Gov't shutdown and Chemtrails link???

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Which has what to do with people not recognising contrails?
There are lots of debates about what is happening there, but there is still nothing that says chemtrail spraying is a reality.

This thread asks the question if the shutdown in the US has seen chemtrails stop. The answer is clearly no. The question presupposes the reality of chemtrails, but the answer is somehow not allowed to suggest that presupposition might have been wrong.

waynos
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Which has what to do with people not recognising contrails?
There are lots of debates about what is happening there, but there is still nothing that says chemtrail spraying is a reality.

This thread asks the question if the shutdown in the US has seen chemtrails stop. The answer is clearly no. The question presupposes the reality of chemtrails, but the answer is somehow not allowed to suggest that presupposition might have been wrong.

edit on 16-10-2013 by waynos because: (no reason given)

I think the OP has a pertinent question.

I will do some research on the air quality across the continental united states from the dates of the shut down and report back here.

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


And if it's a super secret squirrel program why file a public patent at all?

reply to post by Korg Trinity


And will you prove that chemtrails are real? Because like waynos said the question, and your idea presuppose chemtrails are real to begin with.

Zaphod58
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

And will you prove that chemtrails are real? Because like waynos said the question, and your idea presuppose chemtrails are real to begin with.

I could respond in much the same way and say, could you prove chemtrails are not real and there fore disprove my hypothesis?

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


There is a lot more evidence that they aren't real than there is they are. You made the claim they are, let's see your evidence for them.

reply to post by Korg Trinity

I will do some research on the air quality across the continental united states from the dates of the shut down and report back here.

That will be extremely difficult, as NOAA, which keeps track of the nation's air quality, is one of the agencies most hurt by the government shut down!

Zaphod58
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

There is a lot more evidence that they aren't real than there is they are. You made the claim they are, let's see your evidence for them.

o.k. then.. I'll call...

Please present your proof that Chemtrails are not real...

This should be a good one...

Korg.

DJW001
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

I will do some research on the air quality across the continental united states from the dates of the shut down and report back here.

That will be extremely difficult, as NOAA, which keeps track of the nation's air quality, is one of the agencies most hurt by the government shut down!

Yep, I noticed that the moment I started researching lol

I have other sources that can help out though, in extending the search to see what the total Albedo of the earth has been... what the global temperatures have been... what the pan evaporation rate has been etc.

I will report back my findings.

Korg.

Korg Trinity

Zaphod58
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

And will you prove that chemtrails are real? Because like waynos said the question, and your idea presuppose chemtrails are real to begin with.

I could respond in much the same way and say, could you prove chemtrails are not real and there fore disprove my hypothesis?

Korg.

Could you please first explain to us the science behind how a chemtrail could persist, grow, and spread into something that looks like a cirrus cloud? Not until then could we attempt to disprove they exist, because you need to give us the all of the physical characteristics of a chemtrail before they can be disproved.

It goes back to trying to "prove a negative". You need to tell give us the physical characteristics of what it is first (give evidence for the "positive") before we can disprove it. So far, the characteristics the trails seen in the sky seem to indicate they are NOT sprayed chemicals, but rather they are ice crystals. Clouds of chemicals sprayed in the sky would not grow like some ice-contrails can.

I mean, it is a logical fallacy to say that we need to prove a negative. For example, can you prove that some trees are actually carnivorous creatures disguised as trees, waiting patiently for a lone human to walk by so they could eat them? No -- you probably can't. Therefore, considering you can't prove that, does that mean you should be afraid for your life when you take a walk in the woods? Maybe you should be, since you can't prove me wrong.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Present your evidence they are.

Korg Trinity

I could respond in much the same way and say, could you prove chemtrails are not real and there fore disprove my hypothesis?

Korg.

But that's not how it works is it. Those of us familiar with aviation for decades have always been aware of contrails. We have seen how they have come about and followed with interest examination of them. We have seen the changes in engine types and understood what effect that would have because of how they work and seen it happen in real time.

Now a lot of Johnny come latelys are just beginning to look up and wonder, but have already decided that they know these are not the familiar contrails we have known all along, they are something else called chemtrails.

Prove that. Then we can proceed.

In this image an A330 can be seen to be crossing below a persistant contrail that has spread over the previous 40 minutes.



The vast scale of the contrail is apparent against what is a large airliner that can seat 250-300 passengers. Our knowledge of contrails explains how this can come about.

If chemtrails are real how does a plane carry enough material to deliberately lay something like that? How does the chemtrail recreate that effect?

waynos

Korg Trinity

I could respond in much the same way and say, could you prove chemtrails are not real and there fore disprove my hypothesis?

Korg.

