Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

CHEMTRAILS

1101113151639

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 728 ✭✭✭joebucks


    alastair wrote: »
    I'll opt for measurable data over an uninformed opinion. But maybe that's just playing into the hands of the conspiracy, eh?

    What tests have be done to prove this?

    If it is as cut and dry as this, then surely they could demonstrate it pretty easily?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    humanji wrote: »
    So you can prove that they're not chemtrails then? ;)
    We do not prove that something "is not" ;) We do prove that something "is". In the same manner I don't have to prove that God does not exist - it's the believers who have to prove that he does. :cool:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    joebucks wrote: »
    What tests have be done to prove this?

    If it is as cut and dry as this, then surely they could demonstrate it pretty easily?

    It is pretty cut and dried - and the formula has been applied (sucessfully) for over 50 years. But what does that prove?

    http://www.ifr-magazine.com/in-flight-icing-appleman-line.html

    http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA254410&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    We do not prove that something "is not" ;) We do prove that something "is". In the same manner I don't have to prove that God does not exist - it's the believers who have to prove that he does. :cool:
    They are either chemtrails or contrails. You prove they are not one, by proving they are the other. Simple, in theory. :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 728 ✭✭✭joebucks


    alastair wrote: »
    It is pretty cut and dried - and the formula has been applied (sucessfully) for over 50 years. But what does that prove?

    http://www.ifr-magazine.com/in-flight-icing-appleman-line.html

    http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA254410&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

    OK I read all of the first link and most of the second link and could find nothing relating to persistent contrails.

    Did you read the first link? It has nothing to do with contrails at all and is about predicting Icing already in the clouds.

    The second link is about predicting contrails for military purposes to avoid high flying aircraft being detected. It says nothing about these contrails persisting and forming clouds.

    So given the evidence you have given us, I would say it is far from cut and dry.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    humanji wrote: »
    They are either chemtrails or contrails. You prove they are not one, by proving they are the other. Simple, in theory. :D
    Well... All I want is a proof that planes spray something above our heads. It is obvious that this proof will not exist, because:
    - all mass media are involved in conspiracy
    - all millions of people working there keep it in secret
    - every pilot, member of the airport crew, everyone are very disciplined and never say what really is in the planes and what they do with it and what for.

    All these people don't care about themselves or their families because "The Case" is the highest priority. "The Case" - obviously, is spreading unknown substances above the land inhabited by humans, however the purpose of this activity remains unknown. All we know comes from some small exceptions who (putting their lives at a great risk!) leak a few bits and pieces and publish on underground websites. Surprisingly though, such a powerful Organisation (the one that is behind the chemtrails, etc.) has no power to block or remove a few silly videos from youtube, part of Google, which - undoubtedly - is involved in the conspiracy as well! Same when it comes to 4th-class web servers with cheapest domains, that contain very valuable proofs and documentation, videos and witnesses relations. They just leave them alone, most likely because they are scared of "The Resistance" - which, let me guess, many of you people consider yourselves to be :)

    Ah, please... Come one... It's as silly as some Nigerian scam....



    By the way - does many of you believe in Reptilians who are going to posses the Earth in 2012? :D:D:D

    Here is the "proof", as valuable as other rubbish from youtube:



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 270 ✭✭GarlicBread


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    Well... All I want is a proof that planes spray something above our heads

    Go outside tomorrow morning and look up, if its a clear enough day you will see all the evidence you need.

    If you dont wanna do that, since most seem incapable of doing it, then watch this documentary instead http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycc0WSxHzts.

    There you go, you got all the evidence you'll ever need, but its not enough, is it?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    There you go, you got all the evidence
    The fact that planes fly across the sky is an evidence? Well, don't consider myself very demanding - but I don't buy it.

    I was thinking of something better - if you are serious about that - and I am damn serious. Lets gather some weekend in a spot that tends to have increased amount of the reported "suspicious" flights and count and write down every hour:minute and direction of every plane that flies across. I would estimate start time 7:00am and we finish when it gets dark.

    It should be quite simple to obtain data from the Airports and with a bit of work we should be able to estimate the amount of "unknown" flights - after considering planes that are just passing by on their way to Moscow, Budapest, etc..

    I am honestly intrigued by that "crazy amount" of planes and the trails - I would like to have a closer look. Better than reading ****ty blogs, isn't it?

