It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It shows NASA asking school kids to help with the study of persistent contrails. So obviously the current data and information about contrail science is incomplete.
Originally posted by Stewie
reply to post by badw0lf
Are you new here?
Chemtrails have been proven. Time and time again. I could bring you the links on ATS alone, but then, why should I?
Get up off your arse and do your own research, some of us are just trying to help you. Why? I don't have a clue.
THE SPRAYING ARE GLOBAL DIMMING PROJECTS NOW BEING RUN BY MOST FREE NATIONS OF THE WORLD.
Contrails do not exist!!!
Thanks for the links in your post. Here's something I found when looking at some of the info.
www.asp.bnl.gov...
The cloud modeling and aerosol research elements of the newly combined Atmospheric System Research Program got off to an early start in a joint meeting held in Boulder Colorado, September 29 - October 2.. The meeting commenced on Tuesday, September 29, with the Cloud Modeling Working Group. The Aerosol Working Group and Atmospheric Science Program commenced on Wednesday, September 30, and extended through Friday, October 2
The Department of Energy's Atmospheric Science Program has as its long-term goal developing comprehensive understanding of the atmospheric processes that control the transport, transformation, and fate of energy related trace chemicals and particulate matter. The current focus of the program is aerosol radiative forcing of climate: aerosol formation and evolution and aerosol properties that affect direct and indirect influences on climate and climate change.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by jdub297
Because information should be reviewed first and the people who are viewing it can make up their own minds. It should not be deemed false or a hoax and tainted by the biased opinions of government shills and dis-info agents. Before anyone has a chance to review it for them self.
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Yes the more interference and obvious attempts to derail this thread occur.
There are plenty of posts and threads by people who have no "proof' for their point of view, are unscientific, go against accepted thoughts, or even seem on the surface to be crazy, but NONE of them receive the same kind of immediate squelching of discussion that would make professional hitmen proud as the chemtrail threads do.
Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by coyotepoet
There are plenty of posts and threads by people who have no "proof' for their point of view, are unscientific, go against accepted thoughts, or even seem on the surface to be crazy, but NONE of them receive the same kind of immediate squelching of discussion that would make professional hitmen proud as the chemtrail threads do.
I don't think it will get "wiped," but I think you've mistaken the form of a thread for the substance.
The differences are pretty clear, really.
Opening a thread only to complain about other members rather than to explore a controversy or conspiracy clearly doesn't belong here.
Opening a thread that presents only opinion, belief, speculation and anecdotes as "scientific," or as "proof" or "un-controverted" should be relegated to HOAX, SkunkWorks or 404, as they are founded upon a false representation.
There are many threads that continue to this day that are based, honestly, on statements of belief, et c. but do not then claim to be final or definitive.
You have to at least try to deliver what you promise. Here, we were promised "objective scientific research" and were delivered cut and paste disconnected compilations, misrepresented cherry-picked out-of-context quotes, and not much more.
Certain members are able to point out the flaws; telling them to stay out is futile.
When certain members point out the flaws, they get personal attacks or gibberish.
The OP usually gets what it deserves.
jw
This post just about sums it up perfectly. I agree 100%. All these debunkers are self-proclaimed experts of weather, science, aviation and politics. I have yet to see any of the debunkers show their credtials or back up their statements. They just post links to other websites and cut and paste job. Spamming off topic posts with as many smiley's as they can squeeze into their two and three line posts which they space out and fill in by quoting previous posts by other members. Yet miraculously they all get the exact same number of stars. 3 or 4 for a period of time until the next shift of debunkers takes over and they get a few more little blue stars.
Originally posted by Stewie
reply to post by Argyll
Uh, oh yes. I know how these chemtrail threads are constantly spammed, and observations made by members don't mean #, and science doesn't mean anything unless it is YOUR science and YOUR scientists that are being quoted.
Duh.
I've seen a lot of contrails in my day...but I've never seen one last for more than an hour or drop down 10,000 feet and spread out like a blanket. I live in a very rural area, so I doubt they spray chemtrails out here, but I do see contrails some times. I don't need any "research" to tell me how a contrail should act, I see it all the time. And if what gmac says actually happens, then chemtrails are real. I've never actually seen it happen, so I haven't concluded anything.
Originally posted by Argyll
Originally posted by gmac10001
reply to post by donatellanator
no proof lol what are you 10?? go outside and watch a contrail and then a chemtrail and see the difference i sorry but vapor does not stay in the air for hours, drop down about 10 thousand feet and spread out like a blanket, you really need to conduct some rational thought. for your own sake.
Yes it does.....you just haven't done your research.
Box 3.1.1.1 Lofting Aerosol Material to the Stratosphere
A number of methods of lofting aerosol or aerosol precursor materials to stratospheric altitudes can be considered. Here (and also in Appendix I), we review a set of the most prominent alternatives—aircraft, guns, rockets, suspended chimneys, and balloons. The feasibility of each depends upon the material being lofted and the means of dispersion, and are not independent of the issues discussed in Box 2.3.1.2 and Box 3.1.1.2. We caution that our preliminary evaluations are no substitute for proper engineering design studies of these options.
The most important consideration—and the largest current source of uncertainty—affecting the choice of lofting mechanism is the height to which materials must be lofted. Significant fundamental questions regarding aerosol transport in the stratosphere need to be addressed before any minimal lofting height for stratospheric dispersal could be confidently established. The presence of equatorial stratospheric upwelling suggests that altitudes of 20 km may be sufficient—any material injected there or higher would be transported vertically by the equatorial upwelling and then distributed throughout the stratosphere. This suggests that existing aircraft may well be suitable and sufficient for the purpose.