|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
'Contrails' at 19% RH?
 Wed Sep 05, 2001 6:24 am
|
 |
|
This was uploaded by Rick from LA into the image DB. Thought I'd rip his post from CTTUSA concerning this photo...
Here is yet another jet contrail (Santa Monica, CA 8/21) which developed and lingered for 3.75 hrs. The relative humidity aloft at LAX at the time was 16% @ 35,000. The CT was much lower than that, but let's give it the benefit of the doubt.
It looks like that in an effort to perpetuate the Chemtrail "hoax," the contrails themselves are actually defying the laws of physics, which state that generally contrails will not persist with a RH under 70%.
Rick
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Chem11 on 09-05-2001] |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 6:39 am
|
|
|
I guess rick went out to the garden and cut loose a balloon ?
what was the source of this data ?
Today is the 5th why wait until now to present it ?
Since you did not provide a link...I have to ask these questions...
grins
[Edited 1 times, lastly by theseeker on 09-05-2001] |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 7:02 am
|
|
|
Well, I imagine he had to have the film developed and scanned and perhaps he still has something of a life, T/S. What possible difference does it make?
As for the source of his information... he started a thread at CTTUSA. Why don't you go over there and ask him?
(insert derisive snickering here)
Okay. Low blow... I'm sure you are completely capable of obtaining the RH data for LAX on your own, T/S. If you question his data, then prove him in error... as opposed to making vague implications.  |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 7:24 am
|
|
|
Well, I imagine he had to have the film developed and scanned and perhaps he still has something of a life, T/S.
film 1 hour,scan an upload 10 minutes max,I think a life can be fit in...
What possible difference does it make?
To me if you really thought this was earth shaking evidence....16 days is quite a wait...
As for the source of his information... he started a thread at CTTUSA. Why don't you go over there and ask him?
(insert derisive snickering here)
Okay. Low blow...
lol...I can always count on you chem for a lesson in bad taste...lol...btw, I could go ask him... (it's on page 2 now, long forgotten)
I'm sure you are completely capable of obtaining the RH data for LAX on your own, T/S. If you question his data, then prove him in error...
It's not a big deal to me....if your trying to prove something, you have to provide some sourced facts chief....It's not my lifelong quest to do others work, if he's trying to prove a spray program, he needs to work a little harder...lol...
as opposed to making vague implications.
I can see why cy wants to put a "pop-knot" on your head, the size a cow could suck on...lol...
T/S
[Edited 1 times, lastly by theseeker on 09-05-2001] |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:08 am
|
|
|
Here we go again. The old 'We don't have to prove anything because it's you people that are making claims therefore I will do nothing to support my arguements while you must provide every last scap of information imaginable and it still won't be good enough because I enjoy being unresonable' routine.
I should have posted this in the science forum... we stil have a science forum, don't we?
|
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:15 am
|
|
|
until some facts are provided...it's just a purdy pic with a contrail in it...
sorry chem...and hey looks like you shaved !
T/S |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:28 am
|
|
|
This what I love about the Zone. By dealing with smartass debununker's like theseeker, the opportunity for increased activism always presents itself.
Thanks to theseeker, I just realized the link to Rick's Gardening Tips on my site was broken. If you haven't checked this guy out, prepare to be amazed. He's pushing this issue on every level imaginable.
Here's the link:
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/ricksgardeningtips
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Chem11 on 09-05-2001] |
| |
|
|
theseeker
Joined: 25 Jul 2000
Posts: 3403
Location: Damnit...I'm a doctor jim |
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:52 am
|
|
|
smartass debununker's
Is that like an archie debununker ?
chem, your total disregard for the facts is unmatched...but on the lighter side...really...I still think you look better now after the shave....
T/S |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 9:10 am
|
|
|
Damn. Gore looks quite a bit more lifelike with that beard. Just reading yet another ludicrous article from a columnist whose still got her panties in a bunch over Nader costing Gore the election. If the democrats could field an electable candidate, they never would have had a problem to begin with. Jesus, what a screwed up campaign they ran. Of course, this is Ralph Nader's fault.
Anyway, looks like the White House is having second thoughts about some of the secret biowar programs that the Clinton administration foisted upon the American taxpayers...
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAZ4HXT7RC.html
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Chem11 on 09-05-2001] |
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 3:30 pm
|
|
|
quote:
Bill Harlow, a CIA spokesman, told the Times that the agency conducted laboratory or experimental work to assess the intelligence it had gathered about biological warfare.
"Everything we have done in this respect was entirely appropriate, necessary and was briefed to the National Security Council staff and appropriate congressional oversight committees," Harlow said.
The secret U.S. work included a Pentagon project to assemble a germ factory in the Nevada desert from commercially available materials, the newspaper said.
See! It was for our own good, Chem! And Gary Condit knew about it. I feel perfectly safe now. |
| |
|
|
Dirk Digler
Joined: 16 Mar 2001
Posts: 126
|
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 3:40 pm
|
|
|
here is my main problem with this photo guys.
it looks like he has atmospheric data (from where, who knows) from 31500, 35000 and 35500 ft roughly. whas the a/c in question at one of these altitudes? how in the world does he know that altitude of the contrail. maybe he does, i dont know, maybe he used FE. but he doesnt state it. and simply saying that it "looked" high doesant cut it. this trail could be anywhere from FL200 to FL410, who knows. and conditions can vary wildly between levels, even in a few hundred ft.
seeker,
it looks like we have something else in common.
sincerely
the lord of swamp castle (the third one) |
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 3:42 pm
|
|
|
It looks like Rick's picture is one of the smoking guns, Chem. How clever of him to have checked the relative humidity at 35,000 feet. (All you photo hounds out there, when you snap a particularly tasty picture, be sure to check ADDS immediately and write down the temperature and RH at altitude. Unlike Flight Explorer, the ADDS info is free, and it makes the debunkers scramble to figure out why it's still a contrail.)
http://adds.awc-kc.noaa.gov/projects/adds/flight_path/ |
| |
|
|
Lulu
Joined: 22 Dec 2000
Posts: 2501
Location: right here |
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 4:51 pm
|
|
|
Contrails persisting at 16% RH...is it possible? Sure is, if they're chemtrails! Nice work Rick. Thanks for heads up chem11. 3T3, do you have an ADDS URL handy? TIA |
| |
|
|
Dirk Digler
Joined: 16 Mar 2001
Posts: 126
|
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 4:52 pm
|
|
|
3T,
what altitude is the trail at?
DD
|
| |
|
|
3T3L1
Joined: 08 Mar 2001
Posts: 1344
Location: Lubbock, Texas |
|
Wed Sep 05, 2001 5:05 pm
|
|
|
Here it is, Lulu  http://adds.awc-kc.noaa.gov/projects/adds/flight_path/
Yes!!! Dirk proves my point. All you chemtrail photographers, when you take your pictures of lines-in-the-sky-that-can't-possibly-be-chemtrails, please write down the relative humidity at
100 (10,000 feet)
140 (14,000 feet)
200 (20,000 feet)
240 (24,000 feet)
300 (30,000 feet)
340 (34,000 feet)
400 (40,000 feet)
440 (44,000 feet)
This will be a bit tedious for you, but it will force the debunkers to claim that the aircraft is obviously contrailing at 50,000 feet or at 5,000 feet or is simply dumping fuel.  |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page
1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 5:16 pm
|
|
|
|
|
Login
