I think I know What Chemtrails are... and it's worse than you can imagine!

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity


Science is done by observation... Why not go out on a cloudy day and tell me that it's warmer than a sunny day.... because that is effectively what you are saying.

Korg.

No it's not. It's the NET effect ya muppet. If you had the cover during the day then removed it at night then the effect would be one of cooling and vice versa.

The Net effect is global warming....

And if I think of the Muppets and I think of your ability to debate I think of Beaker....

Me I'm either Statler or Waldorf.... but we digress somewhat...

Korg.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Blarneystoner

 

There have been studies that show they cause warning too though. You can find studies for both sides when it comes to contrails.

No they haven't admitted to that. The video that said they did was a deliberate misinterpretation. They were talking about the militaries use of chaff, and the claim was they said chemtrails

The U.S. government routinely conducts experiments on weather modification

The U.S. government routinely conducts experiments on weather modification, and has been doing so for at least half a century. Previously classified under such names as “Project Cirrus” (1947) and “Project Popeye” (1966), weather modification is no longer a secret practice. In fact, a bill (S517) was sponsored in 2005 by Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, a Republican, “to establish the Weather Modification Operations and Research Board, and for other purposes.” This bill did not become law. Yet, there is reason to believe that various government institutions are carrying out numerous legal and illegal weather experiments without informing the public.

Even in the face of mountains of evidence, many people still believe that weather modification of any kind is only a fantasy. People must be aware that these technologies have been around for a long time, are indeed being used and have great potential for dangerous and unethical uses.

Geoengineering Climate: Technical Evaluation and Discussion of Impacts

Project Scope
An ad hoc committee will conduct a technical evaluation of a limited number of proposed geoengineering techniques, including examples of both solar radiation management (SRM) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR) techniques, and comment generally on the potential impacts of deploying these technologies, including possible environmental, economic, and national security concerns.

The project has support from the National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. intelligence community, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the Department of Engery(sic). The approximate start date for the project is March 2013; a report is expected be issued in fall 2014

CIA Is Funding Government-Led Chemtrailing Project

Indeed, as we reported last year, a Harvard University project experiment funded by Microsoft founder Bill Gates saw thousands of tonnes of sulphur particles sprayed over New Mexico as part of a geoengineering study, despite the fact that even staunch environmentalists have warned the process could have catastrophic effects on the earth’s eco-system.

Scientists Plan to Block the Sun Using Man-Made Clouds Jul. 17, 2012

The planet is hot and getting hotter. But while most plans to use geoengineering to alter the weather have been rather hypothetical, now a pair of Harvard engineers have announced that they intend to spray thousands of tons of particles into the sky to block the sun's rays—within the coming year.

I think the debate as to whether or not weather modification is being done is mute. Weather modification has been around for a long time.

I don't think it's a far stretch to admit the possibilty that governments around the world are trying to modify the climate as well....

reply to post by Blarneystoner


No one has denied that either. But it's a completely different thing to try to change the climate by spraying particles from planes to do it. You would need a massive fleet to do it, and no one has been able to find it. Fuel is routinely tested, and has to meet certain standards, if it didn't then it would be reported and destroyed, so it's not a fuel additive (not to mention what it would do to engines, and how expensive those are to replace so no way would the airlines go for that idea). It's not military, because they just don't have the planes to do it (both in type, and in ability to spray). So where are the planes?

Skeptics aren't questioning whether they are planning to do something, simply whether they really currently are, and the method that is claimed to be used. A number of us have 30+ years related to aviation, and some of the "proof" of chemtrails is thin to say the least.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Blarneystoner

 

No one has denied that either. But it's a completely different thing to try to change the climate by spraying particles from planes to do it. You would need a massive fleet to do it, and no one has been able to find it. Fuel is routinely tested, and has to meet certain standards, if it didn't then it would be reported and destroyed, so it's not a fuel additive (not to mention what it would do to engines, and how expensive those are to replace so no way would the airlines go for that idea). It's not military, because they just don't have the planes to do it (both in type, and in ability to spray). So where are the planes?

Where are the planes? I honestly don't think that's an issue.

Evergreen Aviation

Here's the thing... weather/climate modification has been taking place for many years. The methods employed are diverse and numerous. It's fairly reasonable to conclude that chemtrails are being utilized on a global scale. The empiricle evidence is there in abundance and hard evidence is also coming to light.

...but I'm not trying to convince you. It's much easier to fool people than it is to convince them that they have been fooled.

reply to post by Korg Trinity

Contrails do indeed exist... They dissipate and do not form cloud cover...

Why do you believe this to be correct information?

reply to post by Blarneystoner


Here's the thing, that doesn't leave a trail behind it though. That dumps everything at once. The only plane that leaves a trail behind it is the NKC-135 at Edwards used for icing tests. No one claiming chemtrails are real can produce the planes. If you could, then people would start to believe.

I can be convinced that I have been fooled, but no one has even come close to doing it. It's always firefighting planes, or center of gravity ballast tanks, or refueling pods.

waynos
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Contrails do indeed exist... They dissipate and do not form cloud cover...

