CHEMTRAILS

My name is URL · 20-10-2010 07:17PM

cml387 wrote: »

The fact is that Ireland is an aviation crossroads.

Westbound flights from Europe to the US and vice versa are routinely routed over Dublin (via the Dublin and knock navigation beacons) to their Atlantic entry points.This is dependent on winds over the Atlantic,sometimes they may route over me in Clonmel towards Shannon.

The northbound/southbound trails are usually traffic from Scottish airports heading towards the Canaries or Portugal.

This discussion usually is kicked off again when the skies are clear and people can see the trails.

Do you know of any study carried out by the airlines to determine what effect if any these contrails have on weather conditions on a local level? ie, when they're routed in vast numbers over any one area? Also, is there any way to see exactly what airplanes are being routed where?

espinolman wrote: »

Ok , so , can we get them to not be routed over Ireland , surely the government could do something about , it must be having an affect on agriculture , all those toxic chemicals , or maybe even the Irish airforce to escort them away from our airspace .

The Irish airforce, as far as I am aware, only have one small jet for transporting VIPs. The rest are prop planes iirc.. they'd have a hell of a time escorting commercial airliners out of Irish airspace!

Do you have links to any published study that lists these toxic chemicals btw?

joebucks · 20-10-2010 07:29PM

cml387 wrote: »

The fact is that Ireland is an aviation crossroads.

Westbound flights from Europe to the US and vice versa are routinely routed over Dublin (via the Dublin and knock navigation beacons) to their Atlantic entry points.This is dependent on winds over the Atlantic,sometimes they may route over me in Clonmel towards Shannon.

The northbound/southbound trails are usually traffic from Scottish airports heading towards the Canaries or Portugal.

This discussion usually is kicked off again when the skies are clear and people can see the trails.

Why do some contrails stay in the sky and others dissipate? I have seen this happen with planes travelling at approximately the same altitude and speed

Why don't these re-routed planes show up on websites like flightradar?

thecommander · 20-10-2010 07:29PM

joebucks wrote: »

Some planes do leave persistant contrails that form clouds. For sake of convenience I refer to these trails as chemtrails. Do you deny that these trails don't exist?

Why give a contrail a new name? Its a contrail.

and yes, contrails exist. Not disputing that.

gizmo · 20-10-2010 07:30PM

My name is URL wrote: »

Do you know of any study carried out by the airlines to determine what effect if any these contrails have on weather conditions on a local level? ie, when they're routed in vast numbers over any one area? Also, is there any way to see exactly what airplanes are being routed where?

Good 'ol Wikipedia has a link to such a study which was conducted post 9-11 when the plans were grounded. It can be found here.

As for diverting airplanes, of course they can't divert them away from the mainland. If all nations did that air transport as we know it would be screwed.

thecommander · 20-10-2010 07:32PM

joebucks wrote: »

Why do some contrails stay in the sky and others dissipate? I have seen this happen with planes travelling at approximately the same altitude and speed

What is your gamut for approximately? 1000 feet? 5000 feet? 10000 feet?

Are you judging this by your eyes?

kelly1939 · 20-10-2010 07:33PM

I seen a plane yesterday turning on and off its trail. the smoke the spread across the sky. was enough for me to head in side.

cml387 · 20-10-2010 08:02PM

joebucks wrote: »

Why do some contrails stay in the sky and others dissipate? I have seen this happen with planes travelling at approximately the same altitude and speed

Why don't these re-routed planes show up on websites like flightradar?

Contrails appear at levels around 30,000 feet. It's impossible by eye to judge a difference of a few thousand feet from 6 miles below.
The transistion betwen contrailing and non contrailing is not perfectly flat,so a contrail may come and go depending on the temperature.

The websites like Flightrader can only track aircraft using ADS-B,which is a newer piece of equipment.Most,but not all, aircraft are fitted.Those that are fitted with older type equipment won't show up on Flightradar.

joebucks · 20-10-2010 08:46PM

thecommander wrote: »

What is your gamut for approximately? 1000 feet? 5000 feet? 10000 feet?

Are you judging this by your eyes?

Yes my eyes :eek:.

I try to approximate the altitude of the aircraft based on any significant points on the landscape and cloud cover. So today the Dublin/Wicklow mountains approx 2000 feet.

cml387 wrote: »

Contrails appear at levels around 30,000 feet. It's impossible by eye to judge a difference of a few thousand feet from 6 miles below.
The transistion betwen contrailing and non contrailing is not perfectly flat,so a contrail may come and go depending on the temperature.

The websites like Flightrader can only track aircraft using ADS-B,which is a newer piece of equipment.Most,but not all, aircraft are fitted.Those that are fitted with older type equipment won't show up on Flightradar.

Many of the contrails I saw today were forming at the same height as cumulus clouds. As these clouds form well below 30,000 ft, I am of the opinion that these contrails were also below 30,000ft.

