|
|
Sore Throat
Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1802
Location: x |
I Can See Clearly Now
 Sun Jun 16, 2002 5:36 pm
|
 |
|
...now that the SPRAYING has stopped, at least temporarily in the San Francisco Bay Area.
We've had an extended, almost unprecedented, period of clear blue skies.
Am I complaining?
NO, of course not.
But remember what we've been told...
"it's cold up there" well, it still is.
"it's difficult to get accurate relative humidity measurements at those temperatures, and those that are measured are consistently too low"
ok, so it's safe to assume that this hasn't changed.
So what's up?
If anything, MORE commercial air traffic as we approach the summer travel season.
As I've said before, once you (debunkers) have made the case that these trails are "natural" and SHOULD BE THERE, your case is shattered when the fleet doesn't consistently show up to SPRAY.
You can't have it both ways.
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Sore Throat on 06-17-2002] |
| |
|
|
PacerLJ35
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 456
Location: Millbrook, AL, USA |
|
Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:52 pm
|
|
|
Who sez that nature has to consistently provide conditions for lingering contrails? There are lots of days that I fly and don't see anyone producing a contrail, at any altitude. Yet other days, everyone's producing contrails. All that means is that conditions vary. |
| |
|
|
Sore Throat
Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1802
Location: x |
|
Mon Jun 17, 2002 3:19 am
|
|
|
Actually pacer, the FACT of the matter is that at this time of the year, nature rarely (i.e., less than 5% of the time) produces conditions that support persistent contrail formation.
My source?
The "Esteemed" NASA contrail researcher, Dr. Patrick Minnis.
Objections? Take it up with him.
Patrick Minnis, J. Kirk Ayers and Steven P. Weaver, Surface-Based Observations of Contrail Occurrence Frequency Over the U.S., April 1993--April 1994 , NASA RP-1404, December 1997, pp. 83, (4MB).
http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/ltrs/refer/1997/NASA-97-rp1404.refer.html
The other problem that I and others have, is on the days when only a small portion of the jet aircraft leave persistent trails. That these planes are unmarked (unlawful) and don't appear on Flight Explorer is also a cause of concern.
It's the blaring inconsistencies to the debunker BS that makes this all so objectionable.
Let me repeat some basic MATH for you pacer.
5% is equal to one and a half days in a month. If a site reported persistent trails three days in a month, this would be a doubling of the frequency noted by the "Esteemed" Dr. Patrick Minnis.
Clearly, a increase of this magnitude across the country would be a substantial variation from the "norm".
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Sore Throat on 06-17-2002] |
| |
|
|
solsystem
Joined: 26 Mar 2002
Posts: 14
Location: USA |
|
Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:08 am
|
|
|
Hello
Walking this evening 6/16, looking northwest towards SF and beyond, definite evidence of layering of sky activity out in the Pacific. And of course the prevailing northwesterly's coming from that same approximate direction. Also noticing that familiar redness as the sun set, sending its rays through the haze.
Have a good and healthy week everyone |
| |
|
|
Deborah
Joined: 30 Jul 2000
Posts: 731
Location: East Coast |
|
Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:54 am
|
|
|
Sore Throat wrote:
.....5% is equal to one and a half days in a month. If a site reported persistent trails three days in a month, this would be a doubling of the frequency noted by the "Esteemed" Dr. Patrick Minnis.
Clearly, a increase of this magnitude across the country would be a substantial variation from the "norm".....
.
.
.
I most definitely agree.
Very sleazy situation we have before us here. |
| |
|
|
canex
Joined: 26 Oct 2000
Posts: 164
Location: USA |
|
Mon Jun 17, 2002 12:51 pm
|
|
|
Not quite sure how deeply Sorethroat read the NASA report, but my reading indicates that during June, the average persistent contrail frequency over the entire US is more like 10% excluding indeterminate data (observations when the sky was obscured), the more representative measure of the actual frequency. Furthermore, the study references the observations to hourly reports. Assuming 14 hours of good sunlight and 30 days in June, there are 420 opportunities to observe contrails. If one third of the opportunities are obscured, then you have 281 actual opportunities. 5% of 281 = 14, 10% of 281 = 28. Thus, one could expect to see persistent contrails as often as 14 days during the month if the contrails were only seen at 1 hour. Such is not the case, however, because they will be observed in clumps of hours, say, 3 for starters. In that case, an observer would see the contrails on 5 different days, even though, they are only observed at a frequency of 5%. Make it 10%, and you've got maybe 10 days per month.
Then again, the contrail frequencies are not the same over the entire country. More contrails are expected over southern areas during the winter and spring than during the summer. The summer decrease in contrails in northern areas is less pronounced. Furthermore, the observations are for one particular year. Conditions may change somewhat from year to year.
The report explains why contrails are typically less frequent, not non-existent, during the summer. The average temperature at flight altitude increases by up to 23C and the average relative humidity decreases between January and July. The humidity measurements may not be particularly accurate (they are actually biased), but they are consistent. Thus, the relative change (decreasing humidity) is real.
If you are going to quote numbers from that report, you should probably read the entire document and understand what it says first. |
| |
|
|
Sore Throat
Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1802
Location: x |
|
Mon Jun 17, 2002 5:40 pm
|
|
|
Please refer to Figure 7c page 10 of the cited report.
Perhaps YOU failed to read (or chose to ignore) this extremely relevant figure.
