ApolloHoax.net
Off Topic => Other Conspiracy Theories => Topic started by: advancedboy on June 16, 2012, 03:29:06 PM
-
I would also like to start a topic on chemtrails as I have been researching the topic for some time, and I have an opinion with some evidence to support it. Before gong into it, what are your strongest points against or for it. I will join you later, once you have come up with your ideas.
-
There are no points, strong or otherwise, for it. All there is is people completely ignorant of meteorology hearing about chemtrials for the first time and for once in their small pathetic lives finally look up in the sky and completely misinterpret what they see.
-
I would also like to start a topic on chemtrails as I have been researching the topic for some time, and I have an opinion with some evidence to support it. Before gong into it, what are your strongest points against or for it. I will join you later, once you have come up with your ideas.
The strongest point against chemtrails is that there is no evidence to support the contention that they exist. No matter what you think you have uncovered, the odds that you have anything constituting proof of chemtrails is a long shot. You are certainly free to discuss what you believe, but if you do, expect a skeptical audience to make a critical appraisal of your presentation.
-
I would also like to start a topic on chemtrails as I have been researching the topic for some time, and I have an opinion with some evidence to support it. Before gong into it, what are your strongest points against or for it. I will join you later, once you have come up with your ideas.
Um, no. That's not how this works. If you have something to present, then please present it.
-
You've barely been here 24 hours, 'advancedboy', and you are growing tiresome already. If you wish to discuss chemtrails then just get on with it. Stop dancing around and playing games.
-
Chemtrails. Easy enough: They're simple contrails left by aircraft.
That was easy.
-
Things I have learned from the ridiculously stupid mistakes the chemtrail conspiracy theorists have made:
Micrograms/L is equal to parts per billion, not parts per million.
Aluminum makes up 8% of the Earth's crust.
Squirting vinegar out of a squirt bottle in your backyard to make chemtrails disappear shows the extent science education in the US has failed.
-
My strongest point against them is that there is no difference between chemtrails and contrails, and contrails have been around almost as long as the airplane.
The number of people who really believe that contrails are something new, that didn't exist before, say, the 1980s, is astonishing.
-
Not sure I understand this. Alumin(i)um, chemically combined, actually is about 8% of the earth's crust, but "micrograms/L" (microgram/liter) is not a dimensionless ratio like ppm or ppb. A gram is a unit of mass while a liter is a unit of volume now equal to 0.001 m3. (It used to be defined as the volume of 1 kg of water at 4C and standard pressure, which is almost exactly but not quite the same.)
Sea level air has a density of roughly 1 g/L or 1 kg/m3 (actually 1.2) while liquid water is about 1 kg/L or 1000 kg/m3, almost 1000 times as dense. So I suppose micrograms/L is equivalent to parts per billion when talking about water, and it is roughly equivalent to parts per million when talking about sea level air. That uses the American (not old British) definition of billion, i.e., 109 or giga.
Was it Churchill who said that Americans and the British are two peoples separated by a common language? A few English words do get us in trouble when we don't realize they mean different things on opposite sides of the Atlantic, the classic example being the verb table. (Never mind, Chew, I see you're another Yank -- in both the US and non-US meanings of the word.)
-
The number of people who really believe that contrails are something new, that didn't exist before, say, the 1980s, is astonishing.
It's astonishing, especially to astronomers, just how many people never look up at the sky.
-
It is kinda funny how allknowing you are. :) I will try to show you some videos. All you need is to watch them, and I will try to show you some interesting coincidences.
here is video 1.
Notice how some trails are dissipating while others are lingering for long period of time. Many people argue that it is because of condensation in cold air that could happen at high altitudes about 10km or so. Yet we will see many videos where the air traffic is above big cities, and leaving these huge lasting chemtrails. Airplanes are not flying above cities at 10km , they are approaching or leaving airports , thus being much lower than 10km, which would exclude condensation trails. This video was shot over Barcelona. I will go into some interesting details about chemtrails a bit later.
-
Well, I just spent a few minutes of my life looking at pretty contrails in the sky. ???
EDIT: As for "all-knowing", that is because there is a scientific cause for contrails that's well-understood. It's much like you were claiming we were "all-knowing" because we said Venus often can be seen in the sky and mistaken for a star.
-
Wow, four minutes of contrails. Exciting stuff.
Come on, even in the opening still picture you can see that the contrails lead directly from the engines, exactly where they are supposed to be coming from.
Do you have anything that says these are any more than the expected trails of ice and water vapour caused by combustion of jet fuel at high altitude?
-
Jason , the trails are seemingly coming from engines, they are actually coming from hollowed static wicks originally manufactured for static eletricity dispersion/accumulation. They use the wicks that are positioned right above the engines on wings. This is just the beginning.
-
Uh, just saying it doesn't make it so.
This is just the beginning.
Well, I can't wait, since this has been so convincing so far.
-
Jason , the trails are seemingly coming from engines, they are actually coming from hollowed static wicks originally manufactured for static eletricity dispersion/accumulation. They use the wicks that are positioned right above the engines on wings. This is just the beginning.
Evidence for that? And please do explain why the sight of a trail coming from a line with the engines is in any way suspect.
-
The lingering is the suspect. The mismatch with transponders on flightradar24.com is a suspect. Heavy traffic on desolated areas that matches not the day/week schedules but overcast/clear sky `schedules.` people reporting of increased Aluminium, barium, strontium levels in their blood is a suspect. Previous operations of spraying in Vietnam( operation Popeye) and over great Britain in 60ies, that now is declassified is a suspect. Exclusive chemtrail lingering over the area of the sun is a suspect. Chemtrail spraying in the way that it is always in the direction that chemtrails travel over the sun, not vice virsa is a suspect. Exclusive spraying over my small town that has never been experienced here is suspect, considering the contraisl have never been lingering when I was younger. And I spent a loooot of time observing airplanes. geoengineering patents is a suspect, Monsanto patenting Al resistant seeds is suspect, etc.
Jason, I have a question to you-
If the chemtrails were real and they were really spraying, in what way would it look different from the video shown above?
-
If it were a chemical being dispensed then it would be visible immediately after leaving the dispenser, like you'd see with a cropduster. Instead what you see is a delay as the exhaust cools.
-
Heavy traffic on desolated areas that matches not the day/week schedules but overcast/clear sky `schedules.`
There is nothing suspect about that. The amount of time a contrail will linger for is entirely dependent on the atmospheric conditions, and most of them are above the cloud layer anyway, so of course they won't appear on cloudy overcast days.
people reporting of increased Aluminium, barium, strontium levels in their blood is a suspect.
Prove a connection.
Previous operations of spraying in Vietnam( operation Popeye) and over great Britain in 60ies, that now is declassified is a suspect.
Prove a connection. Just because chemicals have been sprayed out of aircraft doesn#'t mean they are being so now and that there is some nefarious purpose to it.
Exclusive chemtrail lingering over the area of the sun is a suspect.
In what way?
Exclusive spraying over my small town that has never been experienced here is suspect, considering the contraisl have never been lingering when I was younger. And I spent a loooot of time observing airplanes.
Flight traffic has increased dramatically in the past couple of decades, so of course there are more contrial now than there were then.
geoengineering patents is a suspect, Monsanto patenting Al resistant seeds is suspect, etc.
Why is this suspect?
Jason, I have a question to you-
If the chemtrails were real and they were really spraying, in what way would it look different from the video shown above?
It probably wouldn't. Which means the onus is on you to prove that those are chemtrails and not contrails. Just going 'look there's a trail' is not sufficient when we expect trails to form anyway.
Now I have a question for you: if you wanted to adminster some chemical to the population for whatever purpose, would dispersing it at 30,000 feet really be the best way you could think of to do it? Rather than, say, pumping it out of cars at ground level? Or adding it to the water supply that is pumped into every home and used daily? The suggestion faisl for simply being absurd.
-
Here are some people talking about blood tests. The suspect is not the chemical elements in their blood, or the superbly increased amount of it. The suspect is the combination of these 3 elements. I will later post videos from people reporting exactly these 3 elements in their blood tests from other parts of the world. And Jason are you really that naive to believe that a chemical being dispersed at high altitude, implying cruise speeds of 800-870 km/h would show a trail right exactly one meter behind the airplane? Are you that weak in simple physics?
-
Notice how some trails are dissipating while others are lingering for long period of time.
Because they're produced at different altitudes where the atmospheric pressure, density and water content differ greatly. So what?
Airplanes are not flying above cities at 10km , they are approaching or leaving airports , thus being much lower than 10km,
Say what? I don't know where you live or what air travel is like there, but here in the USA, not every airplane lands at every city it encounters. We actually have flights that take off on one coast and don't land until they reach the other coast, often well over 4,000 km away. That means they have to fly over what's between, which they usually do at high altitudes to stay away from the traffic that is local to those areas.
-
here are some people talking about blood tests.
If you're really concerned about toxic materials artificially introduced into the atmosphere, and everyone probably should be, you're barking up the wrong tree.
Try looking at what automobiles, trucks and coal-fired power plants spew into the air. We've gotten a lot better at scrubbing much of the really nasty stuff like smoke, ash, unburned hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide. But you can't remove it all -- and people like their cars and electric appliances too much to just give them all up.
Sure, airplanes also burn petroleum, so they also have emissions. And we're running out of petroleum, so we need to find something else.
But with all the emissions very well known to enter our atmosphere from our imperfect energy technologies, as demanded by our desire for a high standard of living, the notion that this nasty stuff is being secretly and deliberately released into the air by commercial airplanes is just too weird to take seriously.
-
And Jason are you really that naive to believe that a chemical being dispersed at high altitude, implying cruise speeds of 800-870 km/h would show a trail right exactly one meter behind the airplane? Are you that weak in simple physics?
No. In fact it is the physics of the situation that makes it so utterly absurd. You are proposing that a chemical is sprayed out that forms a lingering trail in the upper atmosphere. Now as long as that trail is visible the contents of it are still in the upper atmosphere. Since air currents vary greatly with altitude, the dispersion and movement of the contents of that trail would carry it many miles from the location you see it over, and the dispersion would be so great that practically none of it would actually ever reach the ground, and what did would be so scanty you'd never notice it, let alone pick it up in blood tests.
On the other hand, if you pump it out of a car at ground level, the concentration in the local area would be of some use.
The chemtrail idea is so absurd because it requires extensive modification of expensive aircraft and VAST quantities of materials need to be sprayed just to get anything to ever reach the ground. It's like suggesting you can poison Hawaii by dumping toxins in the ocean off San Francisco. Are you so weak in basic physics that you don't get the concept of air currents and diffusion?
-
Jason , the trails are seemingly coming from engines, they are actually coming from hollowed static wicks originally manufactured for static eletricity dispersion/accumulation. They use the wicks that are positioned right above the engines on wings.
Present evidence of an aircraft with one of these chemical dispersion mechanisms installed.
-
people reporting of increased Aluminium, barium, strontium levels in their blood is a suspect.
Now that you mention it, my barium is feeling a little high today.
Exclusive chemtrail lingering over the area of the sun is a suspect. Chemtrail spraying in the way that it is always in the direction that chemtrails travel over the sun, not vice virsa is a suspect.
Could you please clarify this? I don't quite follow.
If the chemtrails were real and they were really spraying, in what way would it look different from the video shown above?
Burden of Proof Shift. This is your claim, it is your responsibility to explain why the difference in appearance of contrails constitutes evidence of covert chemical dispersion.
-
Jason , the trails are seemingly coming from engines, they are actually coming from hollowed static wicks originally manufactured for static eletricity dispersion/accumulation. They use the wicks that are positioned right above the engines on wings. This is just the beginning
Have you ever actually flown on an airplane?
Well, I have. And on occasion, when the conditions are right, and I've looked rearward out a back window, I've actually seen our contrails forming behind us. They're down in the engine exhaust streams, not up behind the static dissipation electrodes.
-
`The chemtrail idea is so absurd because it requires extensive modification of expensive aircraft and VAST quantities of materials need to be sprayed just to get anything to ever reach the ground.`
Yes, indeed. The prime suspect of modification- septic tanks. At least dealing with civillian aircraft. You can`t demand proof, as this is not court. What do you expect me to crawl inside a c-17 and take pictures of pipelines? I told you I will bring cummulative evidence step by step.At least you will be able to understand my doubts. You have to realise I am not your regular Richard Hoagland crowd, or consciousness awareness washed jagbodhi crowd. So be careful when simply demanding something.
Look, even Ted Gunderson is gone bonkers and into a conspiracy. Unmarked airplanes, hmm, don`t you say.
-
You can`t demand proof, as this is not court.
Yes we can. Its our forum, and part of the rules that you back up what you say.
What do you expect me to crawl inside a c-17 and take pictures of pipelines?
Yeah, okay.
I told you I will bring cummulative evidence step by step.
NO. Stop playing games.
So be careful when simply demanding something.
That sounds like a threat.
Present your evidence, provide proof of your claims.
-
Andromeda, define, what constitutes proof, that would be within a grasp of forum participants?
Here, here, looks like the monster had its baby years. Would the military or government harm its own people, of course not. Hmmm, ...
-
Yes, indeed. The prime suspect of modification- septic tanks.
Irrelevant, as that still doesn't address the issue of dispersion and the vast amount of material needed to spray from high altitude in order to have any appreciable quantity reach the ground.
You can`t demand proof, as this is not court. What do you expect me to crawl inside a c-17 and take pictures of pipelines?
No, I expect you to show us what evidence you have that has led you to the conclusion that chemicals are being sprayed into the air from aircraft. Something must have led you to that conclusion, therefore it is not unreasonable to ask what it was. If all it was was some inference then we have little to discuss.
I told you I will bring cummulative evidence step by step.
Not good enough.
You have to realise I am not your regular Richard Hoagland crowd, or consciousness awareness washed jagbodhi crowd. So be careful when simply demanding something.
Stop dancing around. If you have the evidence present it. If not, stop wasting everyone's time.
-
Inference that somehow we are intellectually incapable of grasping your point noted.
Would the military or government harm its own people, of course not. Hmmm, ...
Irrelevant. Because they have done something in the past is not evidence they are doing something in this particular case.
Again, you're trying to construct a case out of circumstantial evidence without actually checking if the basic premise has any basis in fact.
-
Airplanes are not flying above cities at 10km , they are approaching or leaving airports , thus being much lower than 10km, which would exclude condensation trails.
You need to get outside more often. I regularly see flights at cruising altitudes over Houston producing contrails and have seen them doing that since the 1960's. I also regularly see flights approaching and leaving HOU and IAH. I know what they are doing because I have been in planes that follow the same paths. Anyone that watches planes at IAH can see jetliners flying at cruising altitudes over the airport. In fact, my plan is to be on the top deck of the IAH terminal A parking garage this afternoon to kill an hour while waiting to meet a flight.
Observe the sky more often, the time spent understanding what you are seeing will answer a number of your questions.
-
1. Statements which do not rely on supposition or assumption, unless stated.
2. Statements which do not contravene known laws of physics, chemistry, biology or subset of same.
3. Statements from peer-reviewed high-impact academic journals or texts.
4. Statements from known, respected scientists or participants in the events in question, with proof of such statements being made by these people (dates, time, context).
that would be within a grasp of forum participants?
That's a bit rude. Many of the forum participants are scientists by profession, training or both. I myself have BSc Physics with Astrophysics (1st Class, with Honours) and MSc Astrophysics. There are aeronautical engineers, biochemists and others here - so I suggest your next plan of attack NOT be that we are incapable of understanding science.
May I ask your qualifications in science?