Just out of curiousity, in your opinion is the case closed on 'chemtrails' or do they warrant any further investigation?

There is an interesting report from the House of Commons here on regulation of geoengineering:

There are three reasons why, we believe, regulation is needed. First, in the future some geoengineering techniques may allow a single country unilaterally to affect the climate. Second, some—albeit very small scale—geoengineering testing is already underway. Third, we may need geoengineering as a "Plan B" if, in the event of the failure of "Plan A"—the reduction of greenhouse gases—we are faced with highly disruptive climate change. If we start work now it will provide the opportunity to explore fully the technological, environmental, political and regulatory issues.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/221/22102.htm

cml387 · 20-10-2010 10:23PM

joebucks wrote: »

Yes my eyes :eek:.

I try to approximate the altitude of the aircraft based on any significant points on the landscape and cloud cover. So today the Dublin/Wicklow mountains approx 2000 feet.

Many of the contrails I saw today were forming at the same height as cumulus clouds. As these clouds form well below 30,000 ft, I am of the opinion that these contrails were also below 30,000ft.

Just out of curiousity, in your opinion is the case closed on 'chemtrails' or do they warrant any further investigation?

There is an interesting report from the House of Commons here on regulation of geoengineering:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/221/22102.htm

Your eyes,excellent though they may be,are very poor at estimating height.
The fact is that that aircraft contrails appear only when the aircraft is flying very high,(this site http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/contrails.html) says above 26000 feet.

There is of course an argument to say that aircraft are a contributor to global warming,and contrails steal sunlight from below especially when grouped together over navigation junctions such as Dublin or London. These facts do not amount to a conspiracy, however.

joebucks · 20-10-2010 10:42PM

cml387 wrote: »

Your eyes,excellent though they may be,are very poor at estimating height.
The fact is that that aircraft contrails appear only when the aircraft is flying very high,(this site http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/contrails.html) says above 26000 feet.

If contrails only appear when the aircraft is above 26000 feet, why do some contrails occur at the same height as cumulus clouds, which occur at approx 8000 feet?

Is it possible that they are not actually contrails, but due to the possibility of spraying chemicals, sulphur dioxide gas as suggested by David Keith, perhaps?

thecommander · 20-10-2010 10:52PM

joebucks wrote: »

Yes my eyes :eek:.

I try to approximate the altitude of the aircraft based on any significant points on the landscape and cloud cover. So today the Dublin/Wicklow mountains approx 2000 feet.

Were they jet or prop planes flying at 2000 ft?

RoboClam · 21-10-2010 06:19AM

joebucks wrote: »

If contrails only appear when the aircraft is above 26000 feet, why do some contrails occur at the same height as cumulus clouds, which occur at approx 8000 feet?

Is it possible that they are not actually contrails, but due to the possibility of spraying chemicals, sulphur dioxide gas as suggested by David Keith, perhaps?

Your eyes are deceiving you. There is no way that you can estimate that kind of distance from your position on the ground (assuming you don't have the relevant equipment of course).

And sure, it is possible that chemicals are being sprayed on us. But from a biological perspective, it is a very inefficient way of targeting the population. You do realise that any substance released at that altitude would be incredibly dispersed before it reached us at ground level, yes? This of course would make it a really indirect, and terribly ineffective method of delivery for any damaging/controlling chemical.

We have a certain tolerance for low levels of what our body perceives as "toxins". So even if we were being sprayed, it'd take a lot more than the "visible chemtrails" to have an affect.

I'd be more worried exhaust fumes from cars to be honest.

joebucks · 21-10-2010 11:38AM

thecommander wrote: »

Were they jet or prop planes flying at 2000 ft?

They were them planes the Wright Bros were flying in:rolleyes:

Where did i say they were flying at 2000ft?

RoboClam wrote: »

Your eyes are deceiving you. There is no way that you can estimate that kind of distance from your position on the ground (assuming you don't have the relevant equipment of course).

So there is no way I could tell if the planes were flying at the same height as the cumulus clouds?

And sure, it is possible that chemicals are being sprayed on us. But from a biological perspective, it is a very inefficient way of targeting the population. You do realise that any substance released at that altitude would be incredibly dispersed before it reached us at ground level, yes? This of course would make it a really indirect, and terribly ineffective method of delivery for any damaging/controlling chemical.

Where did I say that I think they are targeting the population? You do realise the UK gov have coverty tried testing chemicals this way before right?

thecommander · 21-10-2010 11:58AM

joebucks wrote: »

Where did i say they were flying at 2000ft?

I try to approximate the altitude of the aircraft based on any significant points on the landscape and cloud cover. So today the Dublin/Wicklow mountains approx 2000 feet.

What are you referencing in the 2000 feet then?

joebucks · 21-10-2010 01:58PM

thecommander wrote: »

What are you referencing in the 2000 feet then?

