Chemtrail add

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
ehh, what the heck.

Ariel Delivery System, on the GO!

A method and apparatus for aerial fire suppression utilizing a potable fire retardant chemical dispensing system, readily adaptable, without extensive aircraft modification, to various makes of aircraft, for dispensing current types of forest and range fire fighting chemicals.

So now firefighting is chemtrails??

Let's see:

1/ not from engines
2/ not at high altitude
3/ not secret...

and it's not as if it is technically difficult to spray things from aircraft - AFAIK the first patents for aircraft spray systems were in the 1920's and they weren't secret then either.

so what we have here is someone (FC) to whom the ability of aircraft to spray stuff is apparently a big revelation.

Which pretty much shows just how little he (or she?) knows.

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Cheap, self-replicating nanobots.

Wow. That's quite the leap. You might have well said it was magical unicorn pee.

You wouldn't happen to also have a link to the patent for these magical self-replicating (and cheap) nanobots? By the way, how do these replicated nanobots get the poison they are supposedly spreading?

I mean, lets stipulate for a second that these nanobots really can replicate themselves out of thin air after being dropped from planes. If they really are replicating after they are being dropped, where does their payload come from?

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


hmm, see your skepticism sir. But let's think, Nano-tech, to most, is something from a sci-fi novel right?

But, let's take a step back, how many black-box projects are there? Personally, I lost count.

However, who said that nano-tech isn't among them? Also, who said they had to be metal? Why not a biological entity?

This is a debate right? or is it a one-sided attack?

reply to post by FreedomCommander


You still have to suspend the nano tech I'm something, which means volume. An aircraft can only carry so much weight and fly.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Self-contained.

Black-box project.

Anything we try to think up, they are 5 steps ahead.

How far behind are we? Dang.

Look, sorry dude, we got into a heated debate, and both of us took the toll. Just throwing it out there.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


You forgot to mention the old canard "so where are they?"

Because of course "nano" does not mean invisible, nor does it mean undetectable.......so......where are these mysterious non-metal biological nanobots?

Hang on a sec...biological...self replicating.....does he mean bacteria perhaps??

Is this another (yawn) claim that chemtrails are actually bacteria??

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


wow, BFT. (Big Fat Troll)

You know there is something odd about this.

You...being...a...troll...on...pay.

Does "Go home." mean anything to you?

It means that, you don't help, you hinder, that is what your best at. Hinder the heck out of anyone who steps outside the lines?!

Black Box Projects, look them up.

You think that NASA is spending millions of $$$ just for a rocket? What other projects are in the works besides a rocket? Why not nano-bots? Why not FTL drives?

I mean, are you seriously that much of a BFT?

reply to post by FreedomCommander


Gosh...that hurts.......BFT......is that the best you can do?

come on people - give him some encouragement to continue the enter-neter-netainmet folks!

reply to post by FreedomCommander


It's not black box project, it's black project.

Nano machines, even self contained, even if they existed, dropped at 30+K feet would still be subject to the winds at that altitude, which means god knows where they'd come down to earth. Not to mention you wouldn't see a nice white cloud, exactly resembling a contrail, coming from the engines. If you ran them through the engines of a plane, you'd destroy them. And you still run into a volume problem. Commercial aircraft, if those are being used as people claim, still have to have fuel, cargo, mail, passengers, food, etc. That takes up a lot of weight and space.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by FreedomCommander

 

It's not black box project, it's black project.

Almost the same thing. But the reason why they are called Black/Black Box Projects is because, the public is left out of the loop on the results, and given some obsure answer. I'm just asking, how far are we behind?

I have somewhat of an answer, too far behind to even see what they are up to.

Nano machines, even self contained, even if they existed, dropped at 30+K feet would still be subject to the winds at that altitude, which means god knows where they'd come down to earth. Not to mention you wouldn't see a nice white cloud, exactly resembling a contrail, coming from the engines. If you ran them through the engines of a plane, you'd destroy them. And you still run into a volume problem. Commercial aircraft, if those are being used as people claim, still have to have fuel, cargo, mail, passengers, food, etc. That takes up a lot of weight and space.