Why do you believe this to be correct information?

Only under certain conditions do Contrails expand into cloud cover... Please read further into the thread where this has been discussed.

Peace,

Korg.

Korg Trinity
Only under certain conditions do Contrails expand into cloud cover... Please read further into the thread where this has been discussed.

Peace,

Korg.

How about you use some peer reviewed sicence when making your claims? Because if you keep just using your opinion and you keep being as wrong as you are, someone, somewhere will notice and you might end up moping the teachers lounge instead of whatever it is you think you do.

Seriously, learn some damn science. It's not something that "the big bad gubbament" has manipulated for their own evil purposes. It's what SCIENCE TEACHERS teach.

maybe going back to school would be a great start for someone such as yourself. At this time, you come across as a 21 year old kid who thinks he knows everything and refuses to accept reality.

network dude

Korg Trinity
Only under certain conditions do Contrails expand into cloud cover... Please read further into the thread where this has been discussed.

Peace,

Korg.

How about you use some peer reviewed sicence when making your claims? Because if you keep just using your opinion and you keep being as wrong as you are, someone, somewhere will notice and you might end up moping the teachers lounge instead of whatever it is you think you do.

Seriously, learn some damn science. It's not something that "the big bad gubbament" has manipulated for their own evil purposes. It's what SCIENCE TEACHERS teach.

maybe going back to school would be a great start for someone such as yourself. At this time, you come across as a 21 year old kid who thinks he knows everything and refuses to accept reality.

Peer review is a funny thing, for every paper that states one thing, there is nearly always a paper that states the exact opposite.

I might add that 'HOW STUFF WORKS' is not an example of peer reviewed papers!

I find it odd though that you totally ignore all the evidence including peer reviewed papers which support my ascertation, and only cling to your version of the official view point as if your life depended upon it.

Oh and btw, I did go and learn some damn science as you put it, and I can tell you that Science starts in an objective inquiring mind. If not for this we would all still be stuck in the dark ages!

Korg.

I read through about half of this thread but realized the same argument was basically being repeated again and again. Basically stating that Contrails can look like what is claimed to be Chemtrails so that is what everyone is seeing, not really a valid argument although an understandable assumption. That along with good explanations as to why contrails can hang around, which was very useful.

I decided to look at the evidence provided, specifically the video showing two distinct types of trails. It is the same day, same time, same area, supposedly same atmospheric conditions. The only obvious difference is the altitude, so I thought the different altitude could explain the difference in water vapor levels and show why a contrail can hang around at a lower altitude and evaperate quickly at a higher altitude.

The only problem is that the amount of water vapor in the air is supposed to be the determining factor. Please see below website for information on humidity at different altitudes and the quote below the link from that website. FYI I searched for humidity levels at different altitudes and just picked this link as it looked valid and matched others.

www.newton.dep.anl.gov...

"Lowering the air temperature increases its relative humidity for the same partial pressure of water vapor. In general, the relative humidity of a parcel of air will increase as the air rises, because the temperature effect outweighs the vapor pressure effect."

Assuming that is true the video provided should not be possible, water vapor or humidity should be higher the higher altitude and that is the trail that should be hanging around. What we see is the opposite, the only conclusion I can see is something besides water vapor is causing the lower contrail or "chemtrail" to hang around.

It still takes a little bit of a leap to come to the conclusion Korg provided but not without reason. It would be nice if someone could confirm if those quoted documents from snowden are valid. We do know he released a lot of secret information so that is not outside the realm of possibility.

Nice thread, if true seems to be someone decided this would be needed for the greater good and long term survival.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


No, the overall net effect of contrails (aka chemtrails) is warming.

see ie:

www.nature.com...

reply to post by Korg Trinity


So will you continue to ignore the idea that when you see trails that cannot be contrails, you can identify the flight? Yea, I know, it would completely ruin your wet dream that chemtrails exist. Well, I guess you still have all that "knowledge" that you claim. You know, the kind that is completely contrary to all the stuff in the text books. Perhaps you could re-write them. Since you are just that damn smart.

AndyMayhew
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

No, the overall net effect of contrails (aka chemtrails) is warming.

see ie:

www.nature.com...

You don't understand. Korg makes the rules. Your silly "science" has no place in this thread.
This is the land of make believe. Now be gone with your "facts"!

Korg just so you know, normally I would probably write this off and not consider the possibility. However I think your posts in another thread I've been monitoring about photons and a claimed new form of matter helped me keep an open mind here and remain objective.

The math provided was well beyond my understanding but you and a few others were able to dumb down some things enough to make it understandable regarding the difference of rest mass and relativistic mass, thank you for that.

Anyways not saying I completely believe your conclusions but everyone would seem better suited to review the evidence provided on both sides as I did. Combining information from both sides to me it sure likes something other than water vapor has to be involved in some cases which would have to be the claimed chemtrails.

Not sure why people feel the need to fight this so hard, it doesn't seem like doom porn or fear mongering really. Although I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion the intention is something really bad if true.