-
Here is another video. Notice how the chemtrails have a pattern always going towards the sun, meaning the spraying is done following the wind patterns.As to my scientific qualifications, I studied for 2 years at technical university ( RTU), but received a bachelor`s in other specialty from LU. Mostly it is my private interest and passion for science, car industry, space and economy. And yes, having shown a precedent, is important. If historically there has been a case of chemical spraying on their own population of questionable substances( common, guys, cadmium!!!), it shows the extent of what some parties within the government are capable of! I can`t believe that you watched the video from UK, and okeyed it, as if it was ok to do that. What about if your child had abnormalities because of such actions, would it only then matter? I can`t believe what I am reading.
Emma, it is hard to define what is a trustworthy source in science. Would it be NIST? Scientific American? Popular Mechanics? You see, Emma, according to trustworthy sources of media in my country, all existing news channels, the best acclaimed newspapers and internet news sites Ron Paul doesn`t exist because there is no information about him. As in zilch.Yet I would give my life for such a president to run a country. Maybe CNN is trustworthy? If you judge consumer electronics field from CNN, then Apple is the only consumer elctronics company on earth. And if you judge cars from trustworthy british mags, then they are superior to germans, or on par. While german Das Bild, is in opposite opinion. The same about chemtrails, which exact subject or qualification studied at university would make you an expert in this field, more than me, a regular neanderthal with passion from kuldiga?
(P.S.- By grasp of forum participants I actually meant myself.)
-
Here is another video. Notice how the chemtrails have a pattern always going towards the sun, meaning the spraying is done following the wind patterns.
So they are all going the same way? So what? Of course they will follow the wind patterns. Clouds do that all the time. Is that suspect?
And since they are following the wind, and they are lingering for a very long time, they are NOT anywhere near the ground and they are a VERY long way away from where the observer is. So exactly what is the goal of this spraying?
As to my scientific qualifications, I studied for 2 years at technical university ( RTU), but received a bachelor`s in other specialty from LU. Mostly it is my private interest and passion for science, car industry, space and economy.
So you're not in any position to start lecturing us on our understanding of physics then. Thank you for clarifying.
And yes, having shown a precedent, is important. If historically there has been a case of chemical spraying on their own population of questionable substances( common, guys, cadmium!!!), it shows the extent of what some parties within the government are capable of!
But it does NOT show that this is actually happening now. Provide the evidence for the NOW, not the inference from what has gone before.
Answer a simpe question: do you know what contrails are and why they form?
I can`t believe that you watched the video from UK, and okeyed it, as if it was ok to do that.
What are you talking about? Why is not 'OK' for me to watch the video and say it has nothing suspect in it?
What about if your child had abnormalities because of such actions, would it only then matter? I can`t believe what I am reading.
Drop the hyperbole. I have said before and I will say again, PROVE there is a correlation between trails in the sky and ANYTHING observed on the ground.
(P.S.- By grasp of forum participants I actually meant myself.)
Bull. If you meant yourself why did you not say yourself? English may not be your first language, but you're not so bad at it as to mix up those terms.
-
Here is another video.
Due you have any intention of having a conversation? Or is this to be a series of vague monologues?
-
I can`t believe that you watched the video from UK, and okeyed it, as if it was ok to do that.
No one OKed anything. We disputed conclusions as being unproven. There is a difference.
-
Emma, it is hard to define what is a trustworthy source in science. Would it be NIST? Scientific American? Popular Mechanics?
No, it would be the actual peer-reviewed journals, NOT the popular science media like those you list. You see, REAL scientists get their information from a very extensive series of journals and literature that is not actually sold on newsstands. We go to places called 'libraries' and read up on things like 'Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences' and other such journals where actual scientific papers, not articles by journalists, are published.
The same about chemtrails, which exact subject or qualification studied at university would make you an expert in this field, more than me, a regular neanderthal with passion from kuldiga?
Any actual scientific qualification whatsoever would make anyone more of an expert than you. In which case, we've got you beat. Sorry. Such concepts as diffusion, meteorology, physics and any number of basic scientific principles are required.
I will ask again, why are they spraying from thousands of feet up if they want to cover the ground, rather than, say, spiking the water supply or using cars at ground level?
-
Emma, it is hard to define what is a trustworthy source in science. Would it be NIST? Scientific American? Popular Mechanics? You see, Emma, according to trustworthy sources of media in my country, all existing news channels, the best acclaimed newspapers and internet news sites Ron Paul doesn`t exist because there is no information about him. As in zilch.Yet I would give my life for such a president to run a country. Maybe CNN is trustworthy? If you judge consumer electronics field from CNN, then Apple is the only consumer elctronics company on earth. And if you judge cars from trustworthy british mags, then they are superior to germans, or on par. While german Das Bild, is in opposite opinion. The same about chemtrails, which exact subject or qualification studied at university would make you an expert in this field, more than me, a regular neanderthal with passion from kuldiga?
It's not hard to define at all. I said "journals". JOURNALS. With a high impact factor.
Not newspapers, not magazines, not television news shows. Peer-reviewed academic journals such as Nature, Science, Phyiscal Review Letters. They look like this:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1206.3042.pdf
I have already told you what I studied at university. If you can't see the difference between my studies and yours, I can't help you.
-
The same about chemtrails, which exact subject or qualification studied at university would make you an expert in this field, more than me, a regular neanderthal with passion from kuldiga?
There are of course no scientific experts on chem-trials because chem-trials have never been shown to exist. Just as there are no scientific experts on unicorns.
-
Here is another video. Notice how the chemtrails have a pattern always going towards the sun,
They don't all point towards the Sun. Besides, if airliners all flew towards the Sun they would never arrive at their destination. What an incredibly ridiculous thing to claim.
meaning the spraying is done following the wind patterns.
Wow! It is rare to encounter someone so ignorant about the weather. Winds do not blow towards the Sun!
Emma, it is hard to define what is a trustworthy source in science. Would it be NIST? Scientific American? Popular Mechanics?
Bwahahahaha! That's the extent of your knowledge of scientific literature??? What a joke.
-
Not sure I understand this. Alumin(i)um, chemically combined, actually is about 8% of the earth's crust, but "micrograms/L" (microgram/liter) is not a dimensionless ratio like ppm or ppb. A gram is a unit of mass while a liter is a unit of volume now equal to 0.001 m3. (It used to be defined as the volume of 1 kg of water at 4C and standard pressure, which is almost exactly but not quite the same.)
Sea level air has a density of roughly 1 g/L or 1 kg/m3 (actually 1.2) while liquid water is about 1 kg/L or 1000 kg/m3, almost 1000 times as dense. So I suppose micrograms/L is equivalent to parts per billion when talking about water,
It was referring to a news segment from KSLA. We can thank this reporter and his lack of fact-checking for the barium nonsense. KSLA added a correction with the proper concentration to their original report but the conspiracy websites never mention that. You can still find websites citing the "6.8 ppm" error.
The full story is here: http://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/
-
`I will ask again, why are they spraying from thousands of feet up if they want to cover the ground, rather than, say, spiking the water supply or using cars at ground level?`
Jason, they are legitimately hidng under geoengineering. Isn`t it interesting, geoengineering is real, but chemtrails aren`t? Isn`t that funny.They spray under pretense of fighting global warming and probably solar radiation, as barium absorbs radiation. But it must be a huge money laundering scheme as well.
Maybe you should check yourself more about Welsbach materials by Hughes Aircraft. Don`t be shy, check out the patent number 5003186., march 26, 1991. Appl. no. 513-145.
Did you notice in the last video, how the so called contrails were not sprayed in a way that they would go off the sun, but almost all of them were sprayed so that they went over the sun. If that is a coincidence , I will post more of such coincidences. It is also funny, how eagerly you argue about chemtrails, but are afraid to talk about 9/11 by simply stating your beliefs. Is that WTC7 implosion symmetry that makes you shaky or is it Global Hawk RQ4a that hit the Pentagon that seems an uncomfortable topic?:)
Also, when Ted Gunderson mentioned large unmarked airplanes in Nebraska, it even didn`t seem of any interest to you. I don`t know of what airplanes he talked about, but they could have been C-17, C-5, or Kc-10, . I am guessing. I don`t think he was lying. And a question still stands- what are the functions of a large airplane without any markings on them?
Here is Leigh, Lancaster, England. Maybe we should talk to people so they could report their contrail experiences in 90ies?
-
Chew, your arrogance amazes me. I didn`t say the wind blows towards the sun. The viewer is from a standpoint of a town or inhabited area. The airplanes spray in a way that the shadow( fuzzy chem- mist) would cast towards that town or area. That is why they fly in a pattern that no material goes to waste. When they spray, eventually the wind will carry it `over the sun` so that the projected shadow would cast on the town. The target of protection is the populated area, the adversary is the sun. What is so hard to understand?
-
Chew, your arrogance amazes me.
Not as much as your scientific ignorance amuses me.
I didn`t say the wind blows towards the sun.
Yeah, you did. Either you worded it very poorly or you realized how stupid the claim makes you look and are now trying damage control.
The viewer is from a standpoint of a town or inhabited area. The airplanes spray in a way that the shadow( fuzzy chem- mist) would cast towards that town or area.
If that were true then the airliners would be flying zigzag patterns as they try to cover the previous town and the next town. The UK is very densely populated with towns and cities all over the place. One straight path wouldn't cover them all.
That is why they fly in a pattern that no material goes to waste. When they spray, eventually the wind will carry it `over the sun` so that the projected shadow would cast on the town.
And reduce solar insolation by 0.03%? That's what recent studies say is the effectiveness of airliner contrails on solar insolation.
Let's see your plot of air traffic patterns and wind patterns for the area for this day in question. If the pattern overlap to prove chemtrails are dispersed to drift over all towns and cities then you'll have supporting evidence. If the airliners follow wind patterns to maximize fuel efficiency then you've done nothing but demonstrated your own congruence bias.
The target of protection is the populated area, the adversary is the sun. What is so hard to understand?
Nothing would be hard to understand if you could provide anything other than your own misinterpretation of natural phenomena.
For you the difficultly appears to be understanding your own congruence bias. Have you even tried to disprove your own theory or have you only cherry-picked confirming evidence and ignored disconfirming evidence? This is a direct question, which by the rules of the forum you are required to answer: what evidence have you discovered that would disprove the chemtrail theory?
-
Jason, they are legitimately hidng under geoengineering.
At the cost of it actually working?
Actually, I have a question. Who is "they"? Since contrails are a known phenomenon going back to at least the 1940s, and since they are seen all over the world, has the "chemtrail" thing been going on that long, or are they using a basic principle of science to cover up their hugely inefficient spraying? Why don't they do crop dusting from that altitude, while they're at it?
Okay, that's a series of questions, and I have a bunch more in the "basic logic" category. Not, for reasons based on past experience, that I think they're going to get answered or even make our new friend think a little.
-
Jason, they are legitimately hidng under geoengineering. Isn`t it interesting, geoengineering is real, but chemtrails aren`t? Isn`t that funny.
No, it's sense. The spraying of things in the upper atmosphere in geoengineering requires that those things stay in the upper atmosphere to work. you are talking about something reaching the ground. I will say again, how do you control something tens of thousands of feet up in terms of its reaching the ground?
Maybe you should check yourself more about Welsbach materials by Hughes Aircraft. Don`t be shy, check out the patent number 5003186., march 26, 1991. Appl. no. 513-145.
Again, referring to seeding the upper reaches of the atmosphere.
Did you notice in the last video, how the so called contrails were not sprayed in a way that they would go off the sun, but almost all of them were sprayed so that they went over the sun.
In a wide area of sky with heavy aircraft traffic, what did you expect? Several of those trails miss the sun entirely.
It is also funny, how eagerly you argue about chemtrails, but are afraid to talk about 9/11 by simply stating your beliefs.
I am not afraid to talk about 9/11 if you bring specifics to the discussion. You didn't. You proposed a false dilemma as if the answer would somehow be indicative of our reasoning skills. That is NOT a discussion, and it was NOT relevant to the topic in that thread.
Is that WTC7 implosion symmetry
Is a falling building not expected to do so symmetircally then? Or is that just a 'common sense' observation?
is it Global Hawk RQ4a that hit the Pentagon that seems an uncomfortable topic?
Provide your evidence for that claim and I'll discuss it glady.
Also, when Ted Gunderson mentioned large unmarked airplanes in Nebraska, it even didn`t seem of any interest to you.
It's not. Many planes do not carry huge markings visible from the ground. Many planes are unmarked because they are test articles. I want more than just someone saying he saw unmarked planes. i want to know exactly how 'unmarked' they were.
I am guessing.
Guessing is irrelevant and adds nothing to the discussion. If you are guessing that simply means you have no evidence.
Here is Leigh, Lancaster, England. Maybe we should talk to people so they could report their contrail experiences in 90ies?
The 90s? I've been watching contrails cross the sky since the 80s. I would no doubt have noticed them earlier except for the small detail that I wasn't born any earlier. I've been noticing aircraft trails in the sky since I was old enough to look up and go 'what's that mummy?' People have been seeing contrails since the days of powered flight. It was often reported as a problem for bombers in World War II, since it produced a nice neat trail for the enemy aircraft to follow.
Now since we have already established that contrails are normal, and you seem to think we wouldn't be able to tell a chemtrail from a contrail, we come back once again to your astounding lack of evidence that chemtrails even exist. Inferences are not evidence.
-
The target of protection is the populated area, the adversary is the sun. What is so hard to understand?
Why they would go to all that effort with so many aircraft to achieve that which could be done much more efficiently. A criss-cross pattern of thin lines does not an effective shadow cast. Seeding the air to generate clouds does.
-
Did you notice in the last video, how the so called contrails were not sprayed in a way that they would go off the sun, but almost all of them were sprayed so that they went over the sun. If that is a coincidence , I will post more of such coincidences.
Kindly cut to the heart of the matter and tell us what the characteristics of chemtrials are and how those characteristic have been determined.
It is also funny, how eagerly you argue about chemtrails, but are afraid to talk about 9/11 by simply stating your beliefs.
You continued application of this test, as if it mattered, is further painting you as yet just another internet crank. Is that where you really want to be? Perhaps we are simply not as conspiratorially aware as you are!
-
Do you realize that contrails dissipate, but chemtrails persist, here is a chart of how contrails of airplanes should dissipate and in what period of time-
In the tables presented, d is the dimension of the ice crystal along
one side of the cube, T is the temperature of the ambient air where
the contrail forms (.e.g, 35000ft. MSL), and P is the solar radiation
in Watts/sq. m. t is the length of time that it requires for the
contrail, or ice crystal to dissipate (i.e., transform from ice to
water vapor).
d(microns) T(deg. C.) P(watts/sq. m) t(sec)
1 -50 600 1
10 -50 600 8
30 -50 600 25
50 -50 600 42
100 -50 600 83
1 -40 400 1
10 -40 400 12
30 -40 400 35
50 -40 400 58
100 -40 400 115
1 -30 700 1
10 -30 700 6
30 -30 700 18
50 -30 700 33
100 -30 700 60
Odd, isn`t it?
Chemical spraying goes back to at least to Viet Nam era , might be even earlier, I haven`t researched the origin dates. As to why are they not spraying crops from such high altitudes- because they would miss the field and dust unnecessary areas. The area of city or town is not a definite line, while a corn field is definite. And besides the chemtrail sprayers are hiding under geoengineering, remember? meaning they are fighting the sun. And whatever would make the particles linger longer in air, is supposedly fighting the global warming, or the `warming of the globes` as they said it in G. W. Bush parody. As there are not that many airplanes that could fly higher and carry load, the average altitude that a jet airplane reaches are the standard 10 km. Of course , it could be 12km as well, but you see the point.
Chew, why would I need to provide evidence that disproves chemtrails, if I am convinced in exactly the opposite? It is like you would ask me to provide information why is Mittens Romney a viable candidate for presidency?
Here is Dallas.
