|
|
Ellyn
Joined: 16 Jul 2000
Posts: 4455
|
Several videos: KILLER CHEMTRAILS: The Shocking Truth
 Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:11 am
|
 |
|
Killer Chemtrails: The Shocking Truth (Algorithmically Demoted by YouTube...WHY?)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIOAW1aLLVU&feature=related
and several other videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A91JooEjgJI&feature=related
Weather Warfare
7,634 views
gwap360Added
0:59Rainbow Cloud
2,117 views
brukaz73Added
6:26UFOs Chemtrails and Odd Aircraft U.S.A 2007
4,527 views
psyleo7Added
1:01Chemtrial, Chembow,HAARP, Chemcloud over Gilroy...
721 views
ldiamondjAdded
2:09Major Chemtrail Attack Over Las Vegas - 3-11-08
983 views
TheChemTrailReportAdded
1:19Chembow in Nevada Sky - 02/28/08
521 views
Alleluia7Added
5:04Chemtrails. More People Will Notice!
602 views
DavesherlockAdded
3:54A day and a half of chemtrails sped up (higher ...
4,351 views
jamessangerAdded
2:00Double Sun Chembow / Nibiru??
4,421 views
SillyMentaryAdded
8:45Chemtrails Over California
1,885 views
sadbuttrue64Added
3:31Chemtrails:a line in the sky
31,738 views
mdgg2009Added
9:10CHEMTRAILS viewed using Infrared. London 9am De...
26,617 views
LindasufosAdded
4:40Chemtrails compositions and Effects
686 views
CopylevtAdded
9:18Chemtrails the REAL TRUTH (1 of 4 )
2,211 views
skegyAdded
7:22Chemtrails : Population Control
2,455 views
laskywatcherAdded
2:40chemtrail/chembows Humberside Aug/Sept 08 onwards
111 views
citizensrightsmatterAdded
4:52Killer Chemtrails: The Shocking Truth (Algorith...
435 views
nearingmidnightAdded
2:12Chemtrails: Phoenix Cloud cover 2
796 views
ufomikeAdded
3:54Chemtrails - Web Things
2,352 views
mish6874Added
6:11Dr Gwen scott - Chemtrails part 2
232 views |
| |
|
|
Foolsbane
tagged & banned
Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 174
|
|
Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:16 pm
|
|
|
Wonderful Propaganda.
Soft, lilting voice reminiscing about "soft, puffy clouds" contrasting with pulsing shots of menacing planes...no scholarship...just indoctrination via youtube. Classic.
...and the yet the sole determining factor, according to the first video is, is a LIE!!!
Not every contrail dissipates....If you believe that YOU ARE A FOOL...and that is what they base the difference between "chemtrails" and contrail...So, they are LYING.
...and then they list the "ingredients" of "chemtrails"....and yet no one has actually taken an in situ sample of a "chemtrail" - Do they really think people are that gullible...I guess some are.
Lots of In Situ samples of contrails...no barium found...but no one has sampled a "chemtrail"...and yet they "know" what is in them.
Sticking a jar on the hood of a car for 3 days does not count as a sample.
Also- only water/ice can refract light into "bows"...please have a clue.
Any more KoolAid????
Its sad, really....you all seem to be so close-minded as not even be able to look at the data...at the science and research that has been done over the last 50 years...instead just block out reason and rational discourse with shrill cries of fear and paranoia and "debunker". So be it.
