Aerosol components in atmosphere proved

reply to post by stars15k
I read it last week before he even posted it. I don't think that a department of "Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics" is interested in building an engine.

reply to post by coolottie


No but they are rightfully concerned about the sources of black carbon in the atmosphere. And it's causes.
Where did you get out of the report anything about planes?

What the OP is talking about in Aersosls is what is called "carbon dust" put into the air by planes

This is a direct quote from you. There is no place in the report about anything like what you say. It's not called "carbon dust". It's BC, for "black carbon". So you didn't read it with enough understanding to know what it very clearly states. Carbon in the atmopshere combines in different way with different other elements. This is hard to model, because it varies so much, due to both size of the BC particles and the shape and configuration with the other elements in combination. What they did find based on the models used is that reducing BC would have beneficial effects with regards to climate changes.
Pollution is bad. They prove part of it. Or at least the models they made shows they did.

for the trail pic ..

that trail lasted all evening and kept spreading .. the plane in the background was a normal contrail ..

thus dissipating a couple of meters away from the plane

i just wanted to portay the difference between the two ..


the first trail was from a plane .. , the trail was thick .. white .. and was streched from one horizon to the other .. spreading for hours ..

is that a normal contrail to you ?

your right stars .. all along .


happy ?

Originally posted by fazeone1981
the first trail was from a plane .. , the trail was thick .. white .. and was streched from one horizon to the other .. spreading for hours ..

is that a normal contrail to you ?

Let me first say that I am not attempting to debunk chemtrails, however, that is normal contrail activity. Some contrails dissipate very quickly, some persist, some even grow in to full on clouds.

I was hoping there was a tell-tale sign to look for when differentiating between contrails and chemtrails.

reply to post by fazeone1981


Actually the only place that you would see that distinction made is from "chemtrail" believers. Everybody else knows that a contrail, which is water and dirty air, and a cloud, which is water and dirty air will behave the same. Clouds can persist for hours and can be blown by the wind for miles, therefore so can contrails.

The only way to really make any distinction would be to isolate the "chem-" that makes it a "chemtrail." That would take testing, of the trail itself. Testing is done, by many people and for many reasons, and there has been only the expected components of exhaust from jet fuel through a jet engine. You can't test the land, water or air down here, unless you can isolate and eliminate all other sources of the chemicals in question.

Show a test done like that, showing some kind of unusual chemical, and you might be able to say "chemtrail". Otherwise, it looks like a contrail, it behaves like a contrail should, it's tested to contain only exhaust, therefore they are all contrails.

reply to post by Chadwickus


[ATS brings (brought) this mess on itself.
Thing is, the more they try to control humans, the more control they loose.
This site is loosing creds fast, and I'm not helping the situation.

I will continue until my original account is unbanned.
If that never happens, I will have more characters here than you can shake a stick at.
I have so many faces, often I have conversations with myself.

How long will it take for the mods to delete this text?
I don't care. I will continue, until the moderation rudeness stops] This is a direct quote.

reply to post by coolottie


and you wonder why I said you're as sharp as a bowling ball?

Having conversations with yourself, Jesus H Darwin!

reply to post by Chadwickus
Oh is it Chedwick now are multipersonality thing