|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
Attention FK--Comment on Ridgefield Sky?
 Sat Mar 01, 2003 11:50 pm
|
 |
|
FK based on atmospheric readings...are they favorable to support these persistent trails above Ridgefield, OR taken at about 11:50 AM today by Bobbie Bonnnickson? Please respond, thank you.
Looking South
Looking South
Looking South
Looking East
Looking West
|
| |
|
|
Feelin Kocky
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 537
Location: Underground Weather Control Bunker |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 12:44 am
|
|
|
Lulu, Great pics. I wish my digital was this nice. Mine's grainy.
I am not at the office but I got one of the guys to print some stuff off for me to look at Sunday. Will get back to you.
F.K.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Feelin Kocky on 03-01-2003] |
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 12:48 am
|
|
|
Yes the Bonnicksons are exceptional photographers for sure FK. Appretiate you getting the data saved for tomorrow. Will look forward to hearing the low-down  |
| |
|
|
everetteyes
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 126
Location: Everett WA |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 2:38 am
|
|
|
Lulu,
Do YOU belive that these are photos of Chemtrails?
|
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 2:48 am
|
|
|
everetteyes,
If atmospheric readings indicate that conditions are unsupportive of persistent trails, then yes, I believe these to be chemtrails. |
| |
|
|
justlookup
Joined: 01 Mar 2003
Posts: 10
Location: NW Oregon |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:21 am
|
|
|
Great pics Lu. I can't seem to get mine to upload as the file is too large. Again, good shooting. |
| |
|
|
emfx13
Joined: 25 May 2002
Posts: 959
Location: Hayward Ca.U.S.A. |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 4:44 am
|
|
|
I just can't get myself to say"great pic's",they are truly ugly!Thanx for sharing. |
| |
|
|
BigJoe
Joined: 07 Dec 2002
Posts: 1602
Location: A Remote/Well Fortified Complex |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 2:55 pm
|
|
|
Lulu,
What would you say if "atmospheric readings indicate that conditions are SUPPORATIVE of persistant trails"? |
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 4:23 pm
|
|
|
If atmospheric readings are in no way "marginal" or "questionable" but do indeed show supportive conditions for persistence, then these must be contrails bigjoe.
No problem emfx. Many thanks to Bobbie for sending these to me ASAP, before Feelin Kocky's data is purged
|
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 4:28 pm
|
|
|
Morning FK--I see you are at work...so what is your expert opinion sir? |
| |
|
|
Feelin Kocky
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 537
Location: Underground Weather Control Bunker |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 4:51 pm
|
|
|
Lulu,
Here are my observations:
First, I noted there is a lot of cirrostratus in the photographs which is one hint that there was the presence of enough moisture at least at some level of the upper troposphere, at the time the photos were take, with enough moisture to form clouds.
At 1200 GMT on Saturday from southwest OR to northwest WA: At 300mb, the Temps were from -47C to -49C with dewpoint depressions (dd) from 10-12 deg. At 250mb the Temps were right around -57C with dd from 9-10 deg. At 200mb Temps ranged from -62C over southwest OR to -67C over norhtwest WA with dd from 7-9 deg. Finally, at 150mb, the Temps were -57 to -58C with dd from 9-12C.
Now, over southwestern Canda the station on northern Vancouver Is. (still at 1200 GMT) reported the following: 300mb, -47C, dd of 4. 250mb, -56C, dd 3. 200mb, -67C, dd 3, 150mb, -59C, dd 7.
Ok, here is what we have so far. At 5 AM MST Saturday morning over the area in question, we have what appears to be fairly marginal (IMO) conditions for persistent contrails. Based on the observation from Vancouver Is. their appears to be some upstream moisture.
Let's continue:
At 0000 GMT Sunday (5pm MST) over western OR: At 300mb, -47 to -48C, dd 4-5 deg. 250mb, -56 to -57C, dd 5. 200mb, -65 to -66C, dd 5. 150mb -58 to -60C, dd 6.
Satellite images: I looked carefully at the water vapor loop going back to about midnight MST Saturday morning and ran the loop that covered the entire day of Saturday. What I see is a rapid increase in upper level moisture along the northwest US coast from early Saturday morning through Saturday evening. The upper air plots at 0000 GMT would confirm this. The rapid increase in upper level RH values was probably a result in some upperward motion which would quickly raise RH amounts at that level.
So, IMO, adding the presence of high clouds at the time the photos were take, and increasing upper level moisture, I would concluded that persistent contrails were not only possible, but likely.
Perhaps canex would like to add something?
Gosh I hope all that made sense.
F.K. |
| |
|
|
Feelin Kocky
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 537
Location: Underground Weather Control Bunker |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 5:03 pm
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lulu:
Morning FK--I see you are at work...so what is your expert opinion sir?
Edit to add: Good morning to you, Lulu.
Soooo, how would you be able to tell if am at work?
F.K.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Feelin Kocky on 03-02-2003] |
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 5:12 pm
|
|
|
>>Gosh I hope all that made sense.<<
Well I'm not claiming to understand most of what you just said.
>>we have what appears to be fairly marginal (IMO) conditions for persistent contrails.<<
>>So, IMO, adding the presence of high clouds at the time the photos were take, and increasing upper level moisture, I would concluded that persistent contrails were not only possible, but likely.<<
So the conditions grew more favorable to support persistence as the day progressed? this much I understand.
Yes, perhaps canex would care to add his expert opinion?
I know you are at work because of the spycam installed in your office No seriously FK, the mods can see IPs of who's online...!
|
| |
|
|
Feelin Kocky
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 537
Location: Underground Weather Control Bunker |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 5:16 pm
|
|
|
>>So the conditions grew more favorable to support persistence as the day progressed? this much I understand.<<
That was basically what I was trying to say.
F.K. |
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Sun Mar 02, 2003 5:19 pm
|
|
|
Thank you FK for taking the time to check out the data. |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Fri May 25, 2012 9:38 pm
|
|
|
|
|
Login