“Aircraft exhaust may trigger cloud formation in two ways, either directly or indirectly. In the direct case, a contrail forms immediately behind the aircraft. This requires a special thermodynamic state of the atmosphere, especially low (<230 K) temperatures at typical flight altitudes (∼250 hPa) (e.g., Schumann 1996). After a short (about 1 s) initial growth stage (Kärcher et al. 1996), the contrail will evaporate within tens of seconds if the air is dry. In contrast, contrail growth will continue in background air that is supersaturated with respect to ice. Eventually, the line-shaped contrail may transform into a cirrus cloud, as demonstrated by satellite observations (Schumann and Wendling 1990; Minnis et al. 1998; Mannstein et al. 1999). The indirect way can occur when aging aircraft exhaust, consisting of an internal mixture of black carbon soot and liquid volatile aerosols (mainly composed of H2SO4/H2O), leads to the nucleation of ice crystals and, hence, the formation of cirrus clouds, where no cloud would have formed in absence of aircraft (Jensen and Toon 1997; DeMott et al. 1997; Kärcher et al. 1998). This may occur when aircraft exhaust particles have an increased ice-forming ability compared to background particles.”
from: "On the Transition of Contrails into Cirrus Clouds"
F. Schröder and B. Kärcher
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, DLR, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences/ Volume 57, Issue 4 (February 2000)
Article: pp. 464–480
See here if you would like to read it:
http://tinyurl.com/4qyaww
Microphysical and Optical Properties of Cirrus and Contrails: Cloud Field Study on 13 October 1989
Jean-François Gayet and Guy Febvre
Laboratoire de Météorologie Physique, URA CNRS, Université Blaise Pascal, Clermont-Ferrand, France
Gerard Brogniez and Helene Chepfer
Laboratoire d'Optique Atmosphérique, URA CNRS, Université des Sciences et Technologies de Lille, Lille, France
Wolfgang Renger and Peter Wendling
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
(Manuscript received July 1, 1994, in final form July 7, 1995)
ABSTRACT
During the intensive International Cirrus Experiment conducted over the North Sea during fall 1989, natural cirrus and contrail-induced cirrus were analyzed from in situ and remote sensing measurements (lidar and infrared radiometer). These two cloud types primarily formed at the same range of altitude (8200 m, −37°C). Analysis of the measurements depicts distinctive microphysical and optical properties in the two types of cirrus. Natural cirrus exhibits sheared fallstreaks of ice crystals up to 750 µm in size near the base level. From the top to the base of this cloud the mean values of ice water content and particle concentration increase from 15 to 50 mg m−3 and from 26 to 60 L−1, respectively. The corresponding visible optical depth is around 2.0. Greatest particle concentration and smallest ice crystals are measured at all levels in contrails leading to an optical depth of 0.8 in the denser cloud despite an ice water content that never exceeds 18 mg m−3. These results are consistent with remote measurements from which the backscattering to extinction ratio k is deduced. The largest values of k (0.047 sr −1) are found in a young-life contrail and can be theoretically explained by a spherical shape of small ice crystals. Nonspherical ice particles with larger mean diameter are found in natural cirrus and lead to lower values of k (around 0.02 sr−1).
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2001/2000JD900533.shtml
Differences in early contrail evolution of two-engine versus four-engine aircraft: Lidar measurements and numerical simulations
Differences in early contrail evolution of two-engine versus four-engine aircraft: Lidar measurements and numerical simulations
Ralf Sussmann
Fraunhofer-Institut für Atmosphärische Umweltforschung, IFU, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany
Klaus M. Gierens
Deutsches Zentrum für Luft und Raumfahrt, DLR, Wessling, Germany
Jet- and vortex-regime evolution of contrails behind cruising aircraft is investigated by focusing on the role of aircraft type. Cross-section measurements by ground-based lidar and observational analysis are combined with numerical simulations of fluid dynamics and mierophysics in the wake of a two-engine aircraft. Depending on ambient humidity levels, contrail evolution behind short-/medium-range twin-turbofan airliners is classified into two scenarios, which is in contrast to the three scenarios observed for a wide-body four-turbofan aircraft. In the case of ice-subsaturated ambient air, a short visible contrail is formed behind a two-engine aircraft that disappears before the ice is fully entrained into the wingtip vortices (in most cases ≈=» 4 s behind aircraft). The early evaporation of the ice is mainly due to the fast initial jet expansion, mixing the exhaust with the ambient air. Contrails behind a wide-body four-engine aircraft always survive at least until vortex breakdown (i.e., typically 2 min behind aircraft). This is simply due to the larger ice mass in the contrail because of the higher fuel flow rate. Generally, in the case of ice supersaturation, a diffuse secondary wake evolves above the primary vortex wake. For a two-engine aircraft, always the whole contrail persists, while for a four-engine aircraft, the ice inside the primary wake disappears in most cases after vortex breakdown, when the relative humidity is only slightly above ice saturation. In the more rare cases of higher ice-supersaturation the ice in the primary wake survives vortex breakdown and becomes part of the persistent contrail.