-
here is a chart of how contrails of airplanes should dissipate and in what period of time-
Now show that contrails are made up of ice crystals of that size rather than larger ones or water vapour, and that the values presented actually have any relevance. I have seen lingering contrails for a very great many years. They depend on the conditions in the upper atmosphere.
The area of city or town is not a definite line
Definite enough that it would still be missed by high altitude spraying.
Now provide actual evidence that these are not contrails.
-
`Again, referring to seeding the upper reaches of the atmosphere.` Well, that is what the geoengineering is about. The upper limit of atmosphere is about 80 miles. What airplanes do you expect to fly there and spray chemicals? X-15? Ha ha!
The airplanes use troposhere, and high altitude jets use stratosphere. If the values given seem irrelevant to you, you go and research and prove their irrelevance. Didn`t I mister parrot already show you what are the dissipation periods of contrails under various circumsatnces ?
here is antoher chemtrail video in city of Antonio Gaudi. Try to observe them carefully.
-
Do you realize that contrails dissipate, but chemtrails persist, here is a chart of how contrails of airplanes should dissipate and in what period of time-
Cut and paste from a conspiracy web site (http://chemtrailawareness.multiply.com/journal/item/2?&show_interstitial=1&u=%2Fjournal%2Fitem) is not proof or even evidence.
-
If the values given seem irrelevant to you, you go and research and prove their irrelevance.
The burden of proof is on you, advancedboy, whether you accept it or not.
-
If the values given seem irrelevant to you, you go and research and prove their irrelevance.
No, it is your job to prove their relevance. The burden of proof is not on me.
Didn`t I mister parrot already show you what are the dissipation periods of contrails under various circumsatnces ?
No, you posted a list of figures and failed utterly to connect them with any actual contrail conditions. The time in which an ice crystal disperses is not the same as proving that contrails should disperse.
-
Question for advancedboy.
Why is the mountain west of the US so neglected in this geoengineering effort? We very rarely get contrails/chemtrails. Don't we matter? There are plenty of big cities out here, but hardly ever get the trails? Why not?? The planes are still there, just little to no contrails.
-
No. In fact it is the physics of the situation that makes it so utterly absurd. You are proposing that a chemical is sprayed out that forms a lingering trail in the upper atmosphere. Now as long as that trail is visible the contents of it are still in the upper atmosphere. Since air currents vary greatly with altitude, the dispersion and movement of the contents of that trail would carry it many miles from the location you see it over, and the dispersion would be so great that practically none of it would actually ever reach the ground, and what did would be so scanty you'd never notice it, let alone pick it up in blood tests.
Just caught this thread, and have been beaten to the punch.
-
Notice how the chemtrails have a pattern always going towards the sun, meaning the spraying is done following the wind patterns.
All I see is contrails being carried by the prevailing winds. What does the sun have to do with it? What do you even mean by "a pattern always going toward the sun?" I'm not disputing your claim, because I don't even understand what it is.
-
Did you notice in the last video, how the so called contrails were not sprayed in a way that they would go off the sun, but almost all of them were sprayed so that they went over the sun.
There is apparently a language barrier issue here. Please clarify what exactly you mean by "off the sun" and "over the sun."
-
`Why is the mountain west of the US so neglected in this geoengineering effort? We very rarely get contrails/chemtrails. Don't we matter? There are plenty of big cities out here, but hardly ever get the trails? Why not?? The planes are still there, just little to no contrails.`--What is your proof that they are not spraying there? What geographical area is `mountain west of the US? ` Are you joking?
Data Cable, don`t pretend that you don`t understand what I mean by `chemtrail going towards the sun. Of course, I didn`t mean literally going towards the sun. Visually in the vdeo, all the chemtrails pass the sun, meaning they don`t spray in such awaythat the chemtrail would be already past the sun ang being blown further away. It always was sprayed on the right side of the video, while the sun was located in the left corner.
Here is a video, where you can clearly see 2 airplanes, one of them is spraying, one of thm isn`t. It will be very hard to assume that they fly at different altitudes as well. And it will be hard to convince me tha both of them are not jet airplanes.
France:
-
I can only speak for myself, of course, but there are times when I don't understand what you're saying. That isn't me pretending. That is you not writing clearly. Granted, I wouldn't be able to write very clearly in Latvian, but that's why I wouldn't go to a Latvian forum to try to convince people of anything. What brought you here?
-
Here is a video, where you can clearly see 2 airplanes, one of them is spraying, one of thm isn`t. It will be very hard to assume that they fly at different altitudes as well.
On the contrary, jet planes routinely fly at a variety of altitudes. That's how they avoid collisions. Why do you think it would be hard to assume they are following standard practice?
A question regarding your dissipation of contrails numbers from earlier: how do you explain clouds?
-
Jason, just address the video- 2 jets 1 chemtrail. As simple as that. Are you going to claim their flight altitudes are of such difference that each of them would have completely different trails behind them? Clouds have a larger diameter of water droplets, you can research it yourself, that`s why you won`t see a rain coming from regular contrails.
Here is how some people react to chemtrails. Warning. Foul language.
-
Jason, just address the video- 2 jets 1 chemtrail. As simple as that. Are you going to claim their flight altitudes are of such difference that each of them would have completely different trails behind them?
Yes, I am. As I said, jets fly at different altitudes all the time, and the differences in atmospheric conditions can be quite marked. It only takes a small change to go from conditions where water vapour will condense and where it won't.
Clouds have a larger diameter of water droplets, you can research it yourself, that`s why you won`t see a rain coming from regular contrails.
Which clouds are made of what size water droplets, and what size water droplets are formed in contrails? I don't see rain coming from a whole variety of clouds. Cumulus clouds, cirrus clouds, these don't produce rain. They do linger for a very long time, however. Now explain that properly.
-
What video will he post next? The Rainbow Sprinkler Lady?
On a more productive note, it is obvious why chemtrails would be spread from so high up they would be thoroughly mixed and dispersed in the atmosphere before they got anywhere near the ground:
Chemtrails are homeopathic.
-
Jason, just address the video- 2 jets 1 chemtrail. As simple as that. Are you going to claim their flight altitudes are of such difference that each of them would have completely different trails behind them?
Different altitudes, different atmospheric conditions at those altitudes, simple as that.
You do comprehend that the atmosphere is not the same at every altitude, right?
After all, nobody could be daft enough to think that the atmosphere was the same all the way up, right?
Clouds have a larger diameter of water droplets, you can research it yourself, that`s why you won`t see a rain coming from regular contrails.
And that's also why not every cloud produces rain. That's just common sense, right?
Here is how some people react to chemtrails. Warning. Foul language.
A video of a crackpot ranting about the evil NWO poisoning us is not evidence of anything except for the existence of crackpots.
-
Jason, just address the video- 2 jets 1 chemtrail.
Worst porn title ever.
-
People have been seeing contrails since the days of powered flight. It was often reported as a problem for bombers in World War II, since it produced a nice neat trail for the enemy aircraft to follow.
As an aside, 'Johnnie' Johnson mentions in his autobiography Wing Leader that patrolling Spitfires would often fly just below the height at which they formed contrails - that made it easier to spot anyone trying to 'bounce' them from above...
-
I'd only vaguely heard of the 'chemtrail' nonsense. Every time I hear another so-called conspiracy I wonder for some time if my leg is being pulled. Are people really that ignorant of science? Apparently so. But we can at least try.
Advancedboy, are you aware of the following facts?
1. Modern airplanes fly at a wide range of altitudes up to and beyond 40,000 feet or 12 km.
2. Up through this range of altitudes, the temperature of the earth's atmosphere drops sharply at first, reaching a minimum of about -55C.
3. Except at fairly low altitudes, atmospheric temperatures are below the freezing point of water, even in the tropics.
4. Modern aircraft burn petroleum-based fuels, mixtures of liquid hydrocarbons. When burned with air, the primary reaction products are water and carbon dioxide.
5. Sometimes, when the conditions are right, the water condenses into droplets and/or freezes to fine ice crystals visible as a white cloud. We call these contrails.
Please tell me, do you know these facts? I have learned never to assume even the most basic levels of knowledge in discussions like this.
-
Here is a video, where you can clearly see 2 airplanes, one of them is spraying, one of thm isn`t. It will be very hard to assume that they fly at different altitudes as well. And it will be hard to convince me tha both of them are not jet airplanes.
France:
Rather nice of the super-secret Illuminati conspiracy, that influences the entire globe, to be so sloppy as to have two planes side by side. Tsk tsk tsk.
Or maybe the video isn't as indicative as you thought.
-
Solus Lupus-`Rather nice of the super-secret Illuminati conspiracy, that influences the entire globe, to be so sloppy as to have two planes side by side. Tsk tsk tsk.`
Don`t even try to shove down my throat that illuminati stuff. It is not going to happen! And you won`t manage to put me in that category, even don`t go there!
ka9q-`5. Sometimes, when the conditions are right, the water condenses into droplets and/or freezes to fine ice crystals visible as a white cloud. We call these contrails.`
-Then watch the beginning of video in France, and tell me, what are these conditions fot these 2 airplanes that would make their trails so different, considering they are flying mere 200 meters apart. What temperature deviations and droplet diameter differencs can you offer for the trail to be lingering? You really think I am so stupid and don`t know anything about temperatures, altitudes, droplet diameters and dissipation? Beware ,the following videos are not going to be easier.
Here is Milwaukee- beer, bucks and chemtrails.
-
Solus Lupus-`Rather nice of the super-secret Illuminati conspiracy, that influences the entire globe, to be so sloppy as to have two planes side by side. Tsk tsk tsk.`
Don`t even try to shove down my throat that illuminati stuff. It is not going to happen! And you won`t manage to put me in that category, even don`t go there!
Okay, so not the Illuminati. Just a GLOBAL conspiracy involving chemtrails by People of Unknown Origin?
Seriously, you post up links from France as well as everywhere else. That involves a large, underground conspiracy that affects the entire world, don't it?
-
-Then watch the beginning of video in France, and tell me, what are these conditions fot these 2 airplanes that would make their trails so different, considering they are flying mere 200 meters apart.
Show us the calculations you did that allow you to determine they are a 'mere 200 metres apart'.
You really think I am so stupid and don`t know anything about temperatures, altitudes, droplet diameters and dissipation?
Explain why clouds linger and contrails, according to your numbers, do not.
-
A further thing to note:
And it will be hard to convince me tha both of them are not jet airplanes.
Even if we could make the effort, it would be irrelevant. Contrails pre-date jet aircraft. Look at the Wikipedia page on contrails for a picture of B-17 Flying Fortresses producing contrails from the exhaust of their propeller engines. It doesn't matter what engine burns the fuel, water is always a combustion product and hence contrails form.
-
On top of the sheer irrationality of the conspiracist, the part that bothers me most about the chem-trails claims is, why would the world's airlines and their employees go along with it? I've known half a dozen of people that work in various airline positions, including dispatch and ground crews. Certainly the dispatcher would be aware of the systematic flight routing that advancedboy claims is used. Certainly the ground crews would have to notice the "special vehicles" needed to load the chemicals into the planes. Not to mention the manufacturers of the planes and whoever else might be involved. Do all these people let themselves and their families be sprayed just because they get a paycheck? My friend who loads baggage lives a modest but comfortable lifestyle, but it is hardly luxurious. And have all their predecessors gone to the grave keeping the secret?
Advancedboy,
Do all these people really let themselves and their families but drugged? For what reason do they allow this?
Or is this secret is only known to a handful of conspiracist while the people in positions to notice the logistics of spraying know nothing?
-
Advancedboy,
Do all these people really let themselves and their families but drugged? For what reason do they allow this?
Or is this secret is only known to a handful of conspiracist while the people in positions to notice the logistics of spraying know nothing?
To add onto this, why does it take a handful of people on the internet to realize the truth, instead of the MILLIONS of people across the world that would have the scientific knowledge to realize that this stuff isn't real science? If it really isn't, which is the claim you're making?
-
why does it take a handful of people on the internet to realize the truth, ?
Because, WE CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
-
Maybe Jack Nicholson can`t handle the truth, but here is the superimposed pics from the video from France, judge for yourself how far these planes could be from each other.
-
So you responded to Echnaton, making it clear you knew what we were saying, but then proceeded to ignore my questions entirely. Hmmmm...
-
Ecnhaton said-`On top of the sheer irrationality of the conspiracist, the part that bothers me most about the chem-trails claims is, why would the world's airlines and their employees go along with it? I've known half a dozen of people that work in various airline positions, including dispatch and ground crews. Certainly the dispatcher would be aware of the systematic flight routing that advancedboy claims is used. Certainly the ground crews would have to notice the "special vehicles" needed to load the chemicals into the planes. Not to mention the manufacturers of the planes and whoever else might be involved. Do all these people let themselves and their families be sprayed just because they get a paycheck? My friend who loads baggage lives a modest but comfortable lifestyle, but it is hardly luxurious. And have all their predecessors gone to the grave keeping the secret?`
Let me reiterate it this way. Who were those IBM people that serviced punchcard machines and regularly flew to Poland and Germany to fix them, while at the same time people were burned in ovens there? Who were those people standing next to the operating table of doctor Joseph Mengele and passing him a scalpel so he could slice in half another child to be grown together with another one? Who were those trustworthy employees that stack dead and burnt bodies of jews in high piles, day after day, month after month? Did they get bonuses for stacking bodies of children?
Who are those people with wide eyes shouting how they fight for freedom of the United States while dilapidating villages with their uranium rich shells one by one and pretending not to see scattered arms of children, their mothers and shrieks of desperation of the remaining members of their families, at the same time calculating numbers of hardcore cash they will get by the end of their 6 month deployment so they could buy a beefed up Corvette Z06!?
Never underestimate the desperation and primitiveness of people, how thirsty they are for money, and how desperately afraid of manual labour or a single drop of sweat that could drop from their narrow foreheads by actually doing a real job. I don`t categorize all people like that, but, oh boy, they do exist. Then it is a job of the reaper to cherry -pick these people to make them minions to be in servitude to the miserables.
How many people do you know, that walk what they talk? It is not of a regular occurence that people `s eyes would radiate the sincere love for oceans, like those of Jacques Yves Cousteau, or the love of thy own country like that is expressed by every fibre of Ron Paul. The eloquent prolixity is the haze no different from chemtrails that carves people out, and makes them devoid , of what they were born to stand for. Is your disbelief a wanton child within you, or it`s the superb sage status that wouldn`t make the door an inch open?
-
Maybe Jack Nicholson can`t handle the truth, but here is the superimposed pics from the video from France, judge for yourself how far these planes could be from each other.
I didn't say judge, I said show your calculation. Do you know what those two planes are? Do you know what their relative sizes are? You know that at low resolution like that a Boeing 737 and a Boeing 747 will look pretty much the same but are greatly different sizes?
No, all you've done is looked at them and decided they must be flying very close to each other because it looks like it to you.
-
Maybe Jack Nicholson can`t handle the truth, but here is the superimposed pics from the video from France, judge for yourself how far these planes could be from each other.
Absolutely impossible to estimate from this photo, although it's quite likely the aircraft are much farther apart than they appear due to telescopic foreshortening.
-
Let me reiterate it this way. Who were those...
Blah blah blah irrelevant emotive rant.
No-one denies the world is full of bad people and that things are kept secret. However, the things you talk about were NOT kept secret for very long, and the things you are supposedly discussing here are subject to technical and other considerations that this rant just shows you have not the ability or willingness to actually discuss.
-
Let me reiterate it this way. Who were those IBM people that serviced punchcard machines and regularly flew to Poland and Germany to fix them, while at the same time people were burned in ovens there? Who were those people standing next to the operating table of doctor Joseph Mengele and passing him a scalpel so he could slice in half another child to be grown together with another one? Who were those trustworthy employees that stack dead and burnt bodies of jews in high piles, day after day, month after month? Did they get bonuses for stacking bodies of children?
