Welcome
Welcome to All Aircraft Are Not Involved.

Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, make your voice heard!

Geoengineering and Hard Science Made Easy

dialogue and research on chemical trails

Re:

Unread postby anthony.r.duncan » Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:24 am

Don Smith wrote:

One of a variety of clips exploring chemtrails, not all of which are absolutely trustworthy, I'm sure.
Still, each additional bit of information is a step forward in the awakening of society to this criminal activity.

Surely you can see that this truly is harmless?

Salt spray is a natural event, taking place over a million miles of the Earth's coastlines.

The fear might well be that it couldn't possibly make the slightest difference, but as for dangerous, you can't be serious! :D
anthony.r.duncan
 

Re: Noctilucent Clouds

Unread postby anthony.r.duncan » Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:25 pm

socrates wrote:Noctilucent clouds are a result of modernity and the Industrial Revolution.

Er, no. The article you enclose states otherwise: if iron and sulfur come from meteorites - then they always have.

Basic science tells us that anthropogenic clouds can be produced when pollution particles latch onto moisture and then grow.

Not so much "can" as "must".

Now the reason why contrails are not chemtrails, even though the same basic principles are in place, is because there is simply not enough mass in the commercial jetliner exhaust to account for the size and development of man-made clouds.

Then you disagree with research findings that the mass of exhaust ice can increase one-thousand- to ten-thousandfold (edit) by further accretion of ice from a supersaturated stratospheric layer? Even when some of these precede "chemtrails" by decades?

Are you aware that a single 3000-mile jumbo flight can release eighty thousand tons of ice?

Basically, it is very much colder the higher up one goes.

Basically, it isn't.

Image

The chemtrails are too low to persist and spread out like they do if they are from commercial planes.

Wrong. They spread because they are powered by the wave vortex. They fall slowly due to gravity. If they accrete ice from the stratospheric layer because it is humid, then their downward speed increases. When they meet a stratospheric layer boundary, travelling beneath it with a lateral velocity component, they will shear, and spread sideways.

But get those particulates way up closer to space, then that is where the supersaturated ice explanation can actually come into play.

Well, as I've just shown you - it can't. The temperature up there gets hot enough to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen.

Explaining chemtrails as super-saturated ice is disinformation.

Using the word "chemtrails" is disinformation.

use rigged stats

Even stats from 1953? Did they enlist the advice of Nostrodamus?

All they have is the evoking of authority

Not if they "rig stats". Personally I have tendency to respect the authority of professionals who have undergone a rigorous education, apprenticeship, and worked hard for years. The chances are these people are scientists. They know and understand science.

Has geoengineering already begun? I wouldn't doubt it.

I would. Are you broke? I am. Are they broke? Yep.

But it feels like astronomy and space exploration has been privatised, so how is one to know? People can say that NASA is a civilian, governmental entity, but no, it is really part of the US war and capitalistic machine.

Well, it has both of these, but it's getting egg all over its face in the Middle East...

These are the people who were involved in setting off nuclear bombs in space, no? Who else but NASA is going to be involved with space weapons and whatever else is going on way out of our view?

Well, it's nearly fifty years later, and a lot of water has flowed under all the bridges... a bit back further in the past and Ghengis Khan was rampaging westward...

So just as the American family farmer was driven off the land by conglomerations receiving corporate welfare, elites with NASA as the false front have taken over ownership of space.

Nobody's going to buy it in any hurry. Hell, there isn't even a space-lift, or an outpost on the Moon... ...where's the real estate?

There is a reason why the internet is filled with enigmas and convolution

Yeah. Anyone can say anything. :)

An informed people can do the right thing.

But that doesn't include you. First you gotta get yourself informed.

A snookered people can easily be subjugated into brownshirt status.

True. An understanding of science could keep them from believing crap on the internet, and help them make their homes autonomous, and their food permacultural.
Last edited by anthony.r.duncan on Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
anthony.r.duncan
 

Re: Hi Jazzroc

Unread postby socrates » Wed Feb 25, 2009 5:01 pm

I don't have time right now to respond to your posts.

I fixed your links. There is a glitch here with the urls which can be bypassed if you make sure to use the codes:

Code: Select all
1) [url]http://......[/url]

or

2) [url=http://....]url description[/url]



You are fairly well-known for spamming the youtube pages with your soda pop posts. Are you willing to apologize for that?

I also hope you don't mind me changing your avatar. The other one was way too big, and I remembered this one you had at another board.
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Geoengineering and Hard Science Made Easy

Unread postby anthony.r.duncan » Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:05 pm

Hi, Socrates. I figured you might be busy. I don't mind waiting till you respond to them, item-by-item.

I think I understand what you mean by the glitch: your button above doesn't do the job...

