I want to be a CHEMTRAIL DEBUNKER

reply to post by InhaleExhale


I have a gift for spotting "disinformation".

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by InhaleExhale

 

I have a gift for spotting "disinformation".

Spouting, you mean

reply to post by InhaleExhale


I know all of the tricks. You are wasting your time.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by InhaleExhale

 

I have a gift for spotting "disinformation".

Judging by the videos you've been posting you've got a gift for being conned. They've been debunked so many times in so many places it's not even funny any more. Excellent demonstration of the research skills possessed by the average chemtrail believer, way to go.

reply to post by mrthumpy


(Debunked?) by crackpots?

BTW, i see you are very NEW to ATS.

Hmmmmm.............

reply to post by TauCetixeta


I see you haven't bothered to listen to the real video commentary.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by TauCetixeta

 

I see you haven't bothered to listen to the real video commentary.

I can easily (create?) some (real?) commentary myself. It's child's play.

reply to post by TauCetixeta


As evidenced by TankerEnemy videos. It doesn't matter if the commentary is real or not, as long as it agrees with you. Must be nice.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I can tell when someone is simply switching tanks.

Solar Radiation Management

reply to post by TauCetixeta

You are wasting your time.

What do you mean?

Being on ATS is a time waster yes, but are you under some impression that I am attempting to debunk any of your claims?

I know all of the tricks.

To what?

I have a hard time buying into the chem trail thing too, but I also grew up just out side of Logan air port, and I was always a sky watcher, I don't ever recall ever seeing these thick contrails like today that hang around for long periods of time, and we hung out on roof tops of buildings all the time, the contrails I would see would fade away and not hang around like some do now. not saying its chem trails but things have changed.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by InhaleExhale

 

I have a gift for spotting "disinformation".

So yuo agree that TankerEnemy is, at best, and idiot and, at worst, a false flag planted to discredit the chemtrails and possibly entire conspiracy movement though his spreading of obvious falsehoods?

reply to post by greenfox86


You also didn't see the super efficient high bypass turbofans we have today either. They leave more persistent contrails than any engine has in the past.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by mrthumpy

 

(Debunked?) by crackpots?

BTW, i see you are very NEW to ATS.

Hmmmmm.............

edit on 18-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)

Compared to some of us, so are you. Hmmmmm

Originally posted by greenfox86
I have a hard time buying into the chem trail thing too, but I also grew up just out side of Logan air port, and I was always a sky watcher, I don't ever recall ever seeing these thick contrails like today that hang around for long periods of time, and we hung out on roof tops of buildings all the time, the contrails I would see would fade away and not hang around like some do now. not saying its chem trails but things have changed.

Yes things have changed, in previous decades you would not have seen such obvious persisting trails left by lower flying turboprop and turbojet powered airliners. There were a few contrails like today's, but they were left by a small percentage of air traffic powered by high bypass ratio engines, such as the 747, Tristar and DC-10 (just to be clear, aircraft have left persisting trails since before WW2 and all passenger jets have left them, but until the advent of cheap mass air travel they were far less noticeable).

These engines were developed in the 1960's to power these very large aircraft by delivering a large amount of power for minimum fuel burn, this allowed these aircraft to fly long distances without stopping to refuel nearly as often as they would have done with previous model engines. Notice the 747 is bigger than a B-52 but has 4 engines, compared to the 8 of the older bomber. Fast forward another 20 years and the 777, designed to replace early generation 747's and also bigger than the B-52 only has TWO engines.

The subsequent fuel crisis of 1973 (and others since) made this kind of fuel efficiency essential at all levels so not only did it kill Concorde as a commercial prospect, it also made HBPR engines desirable across the whole spectrum of commercial flying, emphasisis being on the fuel efficiency for smaller types.

This means you now have the prospect of persistent trails created by every class of airliner from 36 seats up to 850+. This is quite apart from the growth in sheer aircraft numbers over that period too.

For a quick illustration of this change in one sector, there is the 737-200 of the 1970's and the equivalent 737-700 of today, the newer engines are recognisably far larger in diameter, but burn less fuel, costing less money and leaving less pollutants in the air. The byproduct being leaving trails containing more water from the jet exhaust combined with the larger volume of unburned bypass air.





This explanation is somehow baffling or unbelievable to hardcore chemmies however

reply to post by waynos


Hardcore Crackpoties are wasting their time.

We all know that Aluminium Oxide is being spread all over the place for

Solar Radiation Management.

Originally posted by waynos

Originally posted by TauCetixeta
reply to post by mrthumpy

 

(Debunked?) by crackpots?

BTW, i see you are very NEW to ATS.

Hmmmmm.............

edit on 18-4-2013 by TauCetixeta because: (no reason given)

Compared to some of us, so are you. Hmmmmm

I'm new?

Why do i have more Flags than you? Hmmmmmm..........

Instead of providing valuable content, you muddy the water.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by greenfox86

 

You also didn't see the super efficient high bypass turbofans we have today either. They leave more persistent contrails than any engine has in the past.

Why do the "persistent contrails" come to an abrupt end in this video.

It's almost as if someone flipped a toggle switch.

reply to post by TauCetixeta


You mean the "harmless" aluminum that causes things like Alzheimers, seizures, and death? That's what you keep saying they're spraying. Sure, that won't hurt us at all.

As well as the imperfect cancellation of the effect of greenhouse gases on global warming, there are other significant problems with solar radiation management as a form of geoengineering not least of these are effects on the global hydrological cycle[12] and the inability of such techniques to reduce ocean acidification.
Particular to solar radiation management, a risk of abrupt cessation exists. If SRM were to abruptly stop, the climate would rapidly warm.[13] This would cause a sudden rise in global temperatures towards levels which would have existed without the use of the geoengineering technique. The rapid rise in temperature may lead to more severe consequences than a gradual rise of the same magnitude.[13]

en.wikipedia.org...

Hey, then there's always that.

reply to post by TauCetixeta


It's called a "dynamic atmosphere". Conditions change to the point where contrails don't form. Amazing!