posted 03-10-2002 09:10 AM            

The second step is to determine if the weather at flying altitudes is consistent to contrail formation.

Been there done that, many times contrails aren't suppose to be forming and persisting but they DO...care to comment Dr. Minnis?

Trails seen all day long persisting for hours, drifting S/E, yet I checked every altitude for RH using ADDS and no readings were above 40%, most below 30%. So therefore there is something in the atmosphere which causes trails to persit regardless of the RH readings, or they are CHEMTRAILS!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000876.html

"Given this DOCUMENTED history, it would seem to me that a little “paranoia” would be entirely called for as a basic survival instinct."

Well put Sore Throat! Your posts are right on.

Deb says again...

Like good gossip, it has snowballed to the conjecture you read currently.

Don't pay attention to conjecture or gossip Deb. MY GUT INSTINCT first clued me in something was seriously wtrong in the sky!!! Not Will Thomas or anyone else. Get that straight. I came here on my own accord seeking answers. It was the thick military interest in this supposed non-issue which makes me continue to believe my instinct is on the money. Thanks guys and gals!

Nuff said.

posted 03-10-2002 01:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by RidesTheWind:

I keep slipping back hoping things are better, but ah, they are the samme if not worse. Thermit my friend, open thy eyes! By allowing these rants to constantly decide the boards atmosphere, you have lost alot of the diehard, original posters. Anyone with half a brain would tire of this BS....Its sad, because CTC was the best.Have an entertaining time folks.

---

I understand your point RTW, in fact I and many others have expressed your thoughts almost verbatim. You do have a point...but I think I understand Thermits point of view now, whereas before, I didn't.

Censorship by Thermit would only add to the ostrich/lemmings/'connies' mentality, imagination (and apparent belief, in some cases?) that they need to be censored because they're posts have validity. By now, most of us, members and habitual visitors know that they don't (have validity).

Anyone really serious enough to look at this phenomenon and spend time at this website, will, in time (long or short) decide upon the merits of these forums (not to mention all the other aspects of the CC website), on whether or not this is something worth spending time on, worth studying.

When, as a new member, I felt the way you do (and in some ways still do), after having spent considerable time here, I'm not worried about the 'debunkers'/CONtrail Artists/contrail believers/ostriches & lemmings... lions and tiger and bears! (...deep breath) effect on attitudes and opinions here. As a matter of fact, the contrail believers are no more of a threat than those fictious villains in "The Wizard of Oz". [cue for seeker, the contrail-believing, jpeg-posting 'magician'... how about a tin-man? cowardly lion?... perhaps a flying monkey? ]

As I've said before, The Truth has a funny way of rising to the top, regardless of how much disinfo and misinfo are used to hide it.

Even though it may be a headache at times for some of us to constantly respond to their patented strategies;

* threats/identity exposure,
* ridicule,
* 'expert' testimony that describes routine jet contrails
* dodging/ignoring pertinent issues/questions

... to try to discredit and disregard what we know is real, some of us will keep doing it as long as we have to. If some of us drop out of the forums in exasperation, anger, frustration, etc. there will always be someone to replace them, just as it seems the CONartists do. No one believes this issue is going to go away.

These lame, (though sometimes more sophisticated/well-thought out) attempts to 'debunk' the CHEMtrail phenomenon have already failed, regardless of those who fight their already lost battle to suppress interest/exposure/knowledge of the subject.

posted 03-10-2002 03:55 PM            

Trails seen all day long persisting for hours, drifting S/E, yet I checked every altitude for RH using ADDS and no readings were above 40%, most below 30%. So therefore there is something in the atmosphere which causes trails to persit regardless of the RH readings, or they are CHEMTRAILS!!!!!!!!!! " TARGET=_blank>http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000876.html"<<

And what were the temperatures? You folks way up north will see trails at lower altitudes because it's colder. ADDS map showing white (30-50%) for RH with a cold enough temp will have contrails. A) this can be viewed anywhere within my journal and B) "The measurements are generally drier than the true value (based on research quality instruments vs operational ones). High altitude humidity was never a big factor in weather forecasts until recently. SO, people are trying come up with better operational measurement systems. When those measurements are put into a computer model to give values all over the country , it tends to reinforce the dry bias. That is why you get RH = 50% and contrails. The true value has to be greater than 100% for the contrails to persist for very long (more than a few minutes). At those cold temperatures, a small error in moisture measurement leads to a large error in RH."