Patent US7413145

Underbelly, so out of the engines, yes, bad idea.

White trail, hmmm. 30K' in the air, well, if it was nuclear, that would be dangerous, just throwing that out there and throwing that idea away. Now, hold it, cloud molecules are pushed away from Earth due to their charge, but Jet Fuel is a different story. Up high, air currents are always active, so... hmmmm.

Places that hardly anyone sees on a Jet Liner, the tail, underbelly, and underwings. Easy to conseal the outlets, hardly anyone looks there. Now the space, 1/2" pipes, great pressure and saves on room. Volume, well, you need power, a lot of power, just to get a Jet up and flying. Cargo, luggage, and food, lower compartment in the tail, cargo space anyone notices.

Contrail, Jet fuel that froze. Wait, subjecting a Jet exhaust to ~30K' in the air, wouldn't that melt the ice? I mean, some birds can go that high, and show no signs of ice. I need another idea on how in the world do I see contrails like that. Water has a FP of 32 F. or 0 C. Jet exhaust has more elements so it'll be harder for it to freeze. Hmmmm.

Chemtrails. Similiar to Contrails only that they spread. Easy to conseal anything, nano-bots, viruses, bateria, anything. But how does it get down? 4 on each side have materials. Possible stages of Core, Case, Shell, and... Replicator. That solves the weight problem, equal volumes among the plane, hit the switch, HP hits the tanks and bleeds the contents. The Jet will weigh less than when it took off. But hardly anyone weighs a Jet Liner for contents.

But how does it get to ground? Shell protects the Core and Case from the air, but it depends on it's charge, if negative, it'll repel. If positive, it'll sink. So a positive charge makes it sink. When it hits the ground, we can't see it, all the remains is the Core and Case. So what is needed for the Case to be removed and the Core to go to work? ahhh, water. The only universal solvent that can melt the Case is water.

Am I missing anything? I feel like I'm missing something.

Originally posted by FreedomCommander

Patent US7413145

Underbelly, so out of the engines, yes, bad idea.

White trail, hmmm. 30K' in the air, well, if it was nuclear, that would be dangerous, just throwing that out there and throwing that idea away. Now, hold it, cloud molecules are pushed away from Earth due to their charge, but Jet Fuel is a different story. Up high, air currents are always active, so... hmmmm.

Places that hardly anyone sees on a Jet Liner, the tail, underbelly, and underwings. Easy to conseal the outlets, hardly anyone looks there.

Except pilots, mechanics, loaders, plane spotters, anyone off the end of a runway when an a/c takes off.....and anyone who saw it working:



Gosh - how come it looks nothing at all like the mythical chemtrails supposedly look??

Contrail, Jet fuel that froze.

No, it is not. please try to deny ignorance, not demonstrate it!!

Wait, subjecting a Jet exhaust to ~30K' in the air, wouldn't that melt the ice?

See point immediately above!!

I mean, some birds can go that high, and show no signs of ice.

Such as?

Am I missing anything? I feel like I'm missing something.

Yes - you are missing any actual knowledge of the subject you are spreading BS about

reply to post by FreedomCommander

Underbelly, so out of the engines, yes, bad idea.

So what your saying is in fact that this



is creating these...



Please show me how that works, because Evergreen dumps all at once in a specific area where as contrails are seen over a large spread out area?

Wait, I thought evidence wasn't good for you why are you trying to show what you think is proof of a chemtrail plane?

reply to post by fireyaguns

All this tells me...

Is that people are waking up to the fact that this isn't a conspiracy, and that its a naturally occurring problem associated with air travel. These sites, many of whom have generated extensive income on spreading rumor and fear, are now losing their traffic levels to such a point that they are taking the fear to advertising in other media.