Your motive has now become quite apparent. You really need to stop carrying this hatred around and move on with your life.
the love of thy own country like that is expressed by every fibre of Ron Paul.
What is your fixation with Ron Paul. I've met him and he used to be my Congressman. He is a nice guy that seems to hold to the principles of his modestly unorthodox political philosophy and like every other politician occasionally runs with strange bedfellows. But so what?
Is your disbelief a wanton child within you, or it`s the superb sage status that wouldn`t make the door an inch open?
This make no sense.
ETA
Never underestimate the desperation and primitiveness of people, how thirsty they are for money, and how desperately afraid of manual labour or a single drop of sweat that could drop from their narrow foreheads by actually doing a real job.
Are you also describing yourself in this comment or do you differentiate yourself from the desperation you attribute to others?
Quoted in whole for reference
Ecnhaton said-`On top of the sheer irrationality of the conspiracist, the part that bothers me most about the chem-trails claims is, why would the world's airlines and their employees go along with it? I've known half a dozen of people that work in various airline positions, including dispatch and ground crews. Certainly the dispatcher would be aware of the systematic flight routing that advancedboy claims is used. Certainly the ground crews would have to notice the "special vehicles" needed to load the chemicals into the planes. Not to mention the manufacturers of the planes and whoever else might be involved. Do all these people let themselves and their families be sprayed just because they get a paycheck? My friend who loads baggage lives a modest but comfortable lifestyle, but it is hardly luxurious. And have all their predecessors gone to the grave keeping the secret?`
Let me reiterate it this way. Who were those IBM people that serviced punchcard machines and regularly flew to Poland and Germany to fix them, while at the same time people were burned in ovens there? Who were those people standing next to the operating table of doctor Joseph Mengele and passing him a scalpel so he could slice in half another child to be grown together with another one? Who were those trustworthy employees that stack dead and burnt bodies of jews in high piles, day after day, month after month? Did they get bonuses for stacking bodies of children?
Who are those people with wide eyes shouting how they fight for freedom of the United States while dilapidating villages with their uranium rich shells one by one and pretending not to see scattered arms of children, their mothers and shrieks of desperation of the remaining members of their families, at the same time calculating numbers of hardcore cash they will get by the end of their 6 month deployment so they could buy a beefed up Corvette Z06!?
Never underestimate the desperation and primitiveness of people, how thirsty they are for money, and how desperately afraid of manual labour or a single drop of sweat that could drop from their narrow foreheads by actually doing a real job. I don`t categorize all people like that, but, oh boy, they do exist. Then it is a job of the reaper to cherry -pick these people to make them minions to be in servitude to the miserables.
How many people do you know, that walk what they talk? It is not of a regular occurence that people `s eyes would radiate the sincere love for oceans, like those of Jacques Yves Cousteau, or the love of thy own country like that is expressed by every fibre of Ron Paul. The eloquent prolixity is the haze no different from chemtrails that carves people out, and makes them devoid , of what they were born to stand for. Is your disbelief a wanton child within you, or it`s the superb sage status that wouldn`t make the door an inch open?
-
For someone who claims to be from Latvia, your posts here and elsewhere show an interesting obsession with American politicians.
Oh, and Godwin's Law fail.
-
-Then watch the beginning of video in France, and tell me, what are these conditions fot these 2 airplanes that would make their trails so different, considering they are flying mere 200 meters apart.
Violation of International Flight rules, and you can't measure the separation anyway.
What temperature deviations and droplet diameter differencs can you offer for the trail to be lingering?
Have you gathered the weather reports from that location and time for thevarious atmospheric layers and identified the aircraft and flight numbers and aircraft types? No?
Research fail.
You really think I am so stupid and don`t know anything about temperatures, altitudes, droplet diameters and dissipation?
Rhetorical questions are not your friend.
Beware ,the following videos are not going to be easier.
Here is Milwaukee- beer, bucks and chemtrails.
Star patterns?
Oops! Somebody forgot to research VOR. Didn't they? Ess oo did.
-
You really think I am so stupid and don`t know anything about temperatures, altitudes, droplet diameters and dissipation?
Judging purely on the assertions you have made here, yes I do.
-
Maybe Jack Nicholson can`t handle the truth, but here is the superimposed pics from the video from France, judge for yourself how far these planes could be from each other.
OK. I will.
I would guess they are at least a mile separated. Here is why.
1. The two contrails are illuminated differently. At 200 meters separation, they would be lit more or less identically.
2. The two contrails are diffusing differently. At 200 meters separation, they would be diffusing identically.
3. The contrails form at apparently different distances from the planes. At 200 meters separation, they would be the same distance behind the planes.
-
`You know that at low resolution like that a Boeing 737 and a Boeing 747 will look pretty much the same but are greatly different sizes?`
-Jason, do you realize that 747 has 4 engines but 737 has 2? So the airplanes are a tleast partly comparable in size.
-Emma, what would be your point, that is in strong support that all these are only contrails? What is your occupation, and what is that you do? And I am not obsessed with politicians, that would imply plurality. I only support Ron paul, the rest of bunch mostly are not politicians at all.
Abaddon-`2. The two contrails are diffusing differently. At 200 meters separation, they would be diffusing identically.`
- Thank you , for admitting that these are likely chemtrails, even through your circular statement.
The flight patterns are 200 m away, meaning their route, not exactly the fuselages of those airplanes, as they are not flying next to each other.
Echaton-` strange bedfellows`- in what reference did you mention it regarding R. Paul?
-
-Emma, what would be your point, that is in strong support that all these are only contrails?
Uh-uh. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You are the one making claims against world governments, aerospace engineers, physicists etc - YOU provide your evidence.
What is your occupation, and what is that you do?
That is absolutely none of your business. I have told you what my degrees are, I do not feel it appropriate to drag my employers into this. It's irrelevant - I have given you relevant information.
And I am not obsessed with politicians, that would imply plurality.
I dont know what your definition of "plurality" is, this remark makes no sense.
I only support Ron paul, the rest of bunch mostly are not politicians at all.
Oh dear, are we criticising people behind their backs?
I couldn't care less who you support, frankly. It's irrelevant.
-
Jason, do you realize that 747 has 4 engines but 737 has 2? So the airplanes are a tleast partly comparable in size.
I know that. However, the point stands. There are a wide variety of sizes of aircraft with two engines. and you have no idea what either of those two aircraft are. You have no idea of their size.
What is your occupation, and what is that you do?
Irrelevant.
I only support Ron paul, the rest of bunch mostly are not politicians at all.
Why do you 'support' any American politician if you are Latvian? What does your support have to do with anything that takes place in US politics?
The flight patterns are 200 m away, meaning their route, not exactly the fuselages of those airplanes, as they are not flying next to each other.
Show us your calculation to prove that.
I did a calculation you know. Did you realise that you have two planes of exactly the same size flying at 10 km and 11 km altitude, the one at 11 km altitude will still appear to be 91% the size of the lower one? And that's assuming you have the resolution to make your picture have the aircraft take up more than a dozen pixels.
-
I find it interesting that my questions, which don't require any math or special information at all, have been completely ignored. Does anyone who doesn't believe we're all being poisoned through inefficient mysterious agencies see them?
-
I find it interesting that my questions, which don't require any math or special information at all, have been completely ignored. Does anyone who doesn't believe we're all being poisoned through inefficient mysterious agencies see them?
I can. Maybe all the chemicals being dropped on me are making me hallucinate, though?
-
Emma, it is none of my business, but you could have used a chance to be a bit more polite, it is not that hard to say, sorry, I don`t want to disclose my job that I do But it would also have given you a chance to `shine` if your job was something fascinating, wouldn`t it? Why the secrecy? Education is important,but it is the passion that you do, that accumulates your expertize throughout years, doesn`t it?
Jason, these 2 airplanes are comparable as they look very similar to 737, of course it could be a similarly sized airplane like airbus a320, but it would be comparable. It is very unlikely A330 which would be bigger, but also longer. As to tinier private airplanes, they don`t have this kind of engine configuration.
`Why do you 'support' any American politician if you are Latvian? What does your support have to do with anything that takes place in US politics?`-- because there are no honest politicians worth voting for and I sincerely love America, hence my harsh criticism towards it.. Ron Paul is a global phenomenon and is recognised in every country of the world if we talk the internet milieu.Which can be proved very simply by visiting whowouldtheoworldvotefor.com, if I remeber the site correctly. And what matters is the free will what people vote , not what Limbaugh or vitriol spewing O`Reiley offer as the truth. Besides, Ron Paul addresses external debt, and eventually would fire half of the government, meaning they would need to find real jobs, not pencil pushing. Paul would eventually reorganise education system, so that natural sciences would be prioritised, and manufacturing would be relieved of taxes to such an extent that it would start sprouting again. Just a guess. I keep living in illusions. For me what matters is art, science, and complex manufacturing. Sorry for being off topic. I will try to find more videos with time lapse, as they are more convincing.
Gillianren- was your question about what brought me here? I think I was googling some sites dealing with Apollo and eventually turned up here. Or was it a different question?
-
Emma, it is none of my business, but you could have used a chance to be a bit more polite, it is not that hard to say, sorry, I don`t want to disclose my job that I do But it would also have given you a chance to `shine` if your job was something fascinating, wouldn`t it? Why the secrecy? Education is important,but it is the passion that you do, that accumulates your expertize throughout years, doesn`t it?
I was curt, but not impolite. There is a difference.
As far as I am concerned, my job IS fascinating. However, one of the requirements of it is some degree of anonymity. Not my call, just the way things are. It is not a government job.
Frankly, I don't think you respect my education at all as you have repeatedly rubbished it.
I do not wish to have this conversation with you again.
By the way, as has been asked before I urge you to make use of the "quote" function. Lack of it is making your posts hard to read.
-
Oh goody! Looks like he used the whole "you can't trust big government" deal, so it's an excuse for me to pull out one of my favorite arguments I've made about this!
http://solusl.blogspot.com/2012/04/monkey-governments-and-problem-with-us.html
The "Monkey Government" vs. the "Shakespeare Government". It's a good read, I promise, and you can stop reading once I get into "Us vs. Them", since that's really a bit of a tangent.
No, seriously, advanced, I do want you to read it and consider it.
-
Why do you 'support' any American politician if you are Latvian? What does your support have to do with anything that takes place in US politics?
You know, I saw this attitude in the JREF forum a lot, that people outside the US should butt out and not have opinions about US politics. While it may throw a big question as to whether advanced really is from Latvia or not, I would like to note that people in foreign countries actually do legitimately have concerns over who would become the next president of the United States, or US politics in general. The US reaches out and touches the world, being the one world hegemony currently (about to be competed with by China, many say). The fact that we've gone in to many countries now in conflict, or denied funding to UNESCO for them recognizing Palestine as a country, and threatened to bomb Iran for instance, only makes the world more worried about our politics -- especially with some of our more extrajudicial measures.
-
Emma, it is none of my business, but you could have used a chance to be a bit more polite, it is not that hard to say, sorry, I don`t want to disclose my job that I do But it would also have given you a chance to `shine` if your job was something fascinating, wouldn`t it? Why the secrecy? Education is important,but it is the passion that you do, that accumulates your expertize throughout years, doesn`t it?
Who do you think you are lecturing people on politeness?
It's not secrecy, it's a little thing called privacy. Everyone is entitled to it and you have no right whatsoever to criticise anyone for choosing to maintain it. If you want to start discussing technical issues then the issue of qualification is highly relevant. What people do with those qualifications (or not) is not relevant at all.
Jason, these 2 airplanes are comparable as they look very similar to 737
Now I know you can't be serious. They 'look similar' to a 737? they each take up about a dozen pixels. There are NO distinguishing features that allow you to make that distinction.
However, the point still stands: you have not done ANY calculation whatsoever to support your assertion that they are 200 metres apart. Support it or withdraw it.
-
I sincerely love America,
Pure BS. (Bart Sibrel) You blindly and arrogantly slander America and Americans with your unsupported moon hoax idiocy. And can barely contain your rage against a host of historical "wrongs." That you consider your words here to reflect love or admiration shows the lack of a grasp on your own emotional state.
-
Let me reiterate it this way. Who were those IBM people that serviced punchcard machines and regularly flew to Poland and Germany to fix them, while at the same time people were burned in ovens there?
I feel pretty confident that no IBM staff flew to Poland and Germany while the USA and Germany were at war with each other. But if you can provide a citation showing otherwise I am willing to reconsider my position.
-
[Pure BS. (Bart Sibrel) You blindly and arrogantly slander America and Americans with your unsupported moon hoax idiocy. And can barely contain your rage against a host of historical "wrongs." That you consider your words here to reflect love or admiration shows the lack of a grasp on your own emotional state.
Well I do love America. Every single airplane, phone, car, or helicopter I have designed or sketched is only for United States. I slap America, because I care, and I want them to wake up. I want them to have meaningful jobs, not at WallMarts and Kmarts. Frankly speaking I don`t care what jobs are there for other countries. It is not my business that they can`t assemble or design good cars in Russia, but you outsource engines on your American cars from Mazda( for your Fords) and it is a personal insult to me. You use german lenses on your Kodak, and it is an insult to me. because every single position you make redundant in engineering , creates a little Detroit suburb somewhere in US, and also in me. Guess, how did I feel , when they cancelled Chicago Spire, but went ahead with Burj Khalifah? You guessed it right. Anyway it is a bit off topic.
SolusLupus , I read your article, and it is written at a level of a freshman at University, lacking texture, doesn`t express any taste( sweet, sour, bitter?) and is evasive to express anything definitive. Kinda reminds me a hamburger. Sorry, if that hurt. Practice more.
As the picture of the airplanes is blurry, I have to base the distance on guesstimation.
-
As the picture of the airplanes is blurry, I have to base the distance on guesstimation making stuff up.
Fixed that for you.
-
SolusLupus , I read your article, and it is written at a level of a freshman at University,
Funny, because I'm a semester away from graduating, while in two Honours societies.
lacking texture, doesn`t express any taste( sweet, sour, bitter?) and is evasive to express anything definitive.
I'm sorry if you missed the point. If you would prefer, I could edit the article to explore actual real conspiracies such as Watergate, no? That falls easily within the Monkey Governments, not the Shakespeare Government.
Sorry, if that hurt. Practice more.
Well, considering the quality of your arguments on this forum, it is hard to be "hurt" by any critique you make on my work, especially when it lacks anything definitive itself.
As the picture of the airplanes is blurry, I have to base the distance on guesstimation.
Yet you quoted a precise figure.
-
As the picture of the airplanes is blurry, I have to base the distance on guesstimation.
Then you do not get to draw a firm conclusion about what the contrails from each aircraft could be doing. To summarise:
You do not know what the aircraft are (you have guessed at 737s based on some very dubious interpretation of some very small images in a compressed video)
You do not know what altitude they are flying at
You do not know how far apart they are (though you repeatedly stated 200m as a fact)
Therefore, you do not know that the atmospheric conditions under which the contrails form are not sufficiently different to explain the fact that one lingers and another does not.
So what do you know about that particular example?
-
It doesn`t matter what exactly those 2 airplanes are, both are of comparable size, have 2 engines, have absolutely different contrails, and are in near vicinity of each other. If you value them visually, it could work out of being 200 maybe even 300 meters apart. it would demand very high level experts to calculate very exact numbers judging from the blurry videos. But it doesn`t require an expert, to nitice different contrails. Simply bring forward your parents, and tell them to report me that they have seen these kind of chemtrails all life long. What do you want to say, that these airplanes are flying so far away, most likely many miles, and that these trails are different because one of them flies in completely different air temperature that it makes the contrails linger? No, buddy! it won`t happen, because you will get more and more videos, and reports from people around the world. Uhhm the scary, 9/11, question:) I will never ask it:)
-
It doesn`t matter what exactly those 2 airplanes are, both are of comparable size, have 2 engines, have absolutely different contrails, and are in near vicinity of each other.