This seems like a valid theory based on gathered evidence, it may or may not be true but it definitely is interesting. With how long global warming has been discussed and possible dangers outlined it is understandable that some people in power would feel the need to do something. Of course they couldn't advocate doing anything that could hurt money flow so this would provide an alternative to cleaner more improved practices. Which of course if we went the cleaner improved practice route that would have to be very expensive for companies with power to revamp how things are done, too many people with power will fight that like crazy.

AndyMayhew
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

No, the overall net effect of contrails (aka chemtrails) is warming.

see ie:

www.nature.com...

O.k I can see you are refusing to acknowledge or cannot understand what Global dimming is and what causes it...

Here are few resources you may want to read.

Global Dimming

Fossil fuel use, as well as producing greenhouse gases, creates other by-products. These by-products are also pollutants, such as sulphur dioxide, soot, and ash. These pollutants however, also change the properties of clouds.

Clouds are formed when water droplets are seeded by air-borne particles, such as pollen. Polluted air results in clouds with larger number of droplets than unpolluted clouds. This then makes those clouds more reflective. More of the sun’s heat and energy is therefore reflected back into space.

This reduction of heat reaching the earth is known as Global Dimming.

or this one...

Global Dimming

Global dimming is the gradual reduction in the amount of irradiance at the Earth's surface that was observed for several decades after the start of systematic measurements in the 1950s. The effect varies by location, but worldwide it was estimated to be a 4% reduction from 1960–1990. Since then, a very slight reversal in the overall trend has been observed.

It is thought to have been caused by an increase in particulates such as sulfate aerosols in the atmosphere. The switch from a "global dimming" trend to a "brightening" trend in 1990 happened just as global aerosol levels started to decline.

Global dimming has interfered with the hydrological cycle by reducing evaporation and may have reduced rainfall in some areas. Global dimming also creates a cooling effect that may have partially masked the effect of greenhouse gases on global warming.

Deliberate manipulation of this dimming effect is now being considered as a geoengineering technique to reduce the impact of global warming.

Why argue with me over something that is an observable effect.

The net effect is COOLING!!

Korg.

Aloysius the Gaul

applesthateatpeople

Zaphod58
reply to post by applesthateatpeople

 

You're right, we need to start mass arrests now of people who fly. There were only 643 million people that flew in the US in 2011, so let's get right on it. That'll put a stop to those pesky contrails.

Or maybe we can go back to how it was in the 40s and 50s, and only the 1% can afford to fly, screw everyone else.

Funny, considering there aren't that many people in the US.

And if everyone flies twice on average, and a lot of foreigners fly into the USA??

And, the fact remains: people who fly are trusting their LIVES to a corporation.

Seems pretty stupid to me.

Yes...you do.

Aww look at that. You have a little trouble reading, do you?

It's okay. I'll make it all better...

The person I was responding to said we should lock up all 643 million people that fly in the US.

You said the number is that high because of people flying more than once. Okay, why didn't you say that to the guy that said to arrest all 643 million people?

Still not getting it, are you?

network dude

AndyMayhew
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

No, the overall net effect of contrails (aka chemtrails) is warming.

see ie:

www.nature.com...

You don't understand. Korg makes the rules. Your silly "science" has no place in this thread.
This is the land of make believe. Now be gone with your "facts"!

Actually, the article posted says that Cirrus clouds are responsible for the warming effect. Those clouds were the product of Contrail spreading.

When the atmosphere is supersaturated with respect to ice, the line-shaped contrails can spread to form cirrus cloud, which has a warming effect on climate.

However...

We also computed the dependence of radiative forcing on the effective radius of cloud particles, the optical thickness of the cloud, and the cloud-top temperature (CTT) and determined that cooling effects occur with clouds when their optical thickness is greater than 4.0∼4.5

Source:
Cirrus cloud radiative forcing at the top of atmosphere using the nighttime global distribution with the microphysical parameters derived from AVHRR

reply to post by Blarneystoner


While you recognize that, I recognize that, network dude recognizes that, as you can see above, the OP continues to insist that contrails/cirrus clouds cause cooling. Despite probably dozens of papers showing their net effect is warming.

Korg Trinity

AndyMayhew
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

No, the overall net effect of contrails (aka chemtrails) is warming.

see ie:

www.nature.com...

O.k I can see you are refusing to acknowledge or cannot understand what Global dimming is and what causes it...

I know all about global dimming - it is primarly caused by aerosols in the atmosphere - especially sulphur - and, although there have been some suggestions that industrial pollution from Asia may explain the so-called 'pause' in global warming, it has been in the decline since the West cleaned up after the acid rain scare in the 70s and 80s. Aircraft have no effect.

It is also true that low level clouds do cause cooling, and an increase in stratocumulus across the planet would have such an effect. But higher level clouds - cirrus, whether natural or manmade - have a net warming effect. As previously demonstrated.

This bill was written as the Space preservation Act of 2001, but revised as HR 3616 "Space Preservation Act" and several words and technologies were not mentioned anymore, including the word 'Chemtrail' that was taking out of it.

Chemtrails are definitely written into politics.