    Any volunteers to join me and maybe drop some more ideas? :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 270 ✭✭GarlicBread


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    The fact that planes fly across the sky is an evidence? Well, don't consider myself very demanding - but I don't buy it.

    I was thinking of something better - if you are serious about that - and I am damn serious. Lets gather some weekend in a spot that tends to have increased amount of the reported "suspicious" flights and count and write down every hour:minute and direction of every plane that flies across. I would estimate start time 7:00am and we finish when it gets dark.

    It should be quite simple to obtain data from the Airports and with a bit of work we should be able to estimate the amount of "unknown" flights - after considering planes that are just passing by on their way to Moscow, Budapest, etc..

    I am honestly intrigued by that "crazy amount" of planes and the trails - I would like to have a closer look. Better than reading ****ty blogs, isn't it?

    Any volunteers to join me and maybe drop some more ideas? :)

    Better yet, go take some soil from your garden and test it for aluminium ;).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,034 ✭✭✭thebullkf


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    We do not prove that something "is not" ;) We do prove that something "is". In the same manner I don't have to prove that God does not exist - it's the believers who have to prove that he does. :cool:


    yet you both make opposing claim's......:rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,034 ✭✭✭thebullkf


    seannash wrote: »
    As well you know the burden of proof is on the people who make the claims.Goverment hasnt released the proof to satisfy your theory is what you should have said.There might be nothing to explain.

    Also as im sure people are well aware by now cold weather doesnt cause a cold,hence people get them in the middle of the summer.Those connections are signs of paranoia.
    http://coldflu.about.com/od/cold/f/coldandweather.htm

    You being a believer in science should lead you to believe that hard facts are required not observed coincidences regarding health problems and the appearance of these contrails.
    If people are gonna look at the sick you also have to look at the healthy people who are around when these contrails appear.the condition of a few does not represent the whole group.


    telling posters what they should do....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,034 ✭✭✭thebullkf


    i too am interested in what they are. chem-con.
    if harmless then it shouldn't be a problem....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    So?
    Any volunteers to come forward? Calculators, notepads, pencils, some Internet - anyone into that? We could publish results on boards...




    ....





    ... and I'm afraid that this would be the real proof. The proof of this "chemtrails" urban legend being a complete BULL.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,227 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    So?
    Any volunteers to come forward? Calculators, notepads, pencils, some Internet - anyone into that? We could publish results on boards...




    ....





    ... and I'm afraid that this would be the real proof. The proof of this "chemtrails" urban legend being a complete BULL.

    What observations are you willing to accept as factors for disproving the existence of 'chemtrails'? =p


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    I would like to confirm how many planes are normal passenger/cargo planes, registered and scheduled from where, where to, etc.

    I was inspired by this:

    "Has anyone noticed the crazy amounts of chemtrails over north wexford recently. Pretty obvious grid-like formation. At one stage it was three in a line. The sky literally looked like it was sprayed. We can be fairly certain that although the government has no regard for the safety and well being of its people, they lack the ability to pull such a task off. SO WHO? Unless it was the ministerial jet swooping around. "

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67768610&postcount=1

    So instead of scaremongering why not to do some research?? If it turns out that we could track 90 of 100 planes and remaining 10 would not leave any trails - wouldn't it be a first pinch of salt in this stupid theory? :)

    Better than reading some "underground" blogs anyway...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 728 ✭✭✭joebucks


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    So?
    Any volunteers to come forward? Calculators, notepads, pencils, some Internet - anyone into that? We could publish results on boards...


    ... and I'm afraid that this would be the real proof. The proof of this "chemtrails" urban legend being a complete BULL.

    It would be something I wouldn't mind doing. How are you going to predict which day you are going to see persistent contrails? Today I saw quite a few planes emitting contrails...no persistent ones though..

    Will need a telescope to get an id on plane type. Also is there any devices to measure the exact altitude a plane is flying at from the ground? Fvk it Its Christmas soon..lets just all chip in and rent a plane and try recreate our on chemtrails..