Appl Opt. 1997 Jun 20;36 (1 :4195-201 18253447 (P,S,G,E,B)
[Cited?]
Optical properties of contrail-induced cirrus: discussion of unusual halo phenomena.
[My paper] R Sussmann
Photographs of a 120 degrees parhelion and a 22 degrees parhelion within persistent contrails are presented. These phenomena result from hexagonal plate-shaped ice crystals oriented horizontally with diameters between 300 mum and 2 mm. From our observations and reinvestigation of previous reports, we conclude that a subset of the population in persistent contrails can consist of highly regular, oriented, hexagonal plates or columns comparable to the most regular crystals in natural cirrus clouds. This is explained by measured ambient humidities below the formation conditions of natural cirrus. The resulting strong azimuthal variability of the scattering phase function impacts the radiative transfer through persistent contrails. |
| |
|
|
starman1
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 1494
Location: Earth |
|
Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:53 am
|
|
|
Bane's fool dude,
You boast of your intellect and the lack thereof of others here with your generalizations about individual perceptions with respect to the theme here on this site and then you toss little digs like these...
quote:
...please have a clue.
Any more KoolAid????
etc. etc. etc. ad nausea
Need I remind you, you are already a tagged individual here and therefore require no further warning to be dismissed permanently.
I don't have a problem with your trying to prove your point, and mind you, I find some validity in what you are trying to say with respect to the fact that some "CONTRAILS" can and do linger or remain persistent, nothing new there, and you are not the first to make such a discovery so you may quit with that rant. I am also aware that short of capturing samples via flying into a trail, one will find it a difficult thing to prove with respect to proving chemical content in said lingering trails... Whatever, what I do have a problem with is the continual attempts at baiting individuals into combat like discussions especially after you have been previously warned and tagged for the same behavior before.
If you want to continue to post here you will refrain from making comments directly made to induce negative emotional reactions from others, and hopefully others here will in turn do the same with respect to you. If not, well, you'll get my drift...
Last edited by starman1 on Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
| |
|
|
Foolsbane
tagged & banned
Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 174
|
|
Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:13 am
|
|
|
Fair enough.
but I never once boasted of my intellect. |
| |
|
|
Foolsbane
tagged & banned
Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 174
|
|
Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:40 pm
|
|
|
S-man-
You wrote: "some "CONTRAILS" can and do linger or remain persistent, nothing new there, and you are not the first to make such a discovery so you may quit with that rant."
No- clearly I did not make that discovery- it has been known for over 50 years....
But it is CRUCIAL to having a productive, rational discourse on the topic.
Some contrails do persist...and spread out into cirrus clouds...covering the sky in a white haze...this is fact. This is also identical to the behavior of supposed "chemtrails".
....so, when one looks up and sees a contrail- or multiple contrails persisting and spreading it is willful ignorance to just claim it is without a doubt a "chemtrail"- Taking a picture of it, posting it on the internet and crying with shrill fear that they are spraying is just not logical or productive...
...when videos designed to illicit fear show planes leaving contrails and says "contrails dissipate, "chemtrails" don't" - that is an outright lie and dupes people into unnecessary fear...
So, it is utterly necessary to begin with that premise- that contrails can and do persist and spread out -covering the sky in a haze- Without accepting that reality- one will forever be ignorant of the truth.
They may very well be putting things into the atmosphere...but you cannot tell just by looking at contrail. |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon May 21, 2012 6:11 pm
|
|
|
|
|
Login