I never apologise for speaking the truth. What would be the point of that? What's in soda pop? Water and CO2. What's in a "chemtrail"? Water and CO2...

I shall put in a smaller version of my avatar. You give 200 x 200 as a recommended size, but I'll put in 120 x 120. OK, then, 95 x 95. I'm not that pretty.
anthony.r.duncan
 

Re: Geoengineering and Hard Science Made Easy

Unread postby Uri » Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:21 pm

Hello Jazzroc,

I haven't seen a single chemtrail (or as you insist:contrail) since I am in Chile. This may be due to less air traffic here in general, but even the occasional regular passenger planes don't leave any trails whatsoever. I never pretended to be an expert and always pointed out that I come to my conclusion through the observations I make. The weather conditions are pretty similar to our european weather, only that it's late summer over here instead of late winter. How do you explain that aircraft trails are completely absent in Chile? It amazed me and I can assure you that I haven't seen such a blue sky in many many years. As you know I am from Germany and for me there is no other way to discribe the german sky than as being "sprayed" with whatever you think it is, but it is also a fact that it has a negative effect on the sky in Europe. One is that sunlight can seldomly pass through the thick layers of these trails. Even though we have discussed this issue extensively in the past, I still believe that something is not being told to the general public. I don't wish to have a confrontation with you here or in any other placeof the internet. I hope you can except my decision to trust my guts and observations on this and wish you and your family all the best in the future. Uri
Uri
 

Re: Geoengineering and Hard Science Made Easy

Unread postby socrates » Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:01 pm

anthony.r.duncan wrote:Sulfates are hardly the answer to global warming if they:

a) defoliate our forests, and

b) increase the size of the ozone hole.

Which they do.

So sulfates are a NON-STARTER.




That's the thing. That elements like sulfur, barium, salt, aluminum and whatnot are natural, there is a wiggle room to use them. I'm not saying this is proof that chemtrails are real. But say for example elevated levels of barium are found, or disease clusters with ties to heavy metals. The "debunkers" can come back with how it is impossible to trace the origin of such elements.

I am glad to see you are against the Dr. Evil type geoengineering plans. Sulfates do cause acid rain. What happens if active volcanos go nuts when geoengineering takes place? We are screwed.

I'm not against all "mitigation" ideas. Planting trees makes sense. Maybe dumping the iron thingies into the ocean makes sense. Going to renewable energies yesterday is the answer. The status quo is the problem.

One other thing, climate change is now considered an issue of national security. That implies that the environmental issues are now in the hands of the military and their university ties. This means that all types of "mitigation" programs could be put in place without any exposure or accountability. Colin Powell even said back in 2002 that the US was working on billion dollar technologies to off-set greenhouse gases. And all the while solar, wind, etc. are being shown no love.



Perhaps they discovered the hundreds of research papers (over 54 years) which point to contrails persisting in saturated layers of the stratosphere, and have also the knowledge that air travel has increased fifty-fold over that time, further saturating the stratosphere, leading to a tendency over time of any well-overflown area to get covered over by cirrus clouds.



We are saying the white-outs are occuring in the troposphere, where most weather occurs.


Perhaps the Discovery Channel has put two and two together, and realized that all the complainants know nothing about such a natural turn of events and are incapable of understanding the atmospheric science involved, and have decided to simply stop poking the snake...



The Discovery Channel did no such thing. They gave the bait and switch, at first offering to capture some of the suspect plumes for testing. Then they went with the jet fuel angle to try to figure out the white-outs. The commercial fuel came out clean. The military refused to give samples of their fuel.

Your evoking of authority and "soda pop" like spamming is why most eventually tune you out. There are plenty of folks who believe chemtrails are deliberate and have looked at science for answers. I am a social theorist. Science is not my specialty. But even I have been able to learn some basic scientific ideas on my blogospheric path.

This shouldn't be an us versus them dialogue. You get more bees with honey. No one likes to be verbally abused or belittled as tiny thinkers. I believe there is always the capacity for folks to change, but if you don't soon, if you can't even accept the fact that you did spam youtube, that you have had a mean streak towards the chemmies, then you run the risk of being the new Jay Reynolds, Lord of the Debunkers {and onions}.
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Don Smith

Unread postby socrates » Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:16 pm

anthony.r.duncan wrote:
Don Smith wrote:

One of a variety of clips exploring chemtrails, not all of which are absolutely trustworthy, I'm sure.
Still, each additional bit of information is a step forward in the awakening of society to this criminal activity.

Surely you can see that this truly is harmless?

Salt spray is a natural event, taking place over a million miles of the Earth's coastlines.

