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.
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
reply to post by adeclerk
Would you want to sit behind this "Contrail" coming out of what you can tell are distinctly aerators ? How about swim in the purple black slick it leaves in the water ?
Originally posted by adeclerk
Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
So you're asking someone to fly up into the atmosphere, stick there hand out the window with a test tube, sntach and sample, then fly back down package it up, and send it to you.
Science fail much?
Wrong. They can take a soil air or water sample, all from the ground. If 'chemtrailing' is truly so widespread, something anamalous should show up in any one of those samples.
The samples would be sent to a lab, results posted here. I don't have the ability to test samples, so why would they send them to me?
No,it was a critical thinking fail on your part.
So you're asking someone to fly up into the atmosphere, stick there hand out the window with a test tube, sntach and sample, then fly back down package it up, and send it to you.
Requests for access to research flight hours begin with the submission of an Initial Request for Aircraft Support (Word (35kb), PDF (30kb)) to the manager of the facility. Based on information provided on this form, a DOE-empowered advisory panel recommends to DOE an award of flight hours for the proposed use. Then the user completes a more detailed Research Aircraft Deployment Document (RADD: Word (180kb), PDF (85kb)) in coordination with the RAF manager. RAF users not associated with the DOE Atmospheric Science Program will need to work with the RAF manager on an estimate of the cost of offsite aircraft logistics such as 1) landing fees, 2) hangar rental, 3) ground support facilities, and 4) labor and expenses for a PNNL flight crew of two pilots and two scientific support personnel. During the preparation of RADD, schedules are confirmed and safety and environmental compliance requirements are addressed.
The RAF does not cover the cost of engineering studies and airframe modifications needed for custom installation of project-specific equipment and instrumentation. Such costs must be budgeted separately through a contract with PNNL or Battelle. When requested, RAF staff will assist users in estimating these costs.
*
Gulfstream-1 Research Aircraft
The G-1 is a large twin turboprop with performance characteristics of contemporary production aircraft. It is capable of measurements to altitudes approaching 30,000 feet over ranges of 1500 nautical miles, and can be operated at speeds that enable both relatively slow sampling and rapid deployment to field sites throughout the world. The aircraft is configured for versatile research applications. It accommodates a variety of external probes for aerosol, radiation, and turbulence measurements and internal sampling systems for a wide range of measurements. The G-1 has sufficient cabin volume, electrical power and payload capabilities, and flight characteristics to accommodate a variety of instrument systems and experimental equipment configurations. Internal instrumentation is mounted in removable racks to enable rapid reconfiguration as necessary. Data from most systems are acquired on a central computer that is tailored to airborne research data acquisition. In addition to acquiring the various analog and digital input signals, it can be configured to communicate with and/or control other systems onboard, and to provide time synchronization to other computers.
*
Science fail much?
Originally posted by User8911
I don't even know why there a section on the forum for chemtrails...
Debunkers just wont shut up about it.
There's plenty information on the net about this, don't believe? Who cares?
I really don't care if you don't
If you want to know what I think about that subject, check the posts I already posted.
edit on 28-5-2011 by User8911 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by miniatus
there is a HUGE glaring problem with this logic that I always mention and I never get a good response to ... let us not forget that the chemicals allegedly being sprayed into the air by the evil ones.. is all breathed by the pilots flying, the pilots families... the government... the armed services... we share the air..
So the logic of this accusation is just insanely flawed.. it's sort of like being the executioner in a gas chamber, while you're inside the chamberedit on 28-5-2011 by miniatus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Jinglelord
"IF".....please, describe how a jet turbine engine's fuel/air "mixture" can be "tweaked":
....if you simply tweaked with a jet's air/fuel mixture ....
Perhaps you are confusing a turbine engine, with a piston-powered internal combustion engine with a carburetor.
Originally posted by adeclerk
Alright 'chemtrail' believers, I'm getting sick of the fantastic, unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' claims. I am hereby issuing a challenge. I challenge any chemtrailer to get an air or water sample to prove that something nefarious is occuring, since you have come up short on 'evidence' thus far. I'm sure you will be willing to spend a little money so that we can get this whole 'chemtrail' conspiracy out in the open for the good of future generations.
Any takers?edit on 5/28/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
No i was answering to the myriad of people that say no spraying exists and that the technology isn't available.
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
The 901 st also sprays radar reducing sprays at 30 000 ft does that count as high altitude ? Are chemicals that can confuse radar more than likely harmful to human ingestion ? Would you consider the spray itself a trail of chemicals ? Would that spray eventually reach human populations and crops ?
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
reply to post by EyeDontKnow
6 I love those of you that take one tidbit of what is presented and use it to repaint the picture I was painting. I will start doing the same to the so called debunker's that didn't take the time to realize that the purple tinge on the oil is the dispersant. The oil is black and orange but I'm sure that's of no consequence as it isn't high altitude enough and therefore not a chemical trail of dispersant on the water.
Originally posted by mkkkay
reply to post by adeclerk
Does this help By the way i myself just don't know
Lab tests show chemtrails contain aluminum!
In 2008, samples around California's Lake Shasta and the Pit River Arm tributary were tested in a State Certified Lab following weeks of fly-overs and chemtrails. The results of the water samples showed 4,610,000 parts per million of aluminum -- 4610 times the maximum contaminant level! [6]
At another pond, filled with filtered water and confirmed to contain "0" aluminum, test revealed 375,000 parts per million of aluminum (375 times the maximum contaminant level) after only 18 months exposure to the aerial spraying.
The usually pristine snow pack from the Ski Bowl area of Mt. Shasta showed 61,000 parts per million of aluminum!
www.viewzone2.com...
Originally posted by DrunkNinja
reply to post by EyeDontKnow
No i was answering to the myriad of people that say no spraying exists and that the technology isn't available. The 901 st also sprays radar reducing sprays at 30 000 ft does that count as high altitude ? Are chemicals that can confuse radar more than likely harmful to human ingestion ? Would you consider the spray itself a trail of chemicals ? Would that spray eventually reach human populations and crops ? I love those of you that take one tidbit of what is presented and use it to repaint the picture I was painting. I will start doing the same to the so called debunker's that didn't take the time to realize that the purple tinge on the oil is the dispersant. The oil is black and orange but I'm sure that's of no consequence as it isn't high altitude enough and therefore not a chemical trail of dispersant on the water.
Originally posted by User8911
I don't even know why there a section on the forum for chemtrails...
Debunkers just wont shut up about it.
There's plenty information on the net about this, don't believe? Who cares?
I really don't care if you don't
If you want to know what I think about that subject, check the posts I already posted.
edit on 28-5-2011 by User8911 because: (no reason given)