No no NO. You just don't get it, do you? You dont KNOW what those aircraft are, therefore you don't KNOW their relative sizes, and you cannot possibly determine how far apart they are.
Again, I point out that two aircraft of exactly the same size will only differ in apparent size by 9% with 1,000 metres between them.
If you value them visually, it could work out of being 200 maybe even 300 meters apart.
Or 400, or 1,000. The point is you don't actually KNOW, and you admit it would take experts to calculate it properly, and yet your whole argument is based on you saying that you Do know how far apart they are.
Simply bring forward your parents, and tell them to report me that they have seen these kind of chemtrails all life long.
I just asked one of them. They have.
What do you want to say, that these airplanes are flying so far away, most likely many miles, and that these trails are different because one of them flies in completely different air temperature that it makes the contrails linger? No, buddy! it won`t happen,
Yes, it will. You can assert that it can't be so all you like, but reality doesn't give a damn what you think. The conditions for contrail to form and linger need only be different by ONE degree Celcius and ONE percent relative humidity and the results will be very different. Such changes can indeed occur over 1km in altitude difference between two aircraft.
because you will get more and more videos, and reports from people around the world.
I don't care how many videos there are, the physics of the existence of contrails is well known, and so far you have not even shown any indication that you understand it.
Explain clouds and the way they linger in relation to your numbers you put up to explain why contrials should not. You seem more scared of that question than anyone here does about your absurd 9/11 litmus test question.
-
The conditions for contrail to form and linger need only be different by ONE degree Celcius and ONE percent relative humidity and the results will be very different. --proof, references, what are the different results?
Show me your calcualtions of 9 % visual difference in size by 2 objects being a mile apart!
-
http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/contrail-edu/faq.html
http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/contrail-edu/resources/activities/appleman_student.html
-
Show me your calcualtions of 9 % visual difference in size by 2 objects being a mile apart!
I didn't say a mile, I said a kilometre. Do try and keep up.
But fine, here we go:
A Boeing 737 is approximately 30 metres in length. We use simple trigonometry to calculate its apparent angular size from the ground at 10 km altitude.
The sine of the angle of a right-angled triangle is equal to the opposite length divided by the hypotenuse. In this case the opposite length is the length of the aircraft, 30 metres; the hypotenuse is the altitude, 10,000 metres. Rearranging the equation gives us the angle being equal to the inverse sine of 30/10,000, which is about 0.172 degrees.
So what about at 11 km altitude? In that case the angle subtended by the aircraft is equal to the inverse sine of 30/11,000, which is about 0.156 degrees.
So that's a difference of about 0.016 degrees.
So, 0.016/0.172 = 0.093, or 9.3%. In other words, the higher plane appears to be 90.7% the size of the lower one.
-
OWNAGE
-
NORTH AMERICAN WEATHER CONSULTANTS OPERATIONAL CLOUD SEEDING PROGRAMS
Partial Listing (through April 2011)
Project Area: Gunnison County, Colorado
Sponsor: Gunnison County
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 2003-present
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Little Cottonwood Canyon, Utah
Sponsor: Alta and Snowbird Ski Areas
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1996 – present
Goal: Enhanced winter snowfall for skiing
Project Area: Wellsville and Wasatch Mountains of Northern
Utah
Sponsor: Utah Division of Water Resources and Cache
County
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1997 – 2000, 2002-present
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Upper Ogden River and Lost Creek
Watersheds, Utah
Sponsor: Weber Basin Water Conservancy District and Utah
Division of Water Resources
Technique: Ground based and airborne silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1991 – 1993
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Upper San Joaquin River Drainage, Southern
Sierra Nevada of California
Sponsor: Southern California Edison Company
Technique: Ground based and airborne silver iodide seeding
with radar surveillance
Time Period: 1951 – 1987 and 1990 – 1992
Goal: Enhanced winter and summer precipitation for
hydroelectric power production
Project Area: Mountain Watersheds in Central and Southern
Utah
Sponsor: Utah Water Resources Development Corporation
Utah Division of Water Resources, 13 Utah
Counties
Technique: Airborne and ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1973 – 1983, 1987, 1988-present
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Bear Lake Drainage, Smith & Thomas Forks,
Southwestern Wyoming and Southeastern
Idaho
Sponsor: Utah Power and Light Company
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1954 – 1970; 1979 – 1982, 1989 – 1990
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for hydroelectric
power production
Project Area: Santa Barbara County, California
Sponsor: Santa Barbara County Water Agency
Technique: Ground based and airborne silver iodide seeding
with radar surveillance; ground-based flare
seeding
Time Period: 1950-1953; 1955; 1956-1960; 1978; 1982 – 1997;
2002-2007; 2008-present
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for municipal and
agricultural water supplies
Project Area: Grouse Creek, Raft River, Wellsville and
Wasatch Mountains of Northern Utah
Sponsor: Utah Water Resources Development
Corporation,Utah Division of Water Resources,
and Cache and Box Elder Counties
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1989 – 1997, 2001-present
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Provo and Weber River Drainages in Western
Uinta Mountains of Utah
Sponsor: Utah Water Resources Development Corporation,
Utah Division of Water Resources, Provo River
Water Users Association and Weber Basin Water
Conservancy District
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1989 – 1995, 2000-present
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Wasatch Mountains in Eastern Salt Lake
County, Utah
Sponsor: Utah Water Resources Development Corporation;
Utah Division of Water Resources; Salt Lake City
Water Division; and Alta, Brighton, and Snowbird
Ski Areas
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1989 – 1996
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for municipal water
supplies
Project Area: Upper Kings River Drainage in the Southern
Sierra Nevada of California
Sponsor: Kings River Conservation District and Kings River
Water Users Association
Technique: Airborne and ground based silver iodide seeding
with radar surveillance
Time Period: 1989 – 1993, 2007-present
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Upper Feather River Drainage in the Northern
Sierra Nevada of California
Sponsor: California Department of Water Resources
Technique: Airborne silver iodide seeding with radar
surveillance
Time Period: 1989
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for municipal and
irrigation water supplies
Project Area: Grand Mesa and West Elk Mountains of
Western Colorado
Sponsor: Grand Mesa Water Users Association
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1990 – 1991
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: San Gabriel Mountains, California
Sponsor: Los Angeles County Flood Control District
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1959 – 1973, 1991 – 1993, 1997-2001
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for municipal water
supplies
Project Area: Bannock, Portneuf and Bear River Mountain
Ranges of Southeastern Idaho
Sponsor: Bear River RC&D and Bannock, Bear Lake,
Caribou, Franklin, and Oneida Counties
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1988 – 1989, 1992, 1993
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Uinta Mountains of Northeastern Utah
Sponsor: Uinta County, Duchesne County and
Utah Division of Water Resources
Technique: Airborne and ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1977, 1989, 2003-present
Goal: Increased winter spring, and summer precipitation
for irrigation water supplies
Project Area: Boise River Drainage, Idaho
Sponsor: Boise Project Board of Control
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1992 – 1996, 2002-2005, 2007-present
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies and hydroelectric power production
Project Area: Willow Creek Drainage, Colorado
Sponsor: Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1992 – 1995
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Higher Elevation Watersheds of Nine Eastern
Idaho Counties and One Western Wyoming
County
Sponsor: High Country RC&D
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1993, 1995
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: Santa Clara County, California
Sponsor: Santa Clara Valley Water District
Technique: Airborne silver iodide seeding with radar
surveillance
Time Period: 1992
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for municipal water
supplies
Project Area: Mornos River Drainage, Greece
Sponsor: Greater Athens Water Authority
Technique: Airborne silver iodide seeding with radar
surveillance
Time Period: 1992, 1993
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for municipal water
supplies
Project Area: Chixoy River Drainage, Guatemala, C. A.
Sponsor: Empresa Electrica and Instituto Nacional de
Electrificacion
Technique: Airborne and ground based silver iodide seeding
with radar surveillance
Time Period: 1991, 1992, 1994
Goal: Enhanced summer precipitation for hydroelectric
power production
Project Area: El Cajon Drainage Basins, Honduras, C. A.
Sponsor: Empresa Nacional De Energia Electrica
Technique: Airborne and ground based silver iodide seeding
with radar surveillance
Time Period: 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997
Goal: Enhanced summer precipitation for hydroelectric
power production
Project Area: Tsengwen Dam Drainage, Taiwan
Sponsor: Taiwan Central Weather Bureau
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1992, 1994
Goal: Enhanced summer precipitation for irrigation water
supplies
Project Area: West Central Texas Near San Angelo
Sponsor: City of San Angelo, Texas
Technique: Airborne silver iodide seeding with radar
surveillance
Time Period: 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988
Goal: Enhanced summer precipitation for municipal
water supplies
Project Area: Edwards Plateau Northwest of San Antonio
Sponsor: Edwards Underground Water District, San
Antonio, Texas
Technique: Airborne silver iodide seeding with radar
surveillance
Time Period: 1985, 1986
Goal: Enhanced summer precipitation for municipal
water supplies
Project Area: South Central Texas North of Corpus Christi
Sponsor: City of Corpus Christi, Texas
Technique: Airborne silver iodide seeding with radar
surveillance
Time Period: 1985
Goal: Enhanced summer precipitation for municipal
water supplies
Project Area: Pine Valley Mountains in Southwestern Utah
Sponsor: Washington County Water Conservancy District
and Utah Division of Water Resources
Technique: Ground based silver iodide seeding
Time Period: 1985-1987
Goal: Enhanced winter precipitation for municipal and
irrigation water supplies
Project Area: Southern Delaware
Sponsor: Delaware Department of Agriculture
Here are the cloud seeding ( chemtrailing) programmes for continental United States just by a single company- North American Weather Consultants.
Technique: Airborne silver iodide seeding with radar
surveillance
Time Period: 1985
Goal: Enhanced summer precipitation for agricultural land.
Here are the cloud seeding ( chemtrailing) programmes for continental United States just by a single company- North American Weather Consultants.
-
Gillianren- was your question about what brought me here? I think I was googling some sites dealing with Apollo and eventually turned up here. Or was it a different question?
My question was, isn't there a Latvian-language forum where you can go spew ignorance in your first language instead of badly written English?
-
Um, you DO know that cloud-seeding is well-known and involves chemicals which remain in the cloudlayer, right? Therefore that cloud-seeding and "chemtrailing" are different things?
You are making wild accusations against a LOT of people here.
Also, http://memegenerator.net/instance/20082114
-
Jason, you made calcualtions assuming disatnce 10km, that would imply the airplane would be barely seen at all. The video depicts a zoomed image. Your trick won`t cut it here.
Gillianren, calm down. I don`t get offensive to women. Don`t use advantage of that.
-
Abaddon-`2. The two contrails are diffusing differently. At 200 meters separation, they would be diffusing identically.`
Learn to quote properly, twit.
- Thank you , for admitting that these are likely chemtrails, even through your circular statement.
Learn to read for comprehension, twit. No such admission was made, twit.
Explain VOR. Now.
The flight patterns are 200 m away, meaning their route, not exactly the fuselages of those airplanes, as they are not flying next to each other.
They are at least a mile apart.
Echaton-` strange bedfellows`- in what reference did you mention it regarding R. Paul?
Why should I care about R. Paul, or any candidate?
-
Jason, you made calcualtions assuming disatnce 10km,
Correct for a passenger aircraft.
that would imply the airplane would be barely seen at all.
Actually the angular resolution limit of the human eye is 0.02 to 0.03 degrees. Jason's calculation showed the plane would have an angular size of 0.172 degrees - several times larger than the smallest the human eye can see.
The video depicts a zoomed image.
So? The camera probably has better resolution than the human eye.
Your trick won`t cut it here.
Elementary mathematics is a "trick"?
Gillianren, calm down. I don`t get offensive to women.
It doesn't look that way from the things you have said.
Don`t use advantage of that.
Case in point.
-
Jason, you made calcualtions assuming disatnce 10km, that would imply the airplane would be barely seen at all. The video depicts a zoomed image. Your trick won`t cut it here.
You do know how zooming works, right?
-
I slap America, because I care, and I want them to wake up.
But you don't care enough to be open to the learning we offer here?
I want them to have meaningful jobs, not at WallMarts and Kmarts.
I am having a hard time envisioning a guy in Latvia caring about "meaningful jobs" in America while at the same time denigrating the effort of people that work in retail. Despite what you have heard, Wal-mart is not a bad place to work, relative to the retail sector. The people at my local Wal-mart work hard. Many of them are immigrants with limited English skills that get a start at a better life in a new country through these jobs. I bet the ability to support themselves is meaningful to them!
And by the way, denigrating Apollo is also insulting to people from countries all around the world.
-
Jason, you made calcualtions assuming disatnce 10km, that would imply the airplane would be barely seen at all.
The assumption is valid for passenger aircraft. And it would be easily seen. That angular size calculated is well within the limit of the human eye to resolve.
The video depicts a zoomed image. Your trick won`t cut it here.
Trick? You think that because the image is zoomed there is going to be a difference? The camera is still at ground level. The angular sizes of the two objects are NOT altered by zooming in, and certainly not relative to each other.
However, thank you for doing exactly what I expected you to do. You asked for a calculation. I provided it. You simply find ways to dismiss it in your ignorance. YOU have been asked for your own calculations on working out the distance between those aircraft and you stubbornly refuse to provide it. Which of us is playing tricks here?
Oh, and your list of cloud seeding stuff is irrelevant. The whole point of cloud seeding is to seed clouds. In other words, what they spray up there stays up there. You are talking about things that make their way to the ground. Totally different and unrelated.
Gillianren, calm down. I don`t get offensive to women. Don`t use advantage of that.
Don't be patronising.
-
If I have an object like airplane 3 metres apart, and another airplane 300 metres away their size difference( visual, percentwise) will be the same as 2 airplanes observed from 10 km distance being 300 metres apart?
I added the cloud seeding program, so you could see how widespread the program of such spraying project could be. So it wouldn`t be a surprise how could they spray the whole country.
I doubt those airplanes are a mile apart( their trails, consequently), although I am not dead sure, as it is a blurry video. It wouldn`t prove that those are contrails.
A hypothetical question- if I had a thread about 9/11 how many of you would stay silent? I want to simply check if you are able to talk truth if it is against the government. And you wouldn`t, if that implied your paycheck. So , Why even bother asking. It is actually a very simple question.As simple as your posting picture of yourself.
-
Why don't you start a thread on 9/11, then, instead of dancing around the issue?
And you have no idea the criticisms I have against the US government (or US patriotism/nationalism). But I prefer to keep my opinion steeped in facts.
-
If I have an object like airplane 3 metres apart, and another airplane 300 metres away their size difference( visual, percentwise) will be the same as 2 airplanes observed from 10 km distance being 300 metres apart?
You really don't get how zooming works, do you?
It doesn't move your viewpoint closer, it just magnifies part of the image. You cannot say that because you are looking at a zoomed image it is like looking at those two objects closer to you.
I doubt those airplanes are a mile apart( their trails, consequently), although I am not dead sure, as it is a blurry video. It wouldn`t prove that those are contrails.
I don't care about your doubts. You have been asked repeatedly now to provide a calculation to back up your claim they are only 200 metres apart and you have consistently refused to do so. That is intellectually dishonest.
The point is not to prove that they are contrails, but that their behaviour in both cases is consistent with the known behaviour of contrails because the atmospheric conditons the planes are flying in are different due to altitude.
A hypothetical question- if I had a thread about 9/11 how many of you would stay silent?
That depends on the content of the thread.
I want to simply check if you are able to talk truth if it is against the government.