The fear might well be that it couldn't possibly make the slightest difference, but as for dangerous, you can't be serious! :D



Don Smith was banned, or I admit, quit this place after I uncovered a bizarre domain called top10th.net. He then went back to a goofball disinfo place called BreakForNews, after admitting here that Fintan Dunne was running some form of cult. It is in the inconsistencies that we reveal ourselves. BreakForNews claims that anthropogenic global warming is a hoax idea. Now why would Don Smith sound so reasonable for a good chunk of time, but then flip out on me and head back to that crazy joint?

I admit I have made tons of mistakes. I try to explain where I went inconsistent. Don, on the other hand, regressed into not adding up.


As for the salt spraying, could that get into fresh water supplies? If not, I would personally not object to that. There was one patent from a long time ago where the idea was to disperse melanins to counteract harmful uv-b rays. Now that is something to be considered.

But don't turn this into National Security. Do not do things without exposure and accountability.

And yes, Don seemed to be all about talking up the criminality of chemtrails without lifting one finger to help us research them. His best efforts on this forum were actually provided in the current events section, where we talked about philosophy and a bit on academia, social justice, the evils of war, mendacity, that kind of stuff.

Don is what is referred to as a concern troll. They gain your trust by making a lot of sense, all the while plotting to destroy the place from within. His sudden departure while calling me mad was his big final act. Despite giving him plenty of time to explain himself, he chickened out and went crawling back to Fintan Dunne, a rightwinger in progressive, tinfoil clothes.
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Noctilucent Clouds

Unread postby socrates » Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:51 pm

anthony.r.duncan wrote:
socrates wrote:Noctilucent clouds are a result of modernity and the Industrial Revolution.

Er, no. The article you enclose states otherwise: if iron and sulfur come from meteorites - then they always have.



Dude, there's only so much time in the day. From the post:

Noctilucent clouds, also known as night-shining clouds, were first described in 1885, two years after the massive eruption of Krakatoa, a volcanic island in Indonesia, sent up a plume of ash and debris up to 80 km into Earth's atmosphere. The eruption affected global climate and weather for years and may have produced the first noctilucent clouds.


There may be a point somewhere in what you said, but this isn't debate club.





Basic science tells us that anthropogenic clouds can be produced when pollution particles latch onto moisture and then grow.

Not so much "can" as "must".



I don't agree. The Appleman Contrail Chart gives a good rough estimate for what conditions are necessary for persistent contrails. You need a certain elevation for temperature. You need a good chunk of humidity.

We can see that certain aircraft emissions are creating white-outs. I've seen this done a bunch of times into clear blue sky with little to no humidity. If you're gonna use science to debunk, please don't hate when science is used to confirm.



Now the reason why contrails are not chemtrails, even though the same basic principles are in place, is because there is simply not enough mass in the commercial jetliner exhaust to account for the size and development of man-made clouds.

Then you disagree with research findings that the mass of exhaust ice can increase one-thousand- to ten-thousandfold (edit) by further accretion of ice from a supersaturated stratospheric layer? Even when some of these precede "chemtrails" by decades?

Are you aware that a single 3000-mile jumbo flight can release eighty thousand tons of ice?



This gets to be too much. I'm simply not into "debunker" versus "believer" conversation like you are. I tried that before at DebateBothSides with Jay Reynolds. I did this kind of thing in the past. It's not where I am nowadays. Nothing personal.

Why do you keep mentioning the stratosphere, when the activities are being witnessed in the troposphere?

Have you ever witnessed a white-out created during a blue sky day?





Basically, it is very much colder the higher up one goes.

Basically, it isn't.

Image


Why mention mesospheres and exospheres? The white-outs are predominantly taking place in the upper troposphere, not the stratosphere. You can go to the Wyoming weather domain and see how it predominantly gets much colder from 10,000 to 20,000 to 30,000 to 40,000 feet.

The chemtrails are too low to persist and spread out like they do if they are from commercial planes.

Wrong. They spread because they are powered by the wave vortex. They fall slowly due to gravity. If they accrete ice from the stratospheric layer because it is humid, then their downward speed increases. When they meet a stratospheric layer boundary, travelling beneath it with a lateral velocity component, they will shear, and spread sideways.


Tony, I can barely contain myself from yawning. If "chemtrails" is such a crazy hoax, why do some like yourself spend so much time debunking? NASA could have put this whole controversy to rest very easily. Just take some of that tax-payer funding and zoom in on commercial airliners during times when the atmospheric conditions are ripe for persistent contrails. Then keep the fancy video equipment filming and see how the stuff expands. But Minnis and NASA never did such a thing. Because they can't prove that commercial airliners create white-outs.

And if you can't get your head out of the stratosphere, this is all getting rather pointless.



But get those particulates way up closer to space, then that is where the supersaturated ice explanation can actually come into play.

