Chemtrail Debunkers....

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Phage

 

I posted that because that is the study done by Dr Jim Haywood and others that involved the circular clouds. The study will never say the sent a plane out to make fake clouds so we can study them. Of course it is going to say the standard lines used by all the agencies involved..

Why?

If someone created contrails in order to study them there would be no reason to hide it, since "they" say contrails are nothing sinister. Indeed any paper that tried to hide it and got found out would be seriously discredited, so it would be totally counter-productive to do as you suggest.

I am not aware of anyone doing so - but your logic for hiding the fact makes no sense.

Here's another pretty good video that shows at the least what these trails are doing to the sky. Don't you 'debunkers' now get too excited that the heading in the video uses the word 'proof' I realize it's not proof perse at all, I merely posted this so we can have a look.

It APPEARS (to me) that at least ONE plane is capable of flying through (or even under, sure LOOKS like it is flying under the previously released spreading plumes but I realize altitudes are deceiving) this mess leaving only a quickly dispating contrail. And the one behind it (Iknow it MUST be at a different altitude, can NEVER be a differerence in the chemical makeup of the exhaust plume right?) is having a bit more trouble.

Well anyway lets have a look and maybe we can have a few honest evaluations. Maybe?

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Tecumte


Seen it - a larger plane and a smaller plane huh? I wonder why that might be...couldn't be that they are different distances away? Different altitudes? No mentino of that possiblity......

Here's an actual video fo a plane flying through a contrail....




it seems the crew survived the lethal experience.....

Yes exhaust can make a difference to contrail formation - such as this experiment - Experimental test of the influence of propulsive efficiency on contrail formation using an old and a new a/c and engines -




Oh and Matty if you are reading this - here's a case where an experimenter is perfectly happy acknowledging creating contrails to study!

Originally posted by Tecumte

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Tecumte

 

No.
I have a very good idea. Those types of "UFO" are frequently posted.

That begs the question.

What exactly are we seeing that looks to be flying around the plume in this particular video?

That video is pathetic. If you have a video camera you can also capture these 'orbs'. Think about it? That contrail could be up at 30,000 feet. The person is filming and zooming in to the contrail. Anything flying or passing close to the camera is going to be recorded. That includes insects, birds, flying seeds. Note how these 'orbs' appear strange and sometimes staggered in the flightpath? That is due to the frame rate of the video camera.

For example the following Chemtrail Orb video. Note the frame rate of the camera at 03:32 when the helicopter goes by? You can see that the rotors of the helicopter are not a complete blur, but you can see the individual rotors as they turn.



The following video shows what happens when the frame rate of the camera matches the helicopter blades. This video is all over You Tube by people who think that the main rotors are not actually turning!



So set your video camera up in a field and point it into the sky. You might be lucky and get a chemtrail in the background? Perhaps a nice cloud backdrop? Anything that flies past the camera is going to be recorded. Experiment with different frame rates. You can then upload it onto You Tube with a chemtrail techno soundtrack and give it a catchy title. Watch those chemtrail orb comments roll in?

TJ

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Well if the first plane is cabable of flying without contributing to that mess then why don't we have the other planes do what it did? It looks like the many many other planes that made the mess in the first place could fly at the same altitude (asuming that's the only difference) that the first one did and we could have much much bluer skies if that's really is all there is to it? And why is the first plane flying lower? in the first place??? (if it TRULY is, we don't KNOW for sure do we) and how much lower would it take for the others to not produce those clouds. You would think all of this could be avoided IF that was the intent rather than to create clouds. Perhaps it's intentional cloud creation to seed into or for other weather mod. and purposely not avoided? Possible?

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Well if the first plane is cabable of flying without contributing to that mess then why don't we have the other planes do what it did?

Clearly some other planes did - that's why the sky seems full of contrail induced cloud - at least it looks liek it to me.

Why do you think that every plane has to make a contrail??

It looks like the many many other planes that made the mess in the first place could fly at the same altitude (asuming that's the only difference) that the first one did and we could have much much bluer skies if that's really is all there is to it?

I dont' kow if that is the only difference, and I dont' know if all those contrails/clouds are at he same altitude, so I have no way of answering your question. How do you know what altitude they are al at?

And why is the first plane flying lower? in the first place??? (if it TRULY is, we don't KNOW for sure do we)

Planes fly lower and higher mainly to avoid each other, and also because they have different abilities - if 2 planes are otherwise identical, the one with less load can fly higher - long distance flights (1-14 hours) can climb as much as 9-10,000 feet simply due to lower weight because of the fuel they have burned - and they will always seek a higher altitide to fly at because it is more economical.

and how much lower would it take for the others to not produce those clouds.