But that's not how it works is it. Those of us familiar with aviation for decades have always been aware of contrails. We have seen how they have come about and followed with interest examination of them. We have seen the changes in engine types and understood what effect that would have because of how they work and seen it happen in real time.

Now a lot of Johnny come latelys are just beginning to look up and wonder, but have already decided that they know these are not the familiar contrails we have known all along, they are something else called chemtrails.

Prove that. Then we can proceed.

I'm noticing an issue with those that appear to be set in their ways and lack critical thinking when faced with something that goes against what the know to be true to them.

The only way to proceed for you in a debate about chemtrails is flat out denial... and I'm not singling out you in that respect.

Some asked me about the science of how the proposed chemtrails would spread out... this is due to the level / mass and composition of particulate that is being used to form the proposed said clouds, and a simple search on geo-engineering from google will show how this is possible.

I am not here to argue over whether chemtrails are a reality or not, or to get into silly muck slinging exercises. I am here however to discuss the air quality circa US Government shutdown...

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Critical thinking can tell you whether something is credible or not. Accepting the unexplainable and unprovable as fact in order to facilitate a wider theory is not critical thinking.

A google search cannot tell me how you think it is achieved. Only how someone else claims it might be.

waynos
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

Critical thinking can tell you whether something is credible or not. Accepting the unexplainable and unprovable as fact in order to facilitate a wider theory is not critical thinking.

A google search cannot tell me how you think it is achieved. Only how someone else claims it might be.

edit on 16-10-2013 by waynos because: (no reason given)

Two quotes come to mind about that...

"His ignorance was as remarkable as his knowledge"

and

"In solving a problem of this sort, the grand thing is to be able to reason backward."

Both are Sherlock Holmes.

Korg.

Soylent Green Is People

Korg Trinity

Zaphod58
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

And will you prove that chemtrails are real? Because like waynos said the question, and your idea presuppose chemtrails are real to begin with.

I could respond in much the same way and say, could you prove chemtrails are not real and there fore disprove my hypothesis?

Korg.

Could you please first explain to us the science behind how a chemtrail could persist, grow, and spread into something that looks like a cirrus cloud? Not until then could we attempt to disprove they exist, because you need to give us the all of the physical characteristics of a chemtrail before they can be disproved.

It goes back to trying to "prove a negative". You need to tell give us the physical characteristics of what it is first (give evidence for the "positive") before we can disprove it. So far, the characteristics the trails seen in the sky seem to indicate they are NOT sprayed chemicals, but rather they are ice crystals. Clouds of chemicals sprayed in the sky would not grow like some ice-contrails can.

I mean, it is a logical fallacy to say that we need to prove a negative. For example, can you prove that some trees are actually carnivorous creatures disguised as trees, waiting patiently for a lone human to walk by so they could eat them? No -- you probably can't. Therefore, considering you can't prove that, does that mean you should be afraid for your life when you take a walk in the woods? Maybe you should be, since you can't prove me wrong.

edit on 10/16/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

If persistent contrails that spread out and grow are merely ice crystals as you say, wouldn't that lead to some form of precipitation? The sky is totally overcast here today, I can only report that it's 65 degrees F. Impossible to visually observe aircraft activity.

Korg Trinity
...I am not here to argue over whether chemtrails are a reality or not, or to get into silly muck slinging exercises. I am here however to discuss the air quality circa US Government shutdown...

I had blue skies three days ago and two days ago. Yesterday, I noticed some persistent spreading contrails during the earlier part of the day -- which was not unexpected because I knew a front was approaching today (I could see the front approaching on the weather map). I knew the air preceding the front could often be conducive to persistent contrails, and sure enough, it was...

...persistent contrails during the government shutdown.

Korg Trinity
Some asked me about the science of how the proposed chemtrails would spread out... this is due to the level / mass and composition of particulate that is being used to form the proposed said clouds, and a simple search on geo-engineering from google will show how this is possible...

You're talking about a spreading cloud of chemicals. I'm talking about a growing trail of ice crystals, which grows because it feeds off of the moisture already in the air, with the growth spurred on by nucleation. A contrail can grow much like the way a cirrus cloud can grow, feeding off of the moisture in the air.

reply to post by Mikeultra


Not at all. High level cirrus clouds can't cause precipitation, and that's what contrails are.

Mikeultra
If persistent contrails that spread out and grow are merely ice crystals as you say, wouldn't that lead to some form of precipitation? The sky is totally overcast here today, I can only report that it's 65 degrees F. Impossible to visually observe aircraft activity.

The type of ice-crystal cloud that can be created by a contrail (basically a cirrus cloud) is not the type that cause precipitation. Cirrus clouds are much higher in the sky than most clouds that produce rain.