Well, as I've just shown you - it can't. The temperature up there gets hot enough to dissociate water into hydrogen and oxygen.



No comment. I'm finding this whole exercise to be a waste of time. Nothing personal.




Explaining chemtrails as super-saturated ice is disinformation.

Using the word "chemtrails" is disinformation.


We agree! But I'm gonna use it anyway along with the word chemmies. A lot of folks like to bury history. I embrace it.


I'm gonna fly through the rest. I refuse to get bogged down with this guy.


Tony sounds like a spook, of the nothing to see here, move along variety.

Has geoengineering already begun? I wouldn't doubt it.

I would. Are you broke? I am. Are they broke? Yep.


Talk about a ridiculous strawman.



These are the people who were involved in setting off nuclear bombs in space, no? Who else but NASA is going to be involved with space weapons and whatever else is going on way out of our view?

Well, it's nearly fifty years later, and a lot of water has flowed under all the bridges... a bit back further in the past and Ghengis Khan was rampaging westward...



More nothing to see here, move along.


So just as the American family farmer was driven off the land by conglomerations receiving corporate welfare, elites with NASA as the false front have taken over ownership of space.

Nobody's going to buy it in any hurry. Hell, there isn't even a space-lift, or an outpost on the Moon... ...where's the real estate?



Tony wants us thinking about NASA as going for the final frontier. Space weapons? He thinks I'm watching too much of the Jetsons.

There is a reason why the internet is filled with enigmas and convolution

Yeah. Anyone can say anything. :)

An informed people can do the right thing.

But that doesn't include you. First you gotta get yourself informed.



And why shouldn't I kick you out at this point? You have some nerve throwing out ad hominems, and yes, evoking authority.



A snookered people can easily be subjugated into brownshirt status.

True. An understanding of science could keep them from believing crap on the internet, and help them make their homes autonomous, and their food permacultural.



This guy sounds very much like Yaak/Ed Snell, and FoolsBane/BryanSails. He seems to be having a difficult time holding back from being a meanie. Is it time to roll out Captain Kirk's evil twin again?
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Geoengineering and Hard Science Made Easy

Unread postby socrates » Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:54 pm

anthony.r.duncan wrote:Hi, Socrates. I figured you might be busy. I don't mind waiting till you respond to them, item-by-item.


Ha, I had to discard some items.


I never apologise for speaking the truth. What would be the point of that? What's in soda pop? Water and CO2. What's in a "chemtrail"? Water and CO2...


How many times did you copy and paste that, 500 times? That's called spam. You did it, now you own it.

Tony should change his signature to nothing to see here, move along.
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Geoengineering and Hard Science Made Easy

Unread postby socrates » Thu Feb 26, 2009 5:04 pm

Uri wrote:
I haven't seen a single chemtrail (or as you insist:contrail) since I am in Chile. This may be due to less air traffic here in general, but even the occasional regular passenger planes don't leave any trails whatsoever. I never pretended to be an expert and always pointed out that I come to my conclusion through the observations I make. The weather conditions are pretty similar to our european weather, only that it's late summer over here instead of late winter. How do you explain that aircraft trails are completely absent in Chile? It amazed me and I can assure you that I haven't seen such a blue sky in many many years.



Chemtrail activity has greatly dwindled the past year in Massachusetts, but he'll come up with an explanation for both of us. That's what closed-minded debunkers do.

Just keep in mind that he has revealed himself to either have no clue or mistaken this forum for being just another "chemtrail" forum. He keeps talking about the stratosphere. He needs to get a clue. Time to buy a vowel, Tony. {inside American joke- based on a game show.}

As you know I am from Germany and for me there is no other way to discribe the german sky than as being "sprayed" with whatever you think it is, but it is also a fact that it has a negative effect on the sky in Europe. One is that sunlight can seldomly pass through the thick layers of these trails. Even though we have discussed this issue extensively in the past, I still believe that something is not being told to the general public. I don't wish to have a confrontation with you here or in any other placeof the internet. I hope you can except my decision to trust my guts and observations on this and wish you and your family all the best in the future. Uri


Hiya Uri,

Have you seen the thread on the German newscast? Maybe you can help us track down some info out of Germany, maybe even email that meteorologist, stuff like that. Then you could translate, then I could edit your spelling.

Uri is a special thinker. I don't agree with a lot of her interests, but for someone who isn't a native born English speaker, she has brilliantly picked up a lot of it. One can see with her writing that she is very thoughtful.
Nobody - I mean nobody - pulls the wool over the eyes of a Gambini
User avatar
socrates
gadfly
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Massachusetts

PreviousNext

Return to Frankensteinian Atmospheric Shenanigans

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
suspicion-preferred