If you bother to look at this you will note that for the month of July (which we are much closer to than the month of April):
11 of 18 stations reported persistent contrail frequency at LESS THAN 5%.
6 of 18 stations reported persistent contrail frequency at LESS THAN 10%.
and only 1 station of 18 reported persistent contrail frequency at greater than 10%, but LESS THAN 15%.
|
| |
|
|
Sore Throat
Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1802
Location: x |
|
Mon Jun 17, 2002 7:35 pm
|
|
|
The point here A-T is that NASA's own data is their greatest liability.
It's their Achilles heel.
Simply note the dance that is going on to try to discount the facts.
The report states, "Most contrails occurred during the winter months and least during the summer with a pronounced minimum during July."
Webster defines PRONOUNCED as distinct, strongly marked.
Compare this to CANEX's statement, "The report explains why contrails are typically less frequent, not non-existent, during the summer."
"typically less frequent". Can one sense a degree of bias in CANEX's interpretation of the data? What an understatement!
By the way, if there has been a change in our skies, it would be good to have hard data to document the differences. To my knowledge, the Minnis report is the only such document that provides data on the frequency of persistent contrails prior to 1999, when most people began to notice the ChemTrail phenomena.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Sore Throat on 06-17-2002] |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Tue Jun 18, 2002 12:15 am
|
|
|
If you are going to quote numbers from that report, you should probably read the entire document and understand what it says first.
LOL !
btw, I hate to burst your bubble throat...but the NOx and SOx are still up there, just ain't manifesting themselves into artificial clouds...
------------------
T/S |
| |
|
|
Sore Throat
Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1802
Location: x |
|
Tue Jun 18, 2002 2:19 am
|
|
|
"If you are going to quote numbers from that report, you should probably read the entire document and understand what it says first."
I couldn't agree more Seeker.
That's why I was the one to quote verbatim from the article. |
| |
|
|
canex
Joined: 26 Oct 2000
Posts: 164
Location: USA |
|
Tue Jun 18, 2002 3:44 am
|
|
|
Who said anything about April? Nice try at changing the topic. If you read what I said, you will see I was discussing June (look at the next figure). I never ignored the pronounced July minimum. It is June right now. July will take care of itself. As you were saying at the beginning of this thread, contrails are down in SF. A sign of the times?
quote:
Webster defines PRONOUNCED as distinct, strongly marked.
Compare this to CANEX's statement, "The report explains why contrails are typically less frequent, not non-existent, during the summer."
"typically less frequent". Can one sense a degree of bias in CANEX's interpretation of the data? What an understatement!
---
Point is, they still occur during July, they do not dissappear altogether. BTW, I see on the web page that you cite that they put out a new report that includes 1998-99. It seems there were fewer contrails in 98-99 compared to 93-94 because 98-99 was a drought year. The minimum looks like it happened in July, Aug, or Sept. Hard to tell.
No reason for anyone to hang him (her) self. |
| |
|
|
Sore Throat
Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1802
Location: x |
|
Tue Jun 18, 2002 6:30 am
|
|
|
What is it that squeaker and CANEX don't understand about the term "less than".
This doesn't mean EQUAL TO which CANEX seems all to willing to use in his analysis.
I wonder how the "Esteemed" Dr. Patrick Minnis would feel about those who take such intentional or careless liberties with the distortion of his data.
I can only imagine his moral outrage, being the consummate professional that he is.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Sore Throat on 06-18-2002] |
| |
|
|
David
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Posts: 1381
|
|
Tue Jun 18, 2002 4:41 pm
|
|
|
Spraying has began again over N. Calif. |
| |
|
|
IZAKOVIC
Joined: 09 Jan 2001
Posts: 130
Location: Rijeka, Croatia (Europe) |
|
Tue Jun 18, 2002 5:52 pm
|
|
|
Here, in Croatia, during past 2 weeks, the sprayings were rare, mostly in the morning (meaning night also), but saturation of the atmosphere from the ground level upwards is incredible.
There are no clouds, relative humidity is always 80-85% (since two years ago we did not have anything over 60-65%), temperature 30 deg C, visibility in horizontal direction is 2-3 miles at best because of the permanent milky white haze, no wind. My digital TV satellite tuner, for most of the stations of the satellite on which it is directly locked on (45 deg north latitude), was displaying "Bad or no signal" notice. Signals from other satellites that are slightly off the central line of the dish, that was possible to receive since two weeks before, were cut off. I believe that this was because the plasma frequency of this haze I/ we see, the ground level ionosphere, is higher than that of TV signal (around 10-12 GHz) from satellite so it cannot reach the surface. Constantly high relative humidity and visible haze means that the water vapor is condensing around chemtrail powder particles as condensation cores, but as there are too many of them, local accumulation of water is to low so particles stay separated and do not form clouds, and the rain stays afloat in the form of haze. Because of the color of the haze and absence of local conglomerations regardless of high humidity I would expect that the airborne compounds probably are not particularly hygroscopic (BaO) - there is no dry lips sensation. They are made of MgO.
They did not stop sprayings, they have just reached a saturation level that it is required and maintained (globally) and they have completed introduction of the biological agents they wanted we have.
Then Sunday afternoon (06-16-2002), all programs suddenly came back. Atmosphere saturation level with chemtrail haze did not change.
They have turned chemtrail plasma energizing device off.
Best regards,
IZAKOVIC
http://www.deepspace4.com |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page
1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Fri May 25, 2012 11:23 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
