A Chemtrail Challenge - FACT or BELIEF?

Its not obvious questions at all for chemtrailers. Many have insisted before that upper air is not always going to be cold, that it could even be warm. Or they insist that contrails before in the past never lasted more than a few seconds, and that contrails in WW2 were a spray program or were just engines running too rich.

Maybe you could ask them what drugs they were on, who insist on those things.

Who cares about star counts, that has nothing to do with anything. But what do you think contributes towards contrail persistences?

reply to post by firepilot

Its not obvious questions at all for chemtrailers. Many have insisted before that upper air is not always going to be cold, that it could even be warm. Or they insist that contrails before in the past never lasted more than a few seconds, and that contrails in WW2 were a spray program or were just engines running too rich.

Well mate, many planes fly over me and like I said, I rarely see a contrail and I can't remember seeing one that lasted maybe more that 30 mins max..
So I guess the air is not always cold enough here..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by firepilot

 

No, it can underestimate persistent contrails, especially since engines today are more apt to make contrails than engines back then. Your did find that out, didnt you?
And whats with the "drugs" reference.
Tell us all exactly what in my message pointed to drugs and to what kind?
Was is that upper air can be really cold?Was it that contrails were around in WW2?
Do either of those point to drug issues on my behalf? What drugs then?

The drug question was because I know perfectly well what causes contrails..
I've never said different, even with WWII and again question why you would bring up such obvious questions..

The Appleman Chart has been shown time and time again to be inaccurate..
That's a fact...

Anyways, you guys carry on staring each other for nothing posts..
I'm not interested in arguing and boosting your star count..

A fact eh? Care to back up your claim?
Time and time again? Based on what?
Inaccurate? How?
And what evidence supports your claim?


Typical "chemtrailer" with no evidence, you have to resort to ignorant attacks because your argument is illogical and holds no water.

reply to post by GringoViejo

A fact eh? Care to back up your claim?
Time and time again? Based on what?
Inaccurate? How?
And what evidence supports your claim?


Typical "chemtrailer" with no evidence, you have to resort to ignorant attacks because your argument is illogical and holds no water.

Typical closed minded debunker...
Prove it's accurate, site a source that states how accurate it is..
Do some research to disprove my statement..
BTW, I know I'm right so you'll have a tough time..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

A fact eh? Care to back up your claim?
Time and time again? Based on what?
Inaccurate? How?
And what evidence supports your claim?


Typical "chemtrailer" with no evidence, you have to resort to ignorant attacks because your argument is illogical and holds no water.

Typical closed minded debunker...
Prove it's accurate, site a source that states how accurate it is..
Do some research to disprove my statement..
BTW, I know I'm right so you'll have a tough time..

You make the claim, you show the evidence. That's how it works.

reply to post by GringoViejo


Can't be bothered and I really don't give a flying &^&^ what you think..
You know the truth as well as I do, you spend enough time on this issue..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

Can't be bothered and I really don't give a flying &^&^ what you think..

You know the truth as well as I do, you spend enough time on this issue..

Well the burden of proof is on you, so if you can't be bothered, keep your baseless assumptions to yourself

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

I bet you can't be bothered with evidence that is contrary to your belief either?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by GringoViejo

Well the burden of proof is on you, so if you can't be bothered, keep your baseless assumptions to yourself

Are you a mod or something??

I think I'll post my "factual" statements anywhere I see fit..

You calling them "baseless assumptions" is a little lame seen as how you have no proof..

Ciao..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

Well the burden of proof is on you, so if you can't be bothered, keep your baseless assumptions to yourself

Are you a mod or something??

I think I'll post my "factual" statements anywhere I see fit..

You calling them "baseless assumptions" is a little lame seen as how you have no proof..

Ciao..

You have presented zero evidence to support your claims hence, baseless assumptions.

Nice try, child.

reply to post by GringoViejo

You have presented zero evidence to support your claims hence, baseless assumptions.

Nice try, child.

Ahh, how pathetic..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here's Chadwickus stating the Appleman chart is unreliable..
If I looked I'd finf Phage stating the same..

Using these reports and observations of temperature, pressure and relative humidity, the USAF found that the forecasts using the Appleman method were correct about 60 to 80 percent of the time. Looking more closely at the data, they found that when no contrails were forecast, the forecast was correct 98 percent of the time! However, when contrails were forecast to occur, the forecast was correct only 25 to 35 percent of the time, and often failed to predict the occurrence of contrails.

trutherd.com...

asd-www.larc.nasa.gov...

Do you need me to do any more research for you??

The Appleman Chart is NOT very reliable.....

BTW, I don't expect an admission or apology from you.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

You have presented zero evidence to support your claims hence, baseless assumptions.

Nice try, child.

Ahh, how pathetic..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here's Chadwickus stating the Appleman chart is unreliable..
If I looked I'd finf Phage stating the same..