And so you reveal your bias right from the start. What if we think the truth is NOT against the government?
And by the way, are you labouring under the mistaken impression that we are all governed by the same one? Why do you think the US government has a thing to do with my paycheck?
-
Kind of wish I was a paid disinfo agent. I'm having to sell some of my stuff just to afford school!
-
Well, at least my question now gets added to the list of the "seen but unanswered."
If there were a thread of "problems you have/had with the US government," there is not a single person here who wouldn't have anything to post in it. That doesn't mean that we have to believe in the incredibly stupid chemtrails conspiracies. That doesn't mean we have to believe that the collapse of the World Trade Center was caused by anything but Big Frickin' Planes plus Big Frickin' Fires. That doesn't mean that we have to believe that Apollo was faked. Just because the Tuskegee Syphilis Study was real and horrific doesn't mean that the US government never does great things--or never fails to do bad ones.
-
-Then watch the beginning of video in France, and tell me, what are these conditions fot these 2 airplanes that would make their trails so different, considering they are flying mere 200 meters apart.
I don't even have to watch the video to answer this one. It's simple, airplanes in cruise flight simply do not fly a mere 200 meters apart. That is much too close for safety.
The separation rules are complex and depend on type of air space, altitude, and direction of separation. Aircraft are allowed to come closest to each other in the vertical direction because airplanes have traditionally measured vertical position much more accurately than horizontal position. In most places, in cruise under 29,000 ft the closest they can ever come is 1,000 ft vertically. Above 29,000 ft, that increases to 2,000 ft vertically. And of course atmospheric conditions for contrail formation can vary greatly over that 1,000-2000 ft. (Remember how the device that measures altitude actually works and why it's so accurate. That's just one atmospheric property that varies quickly with altitude.)
But the separations are likely even greater. Up to 29,000 ft the odd thousand ft levels are assigned to eastbound flights and even thousands to westbound flights, so two aircraft going the same way and in the same geographic location will necessarily be at least 2,000 ft apart vertically. Above 29,000 ft only the odd flight levels are used, increasing the minimum altitude difference between aircraft going in the same direction to 4,000 ft.
Minimum separations in the horizontal directions (ie, at the same altitudes where the air properties for contrail formation would be the same) depend on the altitude and kind of airspace. In radar controlled airspace, horizontal en-route separations are 5 to 10 nautical miles. When two aircraft are following the same route, they cannot come closer than 10 or 15 minutes flying time.
The rules are complex and under revision to permit more efficient use of the air space, but it is still obvious right off the bat that you aren't seeing two cruising aircraft a mere 200m apart. You are seeing them at different altitudes and/or in different locations where the atmospheric conditions for contrail formation can be very different.
You need not guess about the altitude of the aircraft you see. Real time flight tracking data is available online at several sites, e.g., http://www.flightaware.com. You can see for yourself just how far apart they are and determine for yourself the altitudes at which contrails are currently forming.
-
Gillianren, calm down. I don`t get offensive to women. Don`t use advantage of that.
That's funny, I though she was much calmer today than I have been.
-
Gillianren, calm down. I don`t get offensive to women.
What is the term for a statement that automatically disproves itself?
-
I'd explain how that statement was sexist, but I doubt he'd get it.
-
Visually in the vdeo, all the chemtrails pass the sun
Yes, and once they'd passed the sun, they were no longer going toward the sun, but away from it. (It's kinda like that old riddle, "How far can you run into the forest?" The answer: half way) Therefore, not all of the contrails in the video were going toward the sun, hence my confusion with your description.
meaning they don`t spray in such awaythat the chemtrail would be already past the sun
That video starts with the sun at the left edge of the frame. How do you know what is to the left of that? How can you tell, from that video, that new contrails aren't being formed to the left of the sun, from that particular videographer's vantage point, therefore always being carried away from the sun, again, relative to that particular vantage point. For that matter, why is that vantage point special?
It always was sprayed on the right side of the video, while the sun was located in the left corner.
Yes, all of the contrails in that video were traveling at the same rate from frame right to frame left, indicating that they were all being carried by the same prevailing winds, which has nothing to do with the direction in which the contrails were "sprayed." What of it?
-
If I have an object like airplane 3 metres apart, and another airplane 300 metres away their size difference( visual, percentwise) will be the same as 2 airplanes observed from 10 km distance being 300 metres apart?
Do they not teach trigonometry in Latvia?
-
Okay, let me put it this way. If you have two moons in the sky, both side by side, and one was only 20 meters further away from the other, would you see any real difference between the two?
-
Advancedboy how far apart do you think the planes in the attached image are?
-
That's funny, I though she was much calmer today than I have been.
I don't think he likes it when I call him ignorant and his statements rubbish. Sucks to be him, then, because he demonstrably is ignorant and his statements demonstrably are rubbish. He's not interested in learning, either.
(Side note--I have a screensaver on the box I use to stream movies onto my TV that gives me name definitions and "this day in history." I just turned it on to watch some more of Elizabeth R, and the first thing on my screen was the name "Godwin." I am amused.)
-
If I have an object like airplane 3 metres apart, and another airplane 300 metres away their size difference( visual, percentwise) will be the same as 2 airplanes observed from 10 km distance being 300 metres apart?
Pure nonsense.
I added the cloud seeding program, so you could see how widespread the program of such spraying project could be.
"Could be"? Wild speculation without any evidence.
So it wouldn`t be a surprise how could they spray the whole country.
Yet the trails remain in the sky and never reach the ground, and drift in the air to other countries. Just a bit inefficient, no?
I doubt those airplanes are a mile apart( their trails, consequently), although I am not dead sure, as it is a blurry video. It wouldn`t prove that those are contrails.
Prove the separation distance. "I doubt" is insufficient. Prove they are not contrails.
A hypothetical question- if I had a thread about 9/11 how many of you would stay silent?
Off topic. This is your chemtrail thread, not a 9/11 thread. Your answer, by the way, is none.
I want to simply check if you are able to talk truth if it is against the government.
And you wouldn`t, if that implied your paycheck. So , Why even bother asking.
Which government? what paycheck?
It is actually a very simple question.As simple as your posting picture of yourself.
What exactly would posting a picture of myself prove?
-
It is actually a very simple question.As simple as your posting picture of yourself.
Screw it, I don't care.
(https://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/225343_1019060203158_9355_n.jpg)
Satisfied?
Edit: Still living in this apartment, but that's an old photo. This place is now even messier. Yech.
-
I didn`t want to resort to this, but ok. Watch the movie ` What in the world are they spraying` and simply read the qualifications of those people that are speaking on matter of chemtrailing. Why not argue with them with your numbers of airplane distances?
Here is another woman talking about this issue, maybe try to be humble, and listen to all her video, especially when she reads out stats from the local hospital.T he way you speak guys here makes the place desolated and lonely. In the end you are left alone to discuss what air simulator games you fly. You are left among a bunch that have everything the same. And then crickets start chirping. Calling me twit, certainly slowly leads to that.
-
"Global warming... no such thing."
Nope, wrong.
CO2 gas is recognized as a global warming gas. Billions of tons of it are pumped out every day. Venus is a pressure cooker with all of its own CO2 gas. This is basic astronomical knowledge, but naturally it's gotten politicized to hell and back.
T he way you speak guys here makes the place desolated and lonely.
You'll find a good many more people on the JREF Forum and the Bad Astronomy/Universe Today forums. The Apollohoax forum are a much smaller lot, I'm afraid. You'll also find that a good deal of us are on the BAUT as well.
In the end you are left alone to discuss what air simulator games you fly.
Heaven forbid, people talk about their interests over an internet forum. You certainly don't see THOSE in well-populated forums, not in the least! Wait.
-
Why not argue with them with your numbers of airplane distances?
You brought the discussion here. You made a statement regarding the distances between aircraft. You consistently failed to respond to the request to back up your statement, and now you want to shift the argument onto someone else? What a coward you are. If you can't support your statements don't make them. If you fail to meet the standard of proof required for your own statements, don't cry foul because the rest of us call you out on it and expose you for the intellectual coward and liar you are.
-
`Intellectual coward,` nice one, . Hahhaha. I can`t calculate the exact distances, because I don`t have skills to do so. But you are pressing this, as if these are the only skills that matter. I superimposed the pictures, and showed you the approximate visual estimation. Now you press that it must be definitely the temperature variations, that caused the trails to linger. Where have I heard it before, temperature inversions and swamp gass, hmm. You are naive to believe that I won`t find a more convincing video.
There is nothing of intelligence that is coming out of you, which would include patience, reservedness and ability to exercize variables in possible evidence. There is also nothing else that I would attribute of such, that would be created by you, be it physically constructed or written. Nowhere else in scientific community I have seen such agression and name calling.
Lupus, you even can`t post a picture properly?
here is a video of 2 teachers talking it in a simple humble manner. These look like the salt of the earth and sincere people, and before attacking them being stupid and not scientists, what matters is the coincidences that go through many videos of people reporting chemtrails. I like your attitude, at least I know where you stand. One day it will be easier for us to see, and you won`t be able to mingle in, as if one of us.
-
Intellectual coward,` nice one, . Hahhaha. I can`t calculate the exact distances, because I don`t have skills to do so. But you are pressing this, as if these are the only skills that matter. I superimposed the pictures, and showed you the approximate visual estimation.
So you rushed to a conclusion without any expertise, and are unwilling to admit that it is not so easy to visually estimate the distance of two objects at long range based on apparent size differences? And you're completely unwilling to admit you might be wrong?
Now you press that it must be definitely the temperature variations, that caused the trails to linger. Where have I heard it before, temperature inversions and swamp gass, hmm.
Will you please at least do the least amount of research it takes to find out how contrails work?
Lupus, you even can`t post a picture properly?
Pardon? Outside of the unnecessary rudeness (which is completely hypocritical given how much you complain about others here insulting you), it shows up just fine for me, even when I'm logged out.
here is a video of 2 teachers talking it in a simple humble manner. These look like the salt of the earth and sincere people, and before attacking them being stupid and not scientists, what matters is the coincidences that go through many videos of people reporting chemtrails.
So ignorance multiplied several times suddenly becomes knowledge? Once millions thought the sun revolved around the Earth because of the lack of knowledge they had about the solar system, does that suddenly make them right? I'm sure they'd be considered "salt of the earth and sincere people" too.
Also, I'd say ignorant, not stupid. As in, they make layman's assumptions without taking the effort to understand contrails, and are drawn into the hysteria thanks to its propagation by folks such as you. It feeds into itself.
I like your attitude, at least I know where you stand. One day it will be easier for us to see, and you won`t be able to mingle in, as if one of us.
We make her one of us! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBXyB7niEc0)
-
here is a video of 2 teachers talking it in a simple humble manner. These look like the salt of the earth and sincere people, and before attacking them being stupid and not scientists, what matters is the coincidences that go through many videos of people reporting chemtrails.
In the dim and distant past, when I was but a schoolboy, my history teacher was a great guy. Very intelligent, knew his subject very well and could impart both the knowledge and skills required to his students in an exciting and effective manner. But there wasn't a hope in hell that I would have gone to him with questions about my Biology assignment, my German homework or that English essay I just couldn't get started on.
Teachers are fine people (I am married to one after all), and the fact that they are teachers confirms a certain level of academic accomplishment and intellectual potential. However, they are not (and nor are they required to be) experts beyond their subject area. My wife is an English Literature graduate, teaching primary school children, and she often leaves the room (physically or metaphorically) whenever my son and I get into a discussion on our areas of interest ... computing, physics, quantum theory, because it really isn't something she is interested in.
The fact that the subjects in your video are teachers means nothing beyond the fact that teachers are just as capable of being crackpots and/or falling victim to conspiracy theories as the rest of the population.
-
`Intellectual coward,` nice one, . Hahhaha. I can`t calculate the exact distances, because I don`t have skills to do so. But you are pressing this, as if these are the only skills that matter.
You made the claim about distances, but now admit you can't calculate them. And you're offended that we challenge you on this? Do you not see the problem here?
Now you press that it must be definitely the temperature variations, that caused the trails to linger. Where have I heard it before, temperature inversions and swamp gass, hmm.
I don't know, where have you heard it?
The relationship between atmospheric altitude, pressure, density and temperature is extremely well documented and very widely used. For example, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Standard_Atmosphere
and here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Atmosphere
-
I can`t calculate the exact distances, because I don`t have skills to do so. But you are pressing this, as if these are the only skills that matter. I superimposed the pictures, and showed you the approximate visual estimation.
And what is that estimation based on? Nothing. I have numbers, and the well-known fact that passenger aircraft do NOT ever fly that close to each other for safety reasons on my side. I have researched and performed calculations. And you have done... what?
There is nothing of intelligence that is coming out of you,
Typical crackpot: refusing to recognise intelligence in others. Do you find fault with the trigonometry in my equations?
here is a video of 2 teachers talking it in a simple humble manner.
Which proves what? Are they experts on atmospheric phenomena, water vapour condensation and dispersion?
-
There is nothing of intelligence that is coming out of you, which would include patience, reservedness and ability to exercize variables in possible evidence. There is also nothing else that I would attribute of such, that would be created by you, be it physically constructed or written. Nowhere else in scientific community I have seen such agression and name calling.
Ad hominem attacks - the last refuge of the terminally wrong.
-
I didn`t want to resort to this, but ok. Watch the movie ` What in the world are they spraying` and simply read the qualifications of those people that are speaking on matter of chemtrailing. Why not argue with them with your numbers of airplane distances?
Because they aren't arguing that two aircraft are flying dangerously close together for no reason. You are.
-
I already told you I estimated the distances, your messurment is no more accurate than my estimation, you just showed a probability of 9% difference in size. yet, if those airplanes were closer than 1km the variation would be even less. Which is completely fine with this video, as it is inconclusive , because of its blurrness. Your exact calcualtions and the given percentage is the same as Drakes equation, not significant in being more accurate than a guesstimate.
Your assertion that these people`s info is not important, because they are not scientists is equally matched by insignifacance of yours, sitting in the same ditch, as you do no have specific qualifications to deal with this subject more than they or me.
There is something going on here, I can`t figure it out yet. For example, i don`t comment on JFK, or other subjects that I haven`t done at least minimal research, but you are completely specialised in chemtrails. Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because you have your scientific...approach.
Have you ever thought why I am so gullible? Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax, 9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?
You can keep peddaling that everything is nonsence, coincidence, not scientifically approrved by mainstream, etc. That is your job to do here, and that is your pattern.
It is the same as NIST. (`Have you found any explsives`? No. Did you look? No. Why? We didn`t expect them to be there so we didn`t.) You will probably say the same, that you didn`t research chemtrails because they don`t exist. it is meaningless because you are in a postion of only arguing . If you had common sense, you would try to research evidence offered by both parties, or at least be suspicious about why this `chemtrails` issue is so widespread.
-
I already told you I estimated the distances, your messurment is no more accurate than my estimation, you just showed a probability of 9% difference in size. yet, if those airplanes were closer than 1km the variation would be even less. Which is completely fine with this video, as it is inconclusive , because of its blurrness.
So your 200m separation guess is worthless and has no supporting evidence. At least I gave justification for my estimate.
Your exact calcualtions and the given percentage is the same as Drakes equation, not significant in being more accurate than a guesstimate.
And that makes your wild guess valid how, exactly?
Your assertion that these people`s info is not important, because they are not scientists is equally matched by insignifacance of yours, sitting in the same ditch, as you do no have specific qualifications to deal with this subject more than they or me.
How do you know how qualified anyone posting here? This board is populated by many scientists and engineers, some of whom work in the aerospace industry.
There is something going on here, I can`t figure it out yet.
Quelle surprise. What is going on here is you have bitten off more than you can chew.
You didn't expect the depth of knowledge and experience present here.