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,672 ✭✭✭seannash


    Just post this link again for people asking about contrails that dont disperse as quickly as others.This'll explain why


    http://contrailscience.com/how-long-do-contrails-last/


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    @ joebucks:

    There you go.. I didn't think of a telescope. I totally don't mind have a nice trip (sandwich box is a MUST :) ) and see what can WE do... I hope more people would come up with a few more ideas and shape of this project.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,672 ✭✭✭seannash


    thebullkf wrote: »
    telling posters what they should do....
    yeah,very clever.read the conversation.i said the explaination doesnt satisfy his theory

    He says
    show me some sufficient explanation then.

    just because they havent done research dont mean it aint there. it has not been researched.

    one could argue show me solid evidence that proves its not.

    point is theres so many different ones from officials and governments they contradict each others.

    the fact the govts dont release the truth on whatever they are doing is what causes the vacuum that people jump to wild conclusions.

    so what hes saying is that he's expecting the goverment to release evidence on a topic that they dont believe exists.Its like demanding and investigation into unicorns because you believe in them.

    You cant expect the goverment to do investigations into every single paranoid fantasy that the public can dream up.

    And this is why i remarked he should have said "the goverment didnt release any evidence to satisfy your theory"

    But hey your little comment made you look like a knight in shining armour by sticking up for the downtrodden.so go you:)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 728 ✭✭✭joebucks


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    @ joebucks:

    There you go.. I didn't think of a telescope. I totally don't mind have a nice trip (sandwich box is a MUST :) ) and see what can WE do... I hope more people would come up with a few more ideas and shape of this project.

    For sure man. I totally agree that it is important to do your own investigation and not just believe what a few youtube vids claim.

    However if there is covert spraying happening and we manage to crack the nefarious plot, do you think they will let us live to tell the tale?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    joebucks wrote: »
    do you think they will let us live to tell the tale?
    If you tell me precisely who they are, I will be able to tell you whether we survive or not :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    joebucks wrote: »
    OK I read all of the first link and most of the second link and could find nothing relating to persistent contrails.

    Did you read the first link? It has nothing to do with contrails at all and is about predicting Icing already in the clouds.

    The second link is about predicting contrails for military purposes to avoid high flying aircraft being detected. It says nothing about these contrails persisting and forming clouds.

    So given the evidence you have given us, I would say it is far from cut and dry.

    Thre first link covers the gamut of the Appleman line - the formula used to determine if contrails will form or not - no capacity for freezing the condensed water vapour emitted by a jet engine - no persistent contrail.

    Ther second link is a review of the Appleman formula - which finds that it's relatively reliable - particularly at determining when a contrail won't be produced (the intent of the formula in the first place - to avoid the visual detection of military aircraft).

    http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE/resources/activities/appleman_student.html


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 728 ✭✭✭joebucks


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    If you tell me precisely who they are, I will be able to tell you whether we survive or not :)

    Dunno man, I reckon if there is a they and they are capable of conducting a covert worldwide spraying campaign then they won't have any prob bumping off anyone who comes close to exposing them ;)
    alastair wrote: »
    Thre first link covers the gamut of the Appleman line - the formula used to determine if contrails will form or not - no capacity for freezing the condensed water vapour emitted by a jet engine - no persistent contrail.

    Ther second link is a review of the Appleman formula - which finds that it's relatively reliable - particularly at determining when a contrail won't be produced (the intent of the formula in the first place - to avoid the visual detection of military aircraft).

    http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE/resources/activities/appleman_student.html


    OK so is there anywhere we can see the appleman formula put into practice to predict persistent contrails?

    As Sean Nash's link above shows similar criteria for predicting such trails it should be easy to show it put into practice.

    The only problem that remains for me is that some days you see planes emitting persistent contrails and others emitting ones that disappear.
    I have also seen persistent contrails form at the same height as cumulus clouds which where conditons below the criteria needed in the Appleman formula. My eyes may have deceived me in this instance which is why I ask is there a specific instrument one can use from the round to determine the exact altitude a plane is flying?


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,525 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    You can get a radio and listen to the radio chatter between the ATC and pilots. Any plane spotter should be able to help determine which plane you're looking at by the flight schedules.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,227 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    I would like to confirm how many planes are normal passenger/cargo planes, registered and scheduled from where, where to, etc.