Using these reports and observations of temperature, pressure and relative humidity, the USAF found that the forecasts using the Appleman method were correct about 60 to 80 percent of the time. Looking more closely at the data, they found that when no contrails were forecast, the forecast was correct 98 percent of the time! However, when contrails were forecast to occur, the forecast was correct only 25 to 35 percent of the time, and often failed to predict the occurrence of contrails.

trutherd.com...

asd-www.larc.nasa.gov...

Do you need me to do any more research for you??

The Appleman Chart is NOT very reliable.....

BTW, I don't expect an admission or apology from you.

A "chemtrailer" actually did a little research! That's amazing!

As you can see, the Appleman chart, as good as it is for day to day contrail forecasting, isn't much chop for highly accurate and specific forecasts.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Yes, I know what he said.

He was also talking about forecasts, not verifying if contrails could have persisted on a day they were noticed.

So far OzWeatherman has been able to get accurate scientific data using the Appleman chart. As you will see the Appleman chart is highly accurate in verifying if contrails could have been present and persisted on a particular day they were observed.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why would you get an admission or an apology?

reply to post by backinblack


You haven't bothered to do even the rudimentary checking??

So I guess the air is not always cold enough here.

Why state a rhetorical, when you should be able to find it out, from resources. They are available in the States, they will be there too....Australia is a rather technologically advanced nation.

I rarely see a contrail and I can't remember seeing one that lasted maybe more that 30 mins max..

So? Are you spending all day, observing? Have logbooks to show? Keeping meticulous records?

Not looking at the right times? What is the climate like....in, where? Sydney, is it? The latitude is about 34°, so that's in the range, but the upper level air flows, and relative humidity levels can be very different, globally, based on the regional climates. Why do you think some parts of the world are deserts, even at latitudes that, around the globe, are temperate and lush?? Cairo, Egypt lies at about 30° latitude.....it's in a desert, isn't it? The upper levels CAN be humid, even over deserts on the surface, though.....but, the fact that there are differences, is hte point.

The time of year, it plays a role too.

Here is a blog....I just googled "sydney contrails": yssyforum.net...

Just one, because that is all needed, until we find out more about the historical trend, there. Australia certainly doesn't have near the amount of air traffic, either, as the USA or Europe.....

reply to post by weedwhacker

Just one, because that is all needed, until we find out more about the historical trend, there. Australia certainly doesn't have near the amount of air traffic, either, as the USA or Europe.....

No Weed, I'm in Melbourne..
BTW, the Melb/Syd flight path is one of the busiest in the world..

We don't have the air traffic per land mass but we certainly have plenty where I am..

I've lived here for 50 years and I can safely say I see very few contrails and very rarely a persistent one..

reply to post by GringoViejo

Why would you get an admission or an apology?

Just proving you WRONG is enough for me.

Like I said, I didn't expect an admission or apology..
Your type rarely admit errors..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

Why would you get an admission or an apology?

Just proving you WRONG is enough for me.

Like I said, I didn't expect an admission or apology..
Your type rarely admit errors..

I'll be waiting for you to prove me wrong then

Originally posted by GringoViejo

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

Why would you get an admission or an apology?

Just proving you WRONG is enough for me.

Like I said, I didn't expect an admission or apology..
Your type rarely admit errors..

I'll be waiting for you to prove me wrong then

edit on 23-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

What, this isn't enough for you to admit I was right in saying the Appleman Chart is NOT very reliable?
I even linked a NASA site..
Are they lying??

the forecast was correct only 25 to 35 percent of the time, and often failed to predict the occurrence of contrails.

Though like i said, I'm wasting my time on closed minded members..
Pretend all you wish..

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by GringoViejo

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

Why would you get an admission or an apology?

Just proving you WRONG is enough for me.

Like I said, I didn't expect an admission or apology..
Your type rarely admit errors..

I'll be waiting for you to prove me wrong then

edit on 23-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

What, this isn't enough for you to admit I was right in saying the Appleman Chart is NOT very reliable?
I even linked a NASA site..
Are they lying??

the forecast was correct only 25 to 35 percent of the time, and often failed to predict the occurrence of contrails.

Though like i said, I'm wasting my time on closed minded members..
Pretend all you wish..

There are those words again, "forecast" and "predict."

Your talking about it being "un-reliable" in a completely different context

Still waiting to be proven wrong here.

Its interesting, all the people who would be labelled 'non believers' what is your purpose for 'debunking' ?

Someone on another thread said, its a means of self verification ? Well is it, what purpose do you serve, you see more people denieing chemtrails than any other theory it seems, Why, what do you have to gain by 'informing' others, of effectively, your opinions, not facts, yes we are aware contrails are exist, this is not in dispute, chemtrails and contrails are not the same.

Please stop the bickering on chemtrail threads, believers and non believers.

Peace.

reply to post by GringoViejo


Obviously you have comprehension issues..
Have fun in your delusion......

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

Obviously you have comprehension issues..
Have fun in your delusion......

Still waiting.