You thought you could waltz in and slay everyone here with the utterly crapulent arguments you have presented and that nobody could refute them. You were wrong.
For example, i don`t comment on JFK, or other subjects that I haven`t done at least minimal research, but you are completely specialised in chemtrails.
Many here have done the required research, including the topic at hand, chemtrails. That's what this thread is about so enough with the JFK derail.
Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because you have your scientific...approach.
No, because of experience, expertise and previous research, many here have the answers immediately to hand. You act as though you believe nobody here ever heard of chemtrails before, or ever participated in numerous discussions of same.
Have you ever thought why I am so gullible? Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax, 9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?
I have no idea why you in particular are so gullible, why don't you explain why you think you are so gullible.
You can keep peddaling that everything is nonsence, coincidence, not scientifically approrved by mainstream, etc. That is your job to do here, and that is your pattern.
No thanks. We will continue to debunk woo claims for which there is NO EVIDENCE.
-
I already told you I estimated the distances,
No, you guessed. An estimate has some basis in numerical reality.
I calculated.
your messurment is no more accurate than my estimation, you just showed a probability of 9% difference in size. yet, if those airplanes were closer than 1km the variation would be even less.
I know. But that is not the point.
You guessed they were close together because they looked similar in size. I stated that they would still look similar in size even if they were 1km apart, five times further than your 'estimate'. You said that was absurd, you didn't believe it, and challenged me to provide my calculations to prove it. I did.
Naturally, confronted with this demonstration that you were wrong in your disbelief of my original statement, you now try to twist it around, accusing me of 'tricks' because the video is zoomed, and now trying to claim that I have failed to prove something I was never trying to prove in the first place. I never said those planes were that distance apart or that they were at those altitudes. I was addressing ONLY your statement that their similar size showed them to be close together.
And you STILL don't know that they were even the same size. If the lower aircraft is smaller than the higher one then that introduces an even greater range to their possible distances and similar apparent sizes.
Your exact calcualtions and the given percentage is the same as Drakes equation, not significant in being more accurate than a guesstimate.
Absolute rubbish, but you keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel that your TOTAL inability to preform basic calculations before making absurd guesses sets you on an equal footing with anyone here in the reasoning skills department.
you do no have specific qualifications to deal with this subject more than they or me.
I certainly DO have better qualifications to discuss it than you, as demonstrated repeatedly. However, you are once again missing or refusing to get my point. I can't even be bothered reiterating it.
Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because you have your scientific...approach.
Oh, the arrogance! Do you HONESTLY believe you are the first person who has ever come along to discuss chemtrails? Do you seriously think we had never even heard of it before you came along? Are you so up your own backside that you can't conceive of anyone actually possessing relevant knowledge in a field before you bring it to their attention?
I have been discussing Apollo, chemtrails, 9/11 and JFK for YEARS at this point. You are nothing new, nothing special, and nothing even slightly original. We have heard it all before, and seen your blustering and goalpost-shifting tactics from a dozen people before you in the past year alone.
If you had common sense,
When commons sense is sufficient to discuss the science behind these things we'll give you a call.
you would try to research evidence offered by both parties,
The same arrogant attitude: you disagree therefore you have not done your research. I have researched arguments from both sides. I come to a different conclusion than you based on that research, NOT on dismissal of it out of hand. However, that does not matter when dealing with things like your guess about how far apart two distant objects in a video are.
or at least be suspicious about why this `chemtrails` issue is so widespread.
Ignorance is widespread, therefore I expect issues based on ignorance to be equally widespread. The ideas you dismiss about Area 51, sasquatch and so forth are just as widespread as chemtrails, if not more so, yet you dismiss those as quackery even as you try to place some special significance on the prevalence of people wittering on about chemtrails. Double standards, anyone?
-
Have you ever thought why I am so gullible? Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax, 9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?
Yes, I have. Not just you, of course, but others as well.
So please, do tell us why you're so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?
-
I already told you I estimated the distances, your messurment is no more accurate than my estimation, you just showed a probability of 9% difference in size.
You ASKED Jason to prove that two planes that were 1km apart would appear similar sizes. He did so, and now you are having a tantrum because you don't like being proven wrong.
yet, if those airplanes were closer than 1km the variation would be even less. Which is completely fine with this video, as it is inconclusive , because of its blurrness. Your exact calcualtions and the given percentage is the same as Drakes equation, not significant in being more accurate than a guesstimate.
You've changed your tune! You asserted that from that video you were sure the planes were 200m apart!
Your assertion that these people`s info is not important, because they are not scientists is equally matched by insignifacance of yours, sitting in the same ditch, as you do no have specific qualifications to deal with this subject more than they or me.
You have no idea what qualifications people hold because you just don't listen. You are fixated on our jobs.
There is something going on here, I can`t figure it out yet.
Whats going on is that you are, frankly, trolling.
For example, i don`t comment on JFK, or other subjects that I haven`t done at least minimal research
Looking at conspiracy sites and YouTube videos is not "research".
but you are completely specialised in chemtrails
Who said that?!
Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because you have your scientific...approach.
Or maybe because we have been hearing about chemtrails for YEARS, and been looking into it for a long time? I first heard about them in 2001/2002ish.
Have you ever thought why I am so gullible?
Because that is where your comfort zone is. You appear to take pride in having what you deem to be "special knowledge" and you enjoy it because the idea that you are wrong and your worldview is unrealistic distresses you.
Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax, 9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?
The same reason some people believe in God but not pixies. It's your worldview.
You can keep peddaling that everything is nonsence, coincidence, not scientifically approrved by mainstream, etc.
No, we keep showing you our EVIDENCE and asking you for yours, which you have consistently failed to provide.
That is your job to do here, and that is your pattern.
Um, no. It's not our job, we are here because we are sure of our knowledge and can back it up with a variety of sources.
It is the same as NIST. (`Have you found any explsives`? No. Did you look? No. Why? We didn`t expect them to be there so we didn`t.) You will probably say the same, that you didn`t research chemtrails because they don`t exist. it is meaningless because you are in a postion of only arguing . If you had common sense, you would try to research evidence offered by both parties, or at least be suspicious about why this `chemtrails` issue is so widespread.
We have researched it, and drawn our conclusions. They are different from yours.
-
http://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/tin-foil-hat.jpg
-
Case dismissed. As in deltaindiasierramikeindiasierrasierraechodelta.
-
Case dismissed. As in deltaindiasierramikeindiasierrasierraechodelta.
So you concede that we are right and you are wrong? Great! Happy to help :)
Papaindialimalimaoscarcharliekilo.
-
You can`t demand proof, as this is not court.
Case dismissed. As in deltaindiasierramikeindiasierrasierraechodelta.
Consistent as ever.
-
Have you ever thought why I am so gullible?by mainstream, etc. That is your job to do here, and that is your pattern.
It is the same as NIST. (`Have you found any explsives`? No. Did y Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax, 9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?
Really, I have no idea why you are so gullible. Possibly genetics, possibly a deep-seated psychological need to believe that you are smarter than everyone else, without actually having to work for that achievement.
But gullible you are. Strangely, I'm sure that's one statement you will adamantly refuse to believe.
-
You know, I'm not an expert on contrails. Or Apollo. Or 9/11. However, I know enough on all three subjects to debunk ignorant tripe. It doesn't actually take that much knowledge.
-
There is something going on here, I can`t figure it out yet. For example, i don`t comment on JFK, or other subjects that I haven`t done at least minimal research, but you are completely specialised in chemtrails. Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because you have your scientific...approach.
Contrails are easy to understand. I even linked you a page on how to estimate whether or not you'll see contrails. The math might take a bit of work (as well as knowing certain variables), but it's all there. This is the age of the internet, after all.
Relatedly, I don't have to go back and do all the mathematical computations just to show that the Earth goes around the Sun. It's vastly accepted science, and the information is out there with a simple google search; why would I have to say "I'll need a couple of days to look it up", especially online? Google search, link, done.
Have you ever thought why I am so gullible?
Well, some of us do wonder. Some of us think we have this form of thinking figured out. Personally, I think it's a mixture of ego, not wanting to think you're wrong, and demonization (wanting to feel that there's demons out there, such as the US Government, and you ascribe every power, motivation, and ability to them -- or some hidden conspiracy group, you still haven't gone into what you think the real powers are).
Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax, 9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?
You ran off instead of discussing the 9/11 subject, but that's your prerogative. Also, you really don't seem interested in technology or science. You seem to only look up JUST enough to spout off how X is impossible, without doing the research into what it's all about -- just look at contrails.
You can keep peddaling that everything is nonsence, coincidence, not scientifically approrved by mainstream, etc. That is your job to do here, and that is your pattern.
It's not a job. I do this for fun. Enjoyment. I have no obligation to be here.
And no, the evidence is not convincing.
It is the same as NIST. (`Have you found any explsives`? No. Did you look? No. Why? We didn`t expect them to be there so we didn`t.) You will probably say the same, that you didn`t research chemtrails because they don`t exist. it is meaningless because you are in a postion of only arguing . If you had common sense, you would try to research evidence offered by both parties, or at least be suspicious about why this `chemtrails` issue is so widespread.
We understand how contrails operate. I offered you the tools to find out yourself.
Why should I be so suspicious it's widespread? I've seen millions of people ignorant on any number of issues, why not this as well?
-
Case dismissed. As in deltaindiasierramikeindiasierrasierraechodelta.
Oh well. You can lead a horse to water...
-
...but a pencil must be lead!
-
I really don't see all the fuss over what are obviously the continuous flatulence trails of invisible pink unicorns chasing commercial airliners... as invisible pink unicorns are wont to do.
-
I'm amused at this: http://www.alienscientist.com/forum/showthread.php?1653-Chemtraiils.-The-strong-evidence.
Even on a forum that's based around conspiracy theories, he's all disbelieving everyone around him. :D
-
For anyone that believes in "Chemtrails" please explain how a contrail is made...and the difference between that and a contrail!
As well can you answer the following
Who is orchestrating the spraying us of chemicals?
Why are they doing this?
What proof do you offer that provides a conclusive finding of these acts!
How are the ones that plan and carry out this mass dosing of chemicals protecting themselves from adverse effects?....what are those effects?
When you "spot" chemtrails please explain the procedure you go through to cross check FAA scheduled flights and the conflicting or unregistered flight patterns are identified by you how?
WHat is the difference between "chemtrails" and cloud seeding programs?
-
I really don't see all the fuss over what are obviously the continuous flatulence trails of invisible pink unicorns chasing commercial airliners... as invisible pink unicorns are wont to do.
:o ;D ;D That made me spit pop all over my desk!
-
:o ;D ;D That made me spit pop all over my desk!
You're welcome.
-
At the risk of being a broken record, may I offer my usual suggestion / challenge to any 'chem'trail believer?
It is often (almost universally) claimed by 'chem'trail promoters that there are hundreds, nay thousands of these evil-doing planes laying trails at altitudes below that at which contrails would naturally form. Every day, over their heads, criss cross trails, supposedly at levels below which contrails would form..
So, 'chemmies' - wouldn't it be in your interest to actually record an example of such a thing? And given that it is very easy, why not .. do it?
Here's how, and all you need is a camcorder or video-capable camera (why even some of the newer phones have sufficient video quality..). Note that this will work best in the US, for reasons I am happy to go into later..
1. First up, wait for a good day, when the evil is afoot.
2. Now, get up from your computer (that might be the most difficult part)
3. Jump in your car (or better yet, walk and get some exercise! but take a radio with you) and head to your nearest newsagent (or anywhere that sells papers), preferable one near a signposted street junction. Buy a daily paper.
4. Now, staying near your car (turn the radio on so we can hear the time being announced)... Start videoing!!
Here's what you need to film:
5. - the front page of the paper, and then zoom in to show the date and time (make sure it focuses properly)
6. - your location. Do this by zooming back, and showing exactly where you are standing relative to the street junction sign and show enough 'landmarks' to allow verification on Google Earth, so that we can work out which you are facing.
7. - the 'trails' being laid. Again, start from fully zoomed back so we can see which way you are facing, and then zoom in (don't overdo it!) to show at least one aircraft laying the trails.
8. - the entire sky. Just pan slowly around while zoomed right back, to show the sky and any existing clouds and/or trails.
That's it, folks! From there, we can pretty much fully analyse the full situation that you have captured, and in particular, determine whether that particular aircraft *should* have been laying contrails (I'll go through that process later, as required...) Just one thing though - please post the video ON THE DAY that you filmed it (on youtube or whatever) so the date will be verified.. Oh and try to keep the camera steady - a tripod would be good, but isn't essential...
Now, here's the funny thing - no chemtrail believer has elected to take this on.
Why is that - does it all sound too complicated? If anyone has a problem with any of it, can you tell me what is difficult? I'm happy to do an example myself to prove it ain't hard...
I'll tell you why. Either they did try it, and discovered for themselves that the aircraft were in contrail-conducive conditions, or they didn't because they are interminally lazy, trolling, or simply know dam well what the result will be.
CONtrails.
-
Chrlz, you should put that up in the threat I linked a few posts back. Hit them at their source. :D
Though it's just advancedboy really posting in there, so...
-
The biggest lie that "chemtrailers" tell is that a contrail must always dissipate quickly. Nevermind the fact that it has been known since airplanes could fly high enough that contrails could persist and it was spelled out in a study in 1942, it goes against common sense. Contrails are essentially cirrus clouds. By saying they must dissipate quickly and can not persist, they are saying that cirrus clouds can not exist.
-
I also find hilarious the claim that they "chemtrail" in front of the sun. Somehow they never seem to realize that for someone just a few miles away the trails would not be near the sun at all.
-
(http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f2/371533d1339917792-have-you-seen-sky-lately-img_1848.jpg)
What are you guys talking about? After getting out of H2S training for lunch I managed to snap "them" spraying us with lethal chemicals ...right in the open sky!
Now after you look at that pic I took on my iphone...you tell me Chemtrails don't exist.....That is RIGHT...You CAN'T can you? Cause they look like chemicals...and they do leave a trail....so CHEMTRAILS!!!!
-
I think I'm coming to a greater preference for the old English term "vapour trails" ;D
-
Condensation trails, vapour trails, chemtrails!
Call them what your will, they all contain dihydrogen monoxide, (http://www.dhmo.org/) (DHMO) whose dangers are well known.
The list of dangers is quite long and include;
Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities.
Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
-
Hmmm. From Bruce Cockburn's 1979 song "Rumours of Glory", I find the line:
Two vapour trails cross the sky....
Strange - I guess the MiB were at this for about 30 years now?
-
Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
Even brief exposure to gaseous DHMO isn't too good for you either...
-
Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
Even brief exposure to gaseous DHMO isn't too good for you either...
Yeah, exposure to gaseous DHMO has been the leading cause of death in the relatively few fatal industrial accidents in nuclear power plants.
-
While you guise poo-poo all over DHMO you are neglecting the simple fact that in proper quantities it is necessary to support human life.
-
Yes. That's the satire.
-
Thank you, Dr. Killjoy. The "proper quantities" is a part of the original petition. I was hoping someone would jump in with the "yet there is no governmental agency responsible for regulating the amount that can be introduced into the human body" part but you killed it dead.
-
I didn't know that!
My apologies. Now I feel bad. :-[
-
While you guise poo-poo all over DHMO you are neglecting the simple fact that in proper quantities it is necessary to support human life.
More importantly, it goes well with whiskey.
-
I didn't know that!
My apologies. Now I feel bad. :-[
No worries, Solus. Conspiro-nuts have that unique inability to see the truth even when it's right in front of them, so the satire is safe.
-
Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
Even brief exposure to gaseous DHMO isn't too good for you either...
You know, it wouldn't take that much solid to do you serious injury, depending on what you did with it.
