Where Have All The Planes Gone?

reply to post by djcarlosa

You didn't look at the links I posted did you? This one for example:
From 1970:

The spreading out of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight. Often, when persistent conditions exist from 25,000 to 40,000ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge into an almost solid interlaced sheet.

journals.ametsoc.org...



A scientific minded person requires evidence. There is evidence and a scientific basis for contrails persisting for hours.
There is none that such contrails are "chemtrails". In the years that "chemtrails" are claimed to exist, there is no evidence.

reply to post by adeclerk


You are not worthy of my time i have proven that you do not take the time to read what is linked in peoples posts and i have caught you out trying to post like you have read said links.
Members like you are the reason that no real debate can be done on this subject.

reply to post by Phage


I think there is enough evidence out there but finding it is the key how many times have i thought by the heading wow he maybe proof of what i am seeing and bang error 404 when i click on the link this happens to regularly and it seams to me that for us willing to look for evidence [red flag worthy]there are those who are trying to eradicate it.
See the problem here is that in the uk the change in these trail's is only in the last year now not being funny if like your side has proved that contrail's persist with all these study's etc then this would have been the case all last summer but no such trail's just lovely clear sky's with the occasion cloud [you know the nice fluffy kind that kids used to draw or paint] that drifted across the sky's.
So for me this is not me trying to remember from my child hood its remembering from last year i don't drink alcohol so my memory recall is fantastic.
At the end of the day we have proven they can do it and have done it so for you to say they are not doing it without that security clearance proves nothing.

your quote:A scientific minded person requires evidence.
yes but you forget the other trait that makes a person scientific minded and that is "what if"

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk

 

You are not worthy of my time i have proven that you do not take the time to read what is linked in peoples posts and i have caught you out trying to post like you have read said links.
Members like you are the reason that no real debate can be done on this subject.

So you can't answer any of those questions?

Those are questions everyone should ask themselves before deciding they believe in 'chemstuff'. Your inability to answer them demonstrates your knowledge of meteorology, or rather, lack of.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
That said the difference in the constancy of certain trails and the flight plans of the aircrafts that make them and the fact they stay in the sky for 4-8 hours for me discounts that they are normal contrail's.

So write a paper on it. Provide your evidence for peer review.

As it stands, everyone who's studied contrails for the past few decades disagrees with you.

Why are you so sure they are wrong and you are right?

reply to post by Essan


The same way as when Christopher Columbus sailed around the globe proving that the world was not flat as everyone had thought before.
just because what i say seams to disagree with what some so say experts say dose not automatically make my theory wrong and just because i don't own a phd[Leonardo di Vinci didn't have either and even by today's standards his works surpasses most scientist alive today] dose not mean i am wrong.
The only difference is that i can not get a big government budget to prove my theory had i the funds i would be able to get the proof needed.
What is fact and proven is that it can be done, has been done and yet here you are telling me that it is not possible that it is still being done now that to me says that you are closed minded if you won't even consider the possibilty.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Phage

 

I think there is enough evidence out there but finding it is the key how many times have i thought by the heading wow he maybe proof of what i am seeing and bang error 404 when i click on the link this happens to regularly and it seams to me that for us willing to look for evidence [red flag worthy]there are those who are trying to eradicate it.
See the problem here is that in the uk the change in these trail's is only in the last year now not being funny if like your side has proved that contrail's persist with all these study's etc then this would have been the case all last summer but no such trail's just lovely clear sky's with the occasion cloud [you know the nice fluffy kind that kids used to draw or paint] that drifted across the sky's.
So for me this is not me trying to remember from my child hood its remembering from last year i don't drink alcohol so my memory recall is fantastic.
At the end of the day we have proven they can do it and have done it so for you to say they are not doing it without that security clearance proves nothing.

your quote:A scientific minded person requires evidence.
yes but you forget the other trait that makes a person scientific minded and that is "what if"

edit on 27-6-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)

So you even see a conspiracy in broken weblinks and pages that are no longer up? Thats a bit paranoid to say the least, that you think that some there is some nefarious plot afoot to remove webpages. Why would there be any need to remove webpages that are bunk anyways?

If your memory is so incredible, tell us what the weather was on Apr 25, 1998?