It has already been explained why we see so many contrails now, engine changes, and traffic increases. Heck, bomber and spy plane pilots have forever had to worry about generating contrails, as they make a “big arrow” in the sky pointing them out to AA. As a matter of fact, its believed that the Air Force has a contrail suppression system now, of course it involves injecting chemicals into the fuel. With that in mind, I'd be more concerned about “chemtrails” when I don't see them, then when I do.

reply to post by FreedomCommander

Contrail, Jet fuel that froze. Wait, subjecting a Jet exhaust to ~30K' in the air, wouldn't that melt the ice? I mean, some birds can go that high, and show no signs of ice. I need another idea on how in the world do I see contrails like that. Water has a FP of 32 F. or 0 C. Jet exhaust has more elements so it'll be harder for it to freeze. Hmmmm.

Thats what I was talking about! Its lack of knowledge like that that allows you to be hoodwinked about chemtrails.

Contrails are not jet fuel, they are water. The water vapour comes out of the back of the engine extremely hot and then freezes in the ambient temperatures of minus 30 degrees at altitude, that's why in the airliner picture posted above there is a gap between the engine and the start of the trail.

This isn't magic, you can do it yourself

www.youtube.com...

That video shows what you can do at ground level on a particularly cold day. It is much much colder at aircraft cruise altitudes EVERY day.

Seriously dude, by all means be suspicious of the government and be on the look out for their nefarious activities, I cant fault you on that, but don't do it just because aircraft leave trails of water ice in the sky and you don't understand the process, that's not a reason. Those sort of sites you have previously linked to are flat out lying about chemtrails.

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by FreedomCommander

 

Contrail, Jet fuel that froze. Wait, subjecting a Jet exhaust to ~30K' in the air, wouldn't that melt the ice? I mean, some birds can go that high, and show no signs of ice. I need another idea on how in the world do I see contrails like that. Water has a FP of 32 F. or 0 C. Jet exhaust has more elements so it'll be harder for it to freeze. Hmmmm.

Contrails are not jet fuel, they are water. The water vapour comes out of the back of the engine extremely hot and then freezes in the ambient temperatures of minus 30 degrees at altitude, that's why in the airliner picture posted above there is a gap between the engine and the start of the trail.

You're right, waynos.

But it should be pointed out that most of the oxygen in the water that the plane is exhausting comes from the EXISTING air that is being sucked into the engine for the purposes of combustion. Combusting hydrocarbon jet fuel requires oxygen, almost all of which comes from the air the plane is flying through. That oxygen from the air chemically bonds to the hydrogen in the jet fuel during combustion, and one of the main byproducts that comes out of the exhaust is water (granted, along with carbon dioxide and some other chemicals -- but most of it is water and carbon dioxide).

It should also be pointed out that the high-bypass engines being used today exhaust a lot more moisture than what is created by combustion. In a high-bypass engine, only 15% of the air that is being sucked into the front of that engine is used for combustion. The other 85% does not go through the combustion chamber at all, but instead is compressed and ducted through turbines. This 85% of the air being taken into the plane contains water vapor (naturally occurring moisture that is already in the air), and that moisture is compressed and is included in the exhaust.

So THAT'S why the newer high-bypass engines exhaust a lot of water and water vapor out the back.

One other thing -- contrails can grow. That's how a lot of contrails can persist. When a contrail grows, some of that icy contrail is formed out of the moisture that is already present in the surrounding air. That moisture would normally remain in vapor form until it comes in contact with the hot moist plane exhaust. The presence of the contrail can crate nucleation sites onto which more moisture can condense into frozen water ice.

When this happens, the contrail can grow and persist -- but it is still mostly water ice.

This is why people say that contrails are just like cirrus clouds, because they are made up of mostly the same stuff that is in a cirrus cloud -- water-ice crystals.




And you are also right about this:

Originally posted by waynos
Thats what I was talking about! Its lack of knowledge like that that allows you to be hoodwinked about chemtrails.

How could a "chemtrail believer" espouse a belief that persistent contrails are really chemtrails when they don't even have the knowledge and understanding of what a contrail is (or worse, a false understanding of what a contrail is)?

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Spot on, but I was just hoping a discussion might evolve where he could take all that in one bit at a time. Regarding bypass ratios, did you see my post the other day where I included the new GTF engine intended for the A320? It has a ratio of 12:1 and so is even higher than the 85% figure you used