    I was inspired by this:

    "Has anyone noticed the crazy amounts of chemtrails over north wexford recently. Pretty obvious grid-like formation. At one stage it was three in a line. The sky literally looked like it was sprayed. We can be fairly certain that although the government has no regard for the safety and well being of its people, they lack the ability to pull such a task off. SO WHO? Unless it was the ministerial jet swooping around. "

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67768610&postcount=1

    So instead of scaremongering why not to do some research?? If it turns out that we could track 90 of 100 planes and remaining 10 would not leave any trails - wouldn't it be a first pinch of salt in this stupid theory? :)

    Better than reading some "underground" blogs anyway...

    I wasn't trying to scaremonger, it was a genuine question. I don't think identifying the planes and their routes would either prove or disprove the existence of 'chemtrails' to the people who generally believe the theory. Also, calling it a stupid theory (although I personally think the most widely held one is) suggests a confirmation bias on your part so your research is ultimately flawed.

    As for the 'underground blog' remark, well it's not quite as underground these days as you seem to think it is.. there are a number of 'documentaries' relating to the subject and it has being widely discussed in mainstream media recently. People who don't usually have an interest in CTs are talking about it; so it isn't just some fantasy from the bowels of the internet any more.

    As I've said a few times already, I think that using the Appleman Chart to predict the formation of trails on any given day is a better way to disprove the theory that the planned spraying of chemicals is a reality, although the data required to do so is not available for the most part.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56 ✭✭chebonaparte


    kingmob you cant compare chemtrails to unicorns!

    unicorns are fictiion yes but they have a historic myth legend refrence for centuries .

    chemtrails are a new modern phenomenon. the average man on street wouldnt even have heard abotu them compared to the millions tha have learned about unicorns through

    fairytales , fiction and literature pop culture mainstream. chemtrails are unorthodox. and its idea is still evoliving forming wther it be true or not is open to

    debate.

    fact is alot truth comes abotu that the establishment , status qou dont want to hear or get out they deny it label it heresy and you know what go read some copernicus

    and galileo because it always comes otu eventualy and turn everything form science to politics on its head.

    i see alot of arrogance on this thread. not everythign is so cut and dry as some would liek to think. and some need lesson in humility humbleness. history has proven

    unquestionen loyalty ir faith or belief in one doctrine or one dogma is catastrophic.

    you thought police and fascists cannot controll freedom of thought or ideas as long as humanity breathes a breath.

    seannash like other keep replying like thye havent read what i wrote and only reply whaever was on their minds and try apply it to my q.s the phoenix parks pentagram

    is irrelevant. i was talking about wexford airspcace. aint no aiorport over gorey i know of. and no need fror so many planes to fly as thye were continuous for days

    somemtimes but none of you can give a valid reason or excuse for this fact. whose planes were they ? waht were they doing.
    noen of your disinos so far have been sufficent to answer these and my ealrier questions. some the links and info are interesting and maybe she dlight on other issues

    but none of you conclusilvley answered why planes periodicaly fly over cities globaly oin thes e formations leavign trails of whatever for now chemtrails will suffice.

    i never proposed a theory as some of you like to say. i only asked questions . your poor attempts at distrating and misguiding and disnfo only raise more questions.

    others have agendas.

    RoboClam your panes route only shoed uk plane routes when i clicked your link. am curious does this mean the public can visibly look up oni internet any flight and see

    it s no.? so we can check whos flying when the trails start appearing?

    monty i have not promoted any cosnpiracy theory. only asled q.s

    5uspect i understand planes have contrails im not denying that but certain trails do linger and form clouds of difrent nature than average contrail.

    Quote:
    1. there is still the q. why are the planes flying across in such a fashion anyways?
    Navigation via VORs.
    Common practice in busy flight paths.

    Oh realy? its common for planes to fly by in parllel lines leaving obvious trails circle and return again and again parallel and kriss kross patterns in 2-8 plane

    formations? no where near airports or flight routesd whiel a bi plane flies below surveying the trails?

    Quote:
    2. why do they need to fly several planes in such formations again and again across each others paths.?
    Same as above. As I said in another thread they're just roundabouts in the sky. This makes traffic management easier for flight controllers. GPS is only considered a

    secondary system due to it's unreliability.

    i understadn need for traffic control and waitng for landing etc but military drilled precison flights in parallel sequences come on.

    Quote:
    3. and why over so many various locations around the world?
    VORs are common navigational assets found near most airports but also across most countries.