No, "What if" is not the scientific process, and its meaningless unless followed up with real science. Anyone can speculate and play "what if" games. But unless it is followed by a real theory, observations, real science, and something testable, it is nonsense.

reply to post by adeclerk


Its not a case of i can't answer your question it's just i choose not to because i have proven that you post things without checking the facts of the issue that you reply t because you do not read the links provided to you so why should i waste my time answering any of your questions when you have proven that you don't listen or check things we give you information for.
There are lost causes and you fit into that description.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk

 

Its not a case of i can't answer your question it's just i choose not to because i have proven that you post things without checking the facts of the issue that you reply t because you do not read the links provided to you so why should i waste my time answering any of your questions when you have proven that you don't listen or check things we give you information for.
There are lost causes and you fit into that description.

Uh huh, sure you can.

Let us know what you come up with a real theory, rather than endless paranoid speculating and avoiding science.

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Essan

 

The same way as when Christopher Columbus sailed around the globe proving that the world was not flat as everyone had thought before.

Christopher did not sail around the globe and was not attempting to prove that the world is round. He was looking for a short route to India.

reply to post by firepilot


i believe it was heavy rain where i live i was working as a forklift driver at the time and we had a back up of 20 lorry's because of the rain and the fact we only had 4 bays under the canopy.
As the company i work for stored ribeana and other soft drinks these could not be unloaded out in the rain or it would get water damaged and be useless in fact that was one of the wettest Aprils on record in my area.

i have just googled it and this is the closest to the date as i could get
link:www.metoffice.gov.uk...

reply to post by Phage


Come on phage you can do better than that i said it proved that the world was not flat not that he set out to prove that the world was not flat.
I expected better of you

reply to post by djcarlosa

It had been proven that the world was not flat long before Columbus sailed. It was a fact which had been accepted by educated people for centuries.
en.wikipedia.org...

You don't think Columbus was the first to sail beyond the horizon do you?

reply to post by firepilot


that post was not directed at you thats why your name is not at the top in the reply to heading.
I still answer your posts why do you think that is and why do you think i choose not to answer that member.
Had you of been reading through all the posts on this thread you would know why.
You have a big ego you are rash and closed minded but you do take the time to read through some of the information i post links to and the comment on them the rest you choose to ignore but what you don't do is post reply's to the information you have not read to make out like you had read it this is why i choose to reply to you ad not to the other member.

If there where no links at all with tittles like water testing done by university professor shows extremely high levels of aluminium and barium cause for concern that come up with error 404 then you could call me paranoid.

reply to post by Phage


it was not proven it was theorised [as is most of science especially when talking about space and the universe]

Quote: I guess the person who 'proved' the world was round was Ferdinand Magellan, who was the first man to sail around the world. That was the first time it was conclusively proven that the world was round.

Now i agree that i may have been wrong about Christopher sailing around the globe [slaps hand] but without him then Ferdinand Magellan wouldn't have sailed around the world and it was this that proved that the world was round.

link:www.nmm.ac.uk...

reply to post by djcarlosa

You may have been wrong about Columbus? You were wrong.

Eratosthenes proved the world is not flat. He did so by the use of evidence. The only conclusion which could be reached by his evidence was that the world is round. Sailors had been sailing beyond the horizon and returning since long before Columbus or Magellan. That is proof that the world is not flat. Do you think that either Columbus or Magellan would have been able to obtain financing for their voyages if there had been any fear that they would fall off the edge of the world?

I'm not sure how you think it relates to "chemtrails" though. Science, and evidence show us that contrails can persist for hours. You seem to be arguing against yourself.

reply to post by Phage


No your right it dose not relate to this subject i used it as an example to prove a point.It was you that took the little bit of a post and forced this interaction on the subject i still stand by what i wrote though that proof is when someone had sailed around the world otherwise it could just have been that the world was a dome shape and thats why it remained a theory until that trip proved it.
So i know it was off topic and maybe removed but that was you're doing not mine.
The fact remains that you can not say that there is no spraying program going on anywhere in the world because it has been done agent orange or the biological warfare tests done in the usa and uk.
Secondly because these tests have been done you can not provide us of pics of these tests so either you have none or you won't post them [Another thread asked for pic's of chemical spraying from planes to show the difference between what a normal contrail would look like compared to a chemtrail in the china weather modification program]
So if you could have posted those pics so we cold see that they are different from the 2-8 hour contrail's we see in the sky this year then maybe you could put this subject to rest so here's a challenge for you are you up to it :puz

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

You know when you say we have not provided proof of the chemtrail theory i have to laugh if this was a court case would we have a chance well lets see.
so what do we need to take a case to court.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


No i have never been on a jury my point is that there is enough proof to question your belief that no such program is in operation.
The fact that you won't even say that yes it is a possibility even when provided with facts that they have the teck and they have done it in the past speaks volumes.