Have a look at any cloud - how much difference in height can there be between inside and outside a cloud? 100 feet might be enough.

The minimum vertical seperation between a/c is normally 1000 feet AAIK - more than enough to be flying in completely different conditions as far as contrail formation is concerned - even if the different conditions are not visible.

You would think all of this could be avoided IF that was the intent rather than to create clouds. Perhaps it's intentional cloud creation to seed into or for other weather mod. and purposely not avoided? Possible?

at least as possible as reptilian overlords.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Your reply seems unintelligable. What I'm saying is that whole mess in the sky could have easily been avoided as per the first plane shown flying in the video? Why wasn't it???

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Your reply seems unintelligable. What I'm saying is that whole mess in the sky could have easily been avoided as per the first plane shown flying in the video? Why wasn't it???

Well wtf didn't yuo jsut say so??!!

Because avoiding making contrails is not a priority.

The priority is flying as high as possible within ATC constraints, so as to burn as little fuel as possible.

reply to post by tommyjo


Sweet copter video - it is quite spooky, and I can see how the credulous would be amazed!!

As you say it's just frame rates - exactly like a strobe can be set so the spokes of a rotating wheel appear stationary.

Mathius,

Will you be honest and answer my questions posed to you? Will you simply continue to deflect from the previous discussions and post another Tanker Enemy video?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Any comment at all? Remember you are the one claiming that those tanks can only be for spraying purposes. Are you still seeking your photoshop expert to study the 'Sprayer HAZMAT' photograph? Is it beginning to cross your mind that you were duped?

TJ

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Again we don't know whether the plane shown leaving a quickly disapating vapor trail was actually flying any lower and if so if it was substantially lower (I still can't believe this alone accounts for the drastic difference we are seeing in the plume characteristics) but on the *remote* (IMO) chance that it was then perhaps planes need to fly at that elavation and all of this could be avoided. It seemed good enough for plane#1. Yes?

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by tommyjo

 

Sweet copter video - it is quite spooky, and I can see how the credulous would be amazed!!

As you say it's just frame rates - exactly like a strobe can be set so the spokes of a rotating wheel appear stationary.

It is amazing how it fools people? I've even seen comments that it is a toy helicopter on a string or some sort of new propulsion! The footage is from the Czech Air Force Mi-24 Hind display team.

TJ

Here's another one, This is exactly what I've seen on occasion over Mid-Missouri, 125 miles from any major airport, starting on a beautiful completely cloudless blue sky day, except I've witnessed even more x's and u-turns and planes flying RIGHT at each other, in a several hour blitz by multiple dozens of planes that whited out the ENTIRE sky horizon to horizon in a matter of HOURS with the usual east/west traffic flying through this mess leaving very small or sometime NO trails at the same time, Call this 'normal' if you want, but I have watched the sky here for years and years and it isn't NORMAL commercial flight activity that makes this soupy mess IMHO.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Tecumte
...(I still can't believe this alone accounts for the drastic difference we are seeing in the plume characteristics...

Believe it. Even a difference in altitude of 2000 feet may be enough for the difference in temperature, pressure, and humidity to make a marked change in the characteristics of contrails.

WWII bomber pilots knew this. They would changes altitudes to avoid making contrails (contrails which made them a more noticeable target for the enemy).

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

CLIMATE CHANGE
A Coordinated Strategy Could Focus Federal Geoengineering Research and Inform Governance Efforts
www.gao.gov...

Preliminary Observations on Geoengineering Science, Federal Efforts, and Governance Issues
www.gao.gov...

Federal agencies identified 52 research activities, totaling about $100.9 million, relevant to geoengineering during fiscal years 2009 and 2010. GAO’s analysis found that 43 activities, totaling about $99 million, focused either on mitigation strategies or basic science. Most of the research focused on mitigation efforts, such as geological sequestration of CO2 , which were identified as relevant to CDR approaches but not designed to address them directly. GAO found that nine activities, totaling about $1.9 million, directly investigated SRM or less conventional CDR approaches. Officials from interagency bodies coordinating federal responses to climate change indicated that their offices have not developed a coordinated strategy, and believe that, due to limited federal investment, it is premature to coordinate geoengineering activities. However, federal officials also noted that a large share of existing federal climate science research could be relevant to geoengineering. Agencies requested roughly $2 billion for such activities in fiscal year 2010. Without a coordinated federal strategy for geoengineering, it is difficult for agencies to determine the extent of relevant research, and policymakers may lack key information to inform subsequent decisions on geoengineering and existing climate science efforts.