    VORS? explain pls for us laymen.

    Quote:
    4. what are the planes doing???
    Flying places.

    tut. but why fly in such obiously unecesarry formations and leaving trails that form clouds after again and again?

    A320-200 this nonsensival no you linked no i dont understand how could anyone understand that gibberish? even google crapped it!
    you had othber interesting links but what relevance it had on my q.s i cant fathom. espec http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICAO_Standard_Atmosphere what poitn wer eu makin

    about this bs?

    and then you fall into the lowness of insulting. questioning is educating but arrogants liek you would ratehr we all be good sheeple and obey your cockiness so you

    wont have to hurt your head explaining away your corruptions. aand what is this nonsense about me targetting aircraft lol you crazy! " aircraft as the "soft target"

    because people are just too ignorant. " where did i target aircraft and why you getting all defensive its lol

    later you spout more tripe about contrails in winter but you cannto excuse chemtrails in summer in california usa and other regions world hot climates sunny or summer.

    your boyles law might impress some but not me. i passed physics in leaving cert thanks. im aware. your emo commnet is so duh and irrelevant to chemtrails argument why

    its in there?

    humaji is right usa has been experimetning with weather/climate technology since 50s 60s espec around vietnam time. one experiement flew b-52 up high adn dropped

    crystals in clouds to amke it rain. if theyb could do that back in the 50s 60s jsut imagine what they can do now!

    even U.N. documents and US military papers mention and confirm so.

    seannash again you are a revisionist threader troller!or an ignorant idiot who cant read! what i was saying if planes are flying over irish airspace they have to get

    permission. the govt is aware fo them and must have knowledge of what compnaies are flying and hwo planes and pilots are and belong to or working for . therefoire th

    govt should inform the public who they are flying over wexfoprd fro example espec gorey and where hwne and what for . that might stop chemtrails wild theories of thats

    what you relay want so much!

    love to know what excuses youd all have for the banks grand theft too! i can imagine! lol

    why does the net go down alot when on boards.ie so much? censorship? lol :)

    apolagie for any sp errors typeos spellchekcer not working.. i wrote on the go fast! ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 37 A320-200


    I know i said I'd leave this, but I cant pass up the oppertunity.

    The "gibberish" you refer to is a routing from EHAM(Amsterdam Schipol) to EINN(Shannon). Seen as all you experts seem to believe that you know better than everyone else with regard to aircraft routings.

    There are no aircraft being flown in "formations" that you seem to think. Most of them are on airways. But we have introduced a "Free route" system in ireland. Which means basically that in the whole FIR/UIR/NOTA/SOTA there are no Upper airways (Above FL245(24500ft)). So aircraft enter the FIR at one point, and then go Direct to the exit point, which is also the oceanic entry point to the Shanwick OCA.

    From the AIP:
    ENR 6.2
    http://www.iaa.ie/safe_reg/iaip/Published%20Files/AIP%20Files/ENR/EI_ENR_6_2_en.pdf

    With the standard atmosphere link I was trying to show you how cold it actually is at an aircraft cruising level.

    In summer in california the upper temps still reach <-40C continuously. I just dont think you all realise just how cold it is up there.

    Quick maths assuming a temperature of 30C at MSL (summer california), an aircraft cruising at FL360 (36000ft) will experience a SAT (temp) of -42C.

    Lastly, the IAA have better things to be doing than telling some fools in wexford what aircraft are routing over them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 728 ✭✭✭joebucks



    Chemtrails aside, I think there's still an interesting question in regards to the effect that persistent contrails have on diurnal temperatures and in turn on regional weather patterns.



    http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/07/contrails.climate/index.html
    The thin wisps of condensation that trail jet airliners have a significant influence on the climate, according to scientists who studied U.S. skies during a rare interruption in national air traffic after the September 11 terrorist attacks.

    During the three-day commercial flight hiatus, when the artificial clouds known as contrails all but disappeared, the variations in high and low temperatures increased by 1.1 degrees Celsius (2 degrees Fahrenheit) each day, said meteorological researchers


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 728 ✭✭✭joebucks


    Is Billy privy to info that the rest of us aren't?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 56 ✭✭chebonaparte


    food for thought and debate.

    http://vimeo.com/16219493


Advertisement