-
You know, it wouldn't take that much solid to do you serious injury, depending on what you did with it.
As a kid, some of the more malevolent kids in my neighborhood regularly formed quantities of solid DHMO into improvised projectile weapons, using a sort of manual compression-based sintering technique. (I was often their target.)
Obviously the stuff should be kept away from children.
-
All the stuff about DHMO is overblown in my opinion. I have been applying it to my skin for years without any problems whatsoever. The scientists who put that page together are clearly just government shills bent on restricting availability.
-
But... tests show that creatures immersed in DMHO for any longer than a few minutes, invariably, die. You apply that to your SKIN? This is stuff that can cause cause rust on an iron nail in only a few days, with just a little bit of coating.
-
Only some creatures. Others seem to thrive in it.
My research shows that excessive DHMO exposure is especially toxic to birds and mammals including humans, but even here there are exceptions; some birds and one large mammal category seem to seek it out, frequently immersing themselves completely in the stuff, and they get very distressed and can even die when completely removed from it. Obviously this is some form of species-level addiction with a nasty withdrawal syndrome.
-
But did they do that before or after human interference?
-
Did who do what?
-
The birds and one large mammal category. Certainly it's not NATURAL for them to be so reliant?
-
Obviously they had been doing it long before humans came along, but fortunately we humans did our best to remove many of them from DHMO exposure for several centuries once we realized what was going on.
Unfortunately, they can't do this anymore; various do-gooders and heavy government regulations essentially stopped the practice.
-
DHMO is indeed dangerous stuff.
Post-mortem biopsies done on terminal tumours find it in over 98% of them, and over 92% of humans exposed to it have died.
Yet more than half of processed foods measurable quantities.
It's in our food supply, it's a major component of acid rain, clearly, this substance should be banned, yet no one is willing to take action.
Why, why, why? :o
-
Because they make so much money selling the stuff. They even advertise selling it in its "pure" state, the impure state naturally having other chemicals added to it by the government...
-
Egads, what have I started.
-
I regularly leak large quantities of DHMO. It seems to come out of my pores!
-
Egads, what have I started.
A Revolution, my friend. 8)
-
Fight the Power!
-
I would also like to start a topic on chemtrails as I have been researching the topic for some time, and I have an opinion with some evidence to support it. Before gong into it, what are your strongest points against or for it. I will join you later, once you have come up with your ideas.
AB, that photo of the two planes...I assume your research has enlightened you as to aircraft separation rules at flight levels, yes? Two planes in close lateral distances travelling in the same direction will be separated by at least 2000 feet. Your two jetliners in the photo were so separated...you won't find airliners doing formation flights like you imply. (~100m separation). This vertical separation would also explain any differences in contrail appearances...as would differences in aircraft types, weights, power settings, engine types, local atmospheric conditions and other variables. Who knows, maybe one is a 737 and the other is a more distant 767. And the telephoto lens does distort/compress the apparent distance between the aircraft.
You said you have some "evidence to support it" (chemtrails). Still waiting for that evidence. I suspect that the increase in contrails can be significantly explained by the increase in the number of airliners flying up there, aka "fragmentation". More smaller jets flying vs fewer heavies, this in order to cater to customer demands for more convenient flight schedules. Air traffic continues to increase, and it has only recently become a topic for the CTs.
Finally, no one to date has ever made a direct correlation between contrails and any materials (natural or otherwise) found on the Earth's surface. There was a site collecting funds to capture "chemtrail" evidence directly via a business jet, but after some fundraising, the site closed down, much to the consternation of the gullible contributors.
How about you show us your best evidence (aside from "it looks strange to me"). I still rarely see contrails here in Colorado (the "mountain west"), likely a RH issue at altitude, though we do sometimes get the "dashed" trails due to the jetstream interacting with the mountain wave effect. When I do see trails, and I have access to the internet, flightaware.com makes it easy to ID the flights (even shows their filed flightplans). Oft times, one can easily ID the flights visually. Had a Virgin A380 going over some time back, conning all to hell and gone...beautiful sight! Heavy 747s are pretty as well.
Contrails are a natural byproduct of aircraft flying in the right conditions, which can even be on/near the ground. Show us some concrete evidence to the contrary, all those pretty youtube videos aren't doing it.
-
Yet we will see many videos where the air traffic is above big cities, and leaving these huge lasting chemtrails. Airplanes are not flying above cities at 10km , they are approaching or leaving airports , thus being much lower than 10km, which would exclude condensation trails.
This statement, do you really and truely mean it? If so, your "research" machinery needs some work. And jetliners cruise anywhere from FL180-430, give or take...depends on several variables, which your research will also no doubt reveal to you.
I'm starting (!?) to doubt your research...seriously.
-
Don't expect a response. AB has flounced off. Check out his thread on the Hoax Theory section.
-
You could always go to that forum he's in now and ask probing questions, but I doubt it'll end well for anyone.
In that it would just be a headache and they'd probably ban you.
-
Well, I saw him bail on Apollo, missed that he'd left here as well...
His observational/research skills are....exasperating.
"looks like=is".
Reminds me of a recent trip to the Drivers License office...OMG...I'm driving on the same road as these folks???
-
Well, you don't get any more anti-authoritarian than a conspiracy theorist, so if their eyeball disagrees with an "expert", then the expert must be wrong, since they're part of "the authority".
-
Well, you don't get any more anti-authoritarian than a conspiracy theorist, so if their eyeball disagrees with an "expert", then the expert must be wrong, since they're part of "the authority".
I'd always thought of myself as one of the more anti-authoritarian people I know. But if an authority I really disliked were to say "2+2=4", I wouldn't produce a 12-part Youtube video series to argue that 2+2 is really equal to every number but 4.
Yet this is just what CTs do. It's as if anything NASA (or whoever) says must be false simply because they're part of the US government, and the US government always lies. The CTs generally lack the education and skills needed to test the statements for themselves, and they're far too paranoid to trust the opinion of anyone who does have the necessary background. In fact, when the experts agree with the government agency, it can only be because they're all paid shills, not because the statement is actually correct.
-
It's also notable how heavily they lean on appeal to authority in spite of this. And how their chosen authorities almost never have any relevant education or experience and often have been demonstrated to be extremely dishonest individuals...not by a government smear campaign, but by their own actions.
-
I dropped by AB's new forum...scary stuff. There was a linked video of lots of pretty contrails over Milwaukee, the dude filming was having profane fits over all the evil contrails and the evil gubmint etc...that such folks walk the streets bothers me some. Ranting about chem-bombing, chemtrail attacks...I need to check flightaware.com and see what the enroute traffic is like over there.
Also a pretty "racetrack" contrail picture...I enjoyed 8 years with AWACS...I suspect we made quite a few of those when conditions permitted.
-
People like AB don't seem to *see* much of the world. For example, his claim that contrails should not be seen above major cities, because planes there would be landing or taking off, not travelling at altitude.
So, every time I've flown over a metropolitan area on the way to somewhere else didn't happen? It's practically on a par with those people a few years ago who were arguing that the earth had been knocked off its access, because the sun was setting in a different part of the sky in July than in February. How do they not notice the way things work?
-
AB had a deplorable lack of curiosity for the world around him. He seems to prefer abstract rationalizing about the logical consequences of his prejudices to going outside and looking into the sky.
-
A silly thought occurred to me a day or two ago on this subject. Could spectroscopy determine, from the ground, if the chemical composition of a contrail includes significant amounts of anything other than the dreaded DHMO?
-
I'm sure it could. But try explaining to them that you can actually tell what something is made of just by looking at it from a distance.
-
Try explaining to any chemtrail believer that the North American airspace has a estimated 96,000 flights daily over it's skies....then again try explaining anything to them...they are the bottom feeders of the conspiracy believer totem pole.
-
You can't really "explain" anything to these people, because they distrust everyone that supports "the official story", or think that you're one of "the sheeple". If they assume you're deluded or lying before even considering the facts, how they can accept an explanation?
Of course, that's not to say you shouldn't try. It's just unlikely they'll say "Oh, I was wrong all along!" More than likely, a couple months or years down the line, they then will start thinking "Wow, you know, maybe I was being stupid after all."
-
You can't really "explain" anything to these people, because they distrust everyone that supports "the official story", or think that you're one of "the sheeple". If they assume you're deluded or lying before even considering the facts, how they can accept an explanation?
Of course, that's not to say you shouldn't try. It's just unlikely they'll say "Oh, I was wrong all along!" More than likely, a couple months or years down the line, they then will start thinking "Wow, you know, maybe I was being stupid after all."
Believe it or not I have convinced ONE...count 'em...ONE guy to reconsider and then reverse his view on the situation...it was a proud day for me...one that will live in infamy in my heart! ;D
-
Huh, not bad. That's certainly worth something. 8)
-
Believe it or not I have convinced ONE...count 'em...ONE guy to reconsider and then reverse his view on the situation...it was a proud day for me...one that will live in infamy in my heart! ;D
"Infamy" is bad.
-
Bad is the new good!
-
The chemtards claim aluminium is being sprayed and this is causing health problems the world over. But chemtrails are white and aluminium is silver. I'm more confused than ever.
-
Well, aluminum oxide (alumina, Al2O3) is white. But it's also an extremely common material in the environment, so what's the point?
(And alumina actually is deposited in the upper atmosphere in large amounts by solid rocket engines.)
Their theory has another problem: aluminum has very little biological toxicity, so it seems a poor choice of poison. Many people voluntarily consume large amounts of the stuff in the form of Al(OH)3 as a component of most antacids with no apparent ill effect.
-
There has also been public records released of cloud seeding which sometimes strengthen their views when they see this form of attempted weather manipulation out in the open. We have a extensive research and practical cloud seeding program outside of Calgary..to try and induce hail before prairie...what they fail to realize is the silver levels the public is exposed to is about ten times less than if you have fillings in your mouth.
-
Believe it or not I have convinced ONE...count 'em...ONE guy to reconsider and then reverse his view on the situation...it was a proud day for me...one that will live in infamy in my heart! ;D
"Infamy" is bad.
It was bad...frankly the anxiety I suffered from the shock was almost more than I could handle.
-
considering they are flying mere 200 meters apart.
200 metres apart - I don't think so. Standard traffic spacing is at least 1 km separation horizontally, 1,000 feet vertically. In a TMA the horizontal spacing is usually larger, except where you have parallel runways.
Edit: Doh! Covered much more thoroughly elsewhere... that's what comes of not keeping up with the board!
-
Reading this thread was actually the first time I had ever heard of this particular CT.
And I have to say, it may be the dumbest one I've run across yet. Not one shred of evidence except for paranoia and overactive imaginations.
Hell, even I can look through the available Apollo information and come up with questions. They all have valid answers, of course, but at least there are questions that can be asked. This just seems like it's made up out of thin air.
Well, cold thin air and a bit of water vapor.
-
I would hesitate to say that this is the dumbest CT out there. There may be others that I've not heard about yet that are even dumber.
-
What, dumber than static earth theory?
-
I would hesitate to say that this is the dumbest CT out there. There may be others that I've not heard about yet that are even dumber.
I guess Reptilians is a close contender....or HAARP...regardless....if something has the title of dumbest Conspiracy one thing is for certain...it won't hold that title for long! ;D
-
Well, there may well be - in fact I'm sure there are - dumber ones. I'm recently retired/disabled and with lots of free time, my interest has kinda been piqued by the CT world. So, I'm still new here and I'm just saying this is the dumbest one so far. Even though they're still arguing controlled demolition over on the 9/11 boards.
Let me qualify that a little bit more; I don't really consider "theories" that bring in things from completely outside the pale, like alien structures on the moon and such. That's just where I set my personal bar - I don't mean to try to impose on anyone else, of course.
For me, I think the best thing that has come from this so far is my renewed interest in the Apollo Project. When I was a kid I was a space travel nut; I remember getting space travel books in the mail with sheets of stickers to lick-and-stick in them (any other oldies out there remember those?), and I knew more about Goddard, Stapp, and Yeager than Washington and Jefferson. I remember being at Myrtle Beach as a rising high school senior and seriously pissing off this girl from Tennessee because I wanted to watch the Apollo 11 coverage instead of sitting out on the dark porch with her. So the ALSJ and other stuff that's available on line now is a treasure trove for me. Not to mention reading the posts of those of you who actually work in the field and are more than willing to explain technical stuff.
Well, that ran on, didn't it? Sorry.
EDIT:
OK, I just looked through the Conspiracies of FAIL thread. I stand corrected. However, I did learn a new phrase that I just love. It's listed in wiki as one of the characteristics of a conspiracy theory:
- It shows a lack of comprehension of the practical psychology of those who are not paranoid.
Isn't that just a lovely turn of phrase? And doesn't it remind you of so many HBs?
-
Well, there may well be - in fact I'm sure there are - dumber ones. I'm recently retired/disabled and with lots of free time, my interest has kinda been piqued by the CT world. So, I'm still new here and I'm just saying this is the dumbest one so far. Even though they're still arguing controlled demolition over on the 9/11 boards.
Let me qualify that a little bit more; I don't really consider "theories" that bring in things from completely outside the pale, like alien structures on the moon and such. That's just where I set my personal bar - I don't mean to try to impose on anyone else, of course.
For me, I think the best thing that has come from this so far is my renewed interest in the Apollo Project. When I was a kid I was a space travel nut; I remember getting space travel books in the mail with sheets of stickers to lick-and-stick in them (any other oldies out there remember those?), and I knew more about Goddard, Stapp, and Yeager than Washington and Jefferson. I remember being at Myrtle Beach as a rising high school senior and seriously pissing off this girl from Tennessee because I wanted to watch the Apollo 11 coverage instead of sitting out on the dark porch with her. So the ALSJ and other stuff that's available on line now is a treasure trove for me. Not to mention reading the posts of those of you who actually work in the field and are more than willing to explain technical stuff.
Well, that ran on, didn't it? Sorry.
PLease don't apologize as I am always interested in learning and listening to someone older and wiser than myself. It is always something I will do and always enjoy doing. I would say most of the practical things I use on a day to day basis I did not learn for myself, that they were taught or instilled by someone that knew.....and I had the good sense to accept that they know more than I and listened.
EDIT:
OK, I just looked through the Conspiracies of FAIL thread. I stand corrected. However, I did learn a new phrase that I just love. It's listed in wiki as one of the characteristics of a conspiracy theory:
- It shows a lack of comprehension of the practical psychology of those who are not paranoid.
Isn't that just a lovely turn of phrase? And doesn't it remind you of so many HBs?
It is a great quote most definitely. I too argued for 2.5 years with the 9/11 troofers over controlled demolition, a missle hitting the pentagon and so forth. I have since retired from that as I went into it with the notion that their was a great force working behind the scenes....the more I researched the more I found against my initial opinion....I searched harder...the more I did the less I had to base my opinion on...until all was left to do was admit I was wrong and and conclude it was what it was...a attack by a insurgent group to bring the terror home to them that was felt in other parts of the world.
I have to say aren't you the romantic?..
"Hey hunny wanna make out on the porch and watch the stars and tell each other our dreams and wishes?"
"Are you KIDDING?....Neil Armstrong is about to bounce around on the moon and take pictures of Buzz Aldrin"
I relate to this in so many ways and found the mental picture of it to be more than humorous. I do however thank my luck that there are people like you in this world. I would have never called myself a HB but I gave say 10% merit to their claims at one point...thankfully one of them was ignorant beyond logic and to more so outta of spite started down the long path of critical thinking and research of not only Apollo but 9/11, Jfk,Chemtrails and other beliefs that some claim to exist right before our eyes. Thankfully their is forums and information that is so easily accessed nowadays as if I had to go to the library and research I would have probably not gotten passed Apollo yet....just as time would not have been available to get the amount of research in needed for myself to think what is and isn't conclusive.