You asked what gamut I was using. The planes were flying above the Wicklow/Dublin mountains, so given the height of these mountains I estimated the altitudeof the planes.

Now can you provide an answer to any of my questions or are you just concerned over my observation techniques?

I appreciate your concern commander. Are you in the armed services?

If contrails only appear when the aircraft is above 26000 feet, why do some contrails occur at the same height as cumulus clouds, which occur at approx 8000 feet?

Is it possible that they are not actually contrails, but due to the possibility of spraying chemicals, sulphur dioxide gas as suggested by David Keith, perhaps?

thecommander · 21-10-2010 03:08PM

joebucks wrote: »

I appreciate your concern commander. Are you in the armed services?

If I told you I'd have to silence you.

Wanted to find out if you knew what you were on about or if you were another armchair expert. You've answered that, thank you.

joebucks · 21-10-2010 04:17PM

thecommander wrote: »

If I told you I'd have to silence you.

So you don't have an answer to my questions regarding contrails at the same altitude as cumulus clouds so?

Thanks for your contribution.

thecommander · 21-10-2010 08:38PM

joebucks wrote: »

So you don't have an answer to my questions regarding contrails at the same altitude as cumulus clouds so?

Thanks for your contribution.

The basis for you working out that the planes are cruising at the same height as different types of clouds is flawed. Your eyes, and some crude measuring system as evidence isn't something I'm going to spend time debating with you.

joebucks · 21-10-2010 10:29PM

thecommander wrote: »

The basis for you working out that the planes are cruising at the same height as different types of clouds is flawed. Your eyes, and some crude measuring system as evidence isn't something I'm going to spend time debating with you.

Yeah sound out boss. Just keep avoiding the q's that you can't answer.

thecommander · 21-10-2010 10:49PM

joebucks wrote: »

Yeah sound out boss. Just keep avoiding the q's that you can't answer.

What would you like me to answer?

joebucks · 22-10-2010 10:09AM

thecommander wrote: »

What would you like me to answer?

The questions I asked.

If contrails only appear when the aircraft is above 26000 feet, why do some contrails occur at the same height as cumulus clouds, which occur at approx 8000 feet?

Is it possible that they are not actually contrails, but due to the possibility of spraying chemicals, sulphur dioxide gas as suggested by David Keith, perhaps?

thecommander · 22-10-2010 10:14AM

joebucks wrote: »

If contrails only appear when the aircraft is above 26000 feet, why do some contrails occur at the same height as cumulus clouds, which occur at approx 8000 feet?

Haven't seen contrails at 8000 feet so I can't tell you. Do you have a photos of them so I can see? The main thing is, how do you know they're at 8000 feet? And by that, I mean other than by looking up.

joebucks · 22-10-2010 11:10AM

thecommander wrote: »

Do you have a photos of them so I can see?

The only photos I have so far are the ones I have posted and very poor quality.
I will borrow my brothers SLR and post better quality snaps when I get a chance.

The main thing is, how do you know they're at 8000 feet? And by that, I mean other than by looking up.

The planes were flying at the same height as the cumulus clouds and cumulus clouds generally form around 6-8000 feet.

In the meantime, till I can collect my own vids, here is a vid some I-talian fella took with through a range finder which if real demonstrates my point..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwyOV3UXqfY

joebucks · 22-10-2010 04:49PM

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69K18320101021

The United Nations should impose a moratorium on "geo-engineering" projects such as artificial volcanoes and vast cloud-seeding schemes to fight climate change, green groups say, fearing they could harm nature and mankind.

Here is the green groups report. No mention of chemtrails but still interesting enough if you are into this sorta thing.

http://www.etcgroup.org/upload/publication/pdf_file/ETC_geopiracy2010_0.pdf

iPlop · 23-10-2010 04:52PM

They made a movie about it but it was rubbish

joebucks · 26-10-2010 01:38AM

Septic Leper wrote: »

They made a movie about it but it was rubbish

Even Big Boi from Outkast is tweeting about chemtrails

http://plixi.com/p/52700343

@Therealbigboi
Big Boi of OUTKAST
P.s. Look up in the sky sometimes and see if u see this #chemtrails http://plixi.com/p/52700343
24 Oct via Echofon Favorite Retweet Reply

seensensee · 26-10-2010 08:36AM

So... that settles it, now all that remains is to get a mod to move the thread to the appropriate forum. Environment is probably the right one, if not now anytime in the future will do.

espinolman · 28-10-2010 10:56PM

U.N. urged to freeze climate/geo enginneering projects , i.e. - chemtrails :

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69K18320101021

meglome · 28-10-2010 11:49PM

espinolman wrote: »

U.N. urged to freeze climate/geo enginneering projects , i.e. - chemtrails :

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69K18320101021

I thought you believed that chemtrails were to poison the public for some reason?

theworkingman · 01-11-2010 09:24PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

So no evidence then.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te_FOsKL_5Q

CHEMTRAILS

Comments