Examples of SRM approaches in the study include the following:
• increasing the reflectivity of the earth’s surface through activities such as
painting building roofs white, planting more reflective crops or biomass,
or covering desert surfaces with reflective material;
• increasing the reflectivity of the atmosphere by whitening clouds over the
ocean or injecting reflective aerosol particles into the stratosphere to
scatter sunlight; and
• space-based methods to use shielding materials to reflect or deflect
incoming solar radiation.
Examples of CDR approaches in the study include the following:
• enhancing biological, physical, or chemical land-based carbon sinks to
capture and store carbon in biomass or soil (carbon sequestration), or in
chemically reactive minerals (land-based enhanced weathering);

Global distribution of contrail radiative forcing
www-pm.larc.nasa.gov...

United States Government Accountability Office

On page 62 ...table 7....of this report. Just one of many studies using SRM techniques.

www.gao.gov...

Commerce

Research examining the possible implications of aerosol-based geoengineering proposals for the peak power output of large solar-power-generating plants

2008-2009 In-house NOAA’s Earth Division
$45,000 2009 SRM -
stratospheric
aerosol injection

reply to post by MathiasAndrew

From your first souce:

Few geoengineering experiments or modeling studies have been conducted, and major uncertainties remain on the efficacy and potential consequences of geoengineering approaches. GAO’s review of relevant studies and discussions with selected experts indicated that relatively more laboratory and field research relevant to certain CDR approaches exists, although most of this research was not designed to apply to geoengineering.

But congratulations. You found something. You should have quoted this:

In contrast, few modeling studies or field experiments have focused on SRM approaches, according to experts and recent studies. Experts identified only one SRM field experiment with published results—a 2009 Russian experiment that injected aerosols into the middle troposphere to measure their reflectivity. Experts, as well as relevant studies, identified several major uncertainties in need of further investigation for CDR and SRM.

www.gao.gov...

SRM means Solar Radiation Mitigation, the stuff you're talking about. The Russians did an experiment...but sorry, no chemtrails

The paper describes the results of the field experiment on studying solar radiation transmission in the visible wavelength range through model aerosol media formed in the lower troposphere with the help of generators installed aboard helicopters.

www.springerlink.com...

Your second source.

Substantial uncertainties remain on the efficacy and potential environmental impacts of proposed geoengineering approaches, because geoengineering research and field experiments to date have been limited. GAO’s review of relevant studies and interviews with experts to date found that relatively few modeling studies for SRM approaches have been published, and only limited small-scale testing—primarily of carbon storage activities relevant to CDR approaches—have been performed.

www.gao.gov...
Like your first source, it says that there is no organized effort on geoengineering research.



Your third source:

Contrails are ice clouds with radiative effects similar to cirrus clouds. They are short-lived when formed in dry air but persist and develop into extended cirrus cloud layers when the ambient relative humidity exceeds ice saturation

www-pm.larc.nasa.gov...
We know that

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
United States Government Accountability Office

On page 62 ...table 7....of this report. Just one of many studies using SRM techniques.

www.gao.gov...

Commerce

Research examining the possible implications of aerosol-based geoengineering proposals for the peak power output of large solar-power-generating plants

2008-2009 In-house NOAA’s Earth Division
$45,000 2009 SRM -
stratospheric
aerosol injection

edit on 28-3-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: add text

Sorry, the correct document is below
www.gao.gov...

CFR Geoengineering video
www.cfr.org...

Contrails are ice clouds with radiative effects similar to cirrus clouds. They are short-lived when formed in dry air but persist and develop into extended cirrus cloud layers when the ambient relative humidity exceeds ice saturation

Thank you Mathias, for your information that debunks the chemtrailers.

reply to post by Tecumte


Sorry, but that video shows perfectly normal air traffic, and the contrails that will form, when conditions are ripe for them....the reason the sky continued to cloud over is because conditions were ripe for the contrails!!

Yes....IF NOT for the airplanes flying through the air, when it is ripe and primed for contrails to form, then *possibly* fewer cirrus clouds would have naturally developed, on that particular day. There is NO ARGUMENT about that. Airplanes, merely by *being there*, contribute to increasing cloud formation, of cirrus variety.

Having said that, however.....it is STILL A FACT that regardless of aviation activity, weather happens!!

It is frustratingly unbelievable how simple this is to understand, yet how so many people refuse to grasp the concept.


Also....reading the comments on these sorts of videos, on YouTube, make me shudder and sigh with sadness.....at the abject stupidity displayed, by them. Out of the many comments are the occasional rational and sane one. The sheer number of posts that actually agree with these ridiculous claims, and egg each other on? It is, yet again, a testament to the failing of the modern Public School system.....

.....(because, the Internet, and YouTube in particular, being the animals they are, I presume the majority of those ignoramuses are teens or young adults. Hence, the failed School System remark. It is becoming endemic to society, at least in the USA. AND, those same idiots are allowed to vote, which is the really scary part......)....