Like right now, I am seeing some persistent trails and ADDS is showing white (30-50%) from 28,000 - 38,000 feet (I didn't check lower) and the temp at 28,000 is deep purple (-35C - -40C degrees), while the temp at 36,000 feet is white (well below -50C degrees). Since the higher trails are spreading fast, I checked the winds at 28,000 feet, which is yellow (90-105 knots), and at 36,000 feet, the map shows mustard and orange (105-135 knots).

Like you all say, "you have to look at the big picture" so I turned on FE to view the planes passing over right now. I captured them and will edit them in a little later. So note the time of this post and the time of the FE captures when they are posted. I document everything just about with date and time.

posted 03-10-2002 11:02 PM            

Given all the interest in contrail frequence and occurance, how is it that we apparently all have previously overlooked this publication?

Or is it that it has just now become available?

No response on Teller's proposals?

It will take awhile to review this new data.

posted 03-11-2002 12:05 PM            

This seems of significant importance. We have all seen contrails form into cloudcover. Aren't we all here because of cloudcover formed by contrails? We are not here to study persistent contrails except to distinguuish them from chemtrails.Here is a description of contrails and cirrus clouds from another document. http://www.iac.ethz.ch/en/research/index.html

Cirrus Clouds and Contrails

Cirrus clouds exist in the upper troposphere, at altitudes between about 7 to 17 km. They can appear as wide sheets, wispy filaments, and also as subvisible cloud layers. Cirrus clouds are composed of non-spherical ice particles with particle sizes and number densities varying considerably with meteorological conditions and origin of the air in which they form. Because cirrus clouds cover up to 30% of the Earth they play an important role in atmospheric chemistry and climate. Cirrus clouds have a net heating effect on the Earth. This is because they only hardly affect the amount of incoming visible light from the sun, but efficiently absorb the outgoing infrared radiation from the Earth's surface, part of which they reemit back to the surface. Since cirrus clouds are very efficient in heating the surface, even small changes in cirrus cloud coverage may significantly alter the Earth's climate. Observations indicate that the mean global cirrus cloud occurrence frequency over the oceans has increased by several percent per decade. This increase in cirrus may be related to human activities such as air traffic. However, since the exact mechanisms of formation for cirrus clouds are still unknown it is difficult to predict how anthropogenic activities will change cloud abundances in the future.

posted 03-12-2002 12:59 AM            

You would be refering to projects such as TRADEOFF & CLOUDMAP, Hilltop, Mozaic etc.

Are there any theories on what is done with the data that these studies produce?

Are we studying the atmosphere so we can, only better understand it?

Or, is the truth that we are studying the atmosphere so we can have a better understanding on how to 'interact' with and maybe 'control' the atmosphere?
Climate engineering we'll call it. Makes sense to me, why not, if we can.

An "Air Force Weather Squadron(s)" search produces a LOT of "can't access" information.
Are the results of studies kept secret for a logical reason?
Again, not tryin' to be cocky, I just can't think of why I shouldn't also be able to see "all" the RH/PH/particulate/Temp/soot/wind/sulpherhex study results.

Are you, and the Brits able to see "all" the results of "all" af/mil studies, and "programs" to better accelerate your understanding of the atmosphere?

What reason would one have to keep these results secret, from the general public I mean?

I'm intersted in a project called DYCOMS II.
The results aren't available to the public, as I understand it.

It seems I can't find data or results from a lot of the publically funded studies, or I may just be going at it the wrong way.

I'm wondering if you have access to DYCOMS and the results?
Is there anyway you could direct me to a website or book that may have all these study results lumped into one area. It would make sense if this was researched collectively. Your effort really is appreciated.

It does appear the world population has studied the atmosphere to death. You'd think we'd have it all figured out by now and be able to do something about it. Ok, just a little facetious, makes the topic easier to swallow, between breathes.

Ms. Kreidenweis has done wonderful, extensive atmospheric research with colostate. I think she may have even worked on SUCCESS with you! Spectacular list of publications on her link here. http://www.atmos.colostate.edu/dept/facmembers/kreidenw.html
I can't seem to access data for some of the studies done at colostate. A password for data analysis access may help me with a better understanding of what I'm seeing. Anyway I can get a password from colostate?

Can you think of a reason why I can't access the results of basic atmospheric testing?

I understand the europeons are further ahead then we are. Maybe we can leap ahead of them with the fact that, >>"Prof. Kreidenweis is also interested in the analysis of satellite and lidar aerosol data, and especially in using in situ measurements to better understand and model the properties of the detected particles and their effects on the global radiation budget.<< We could use these study results, with the help of Air Force Weather Squadron, and finally get some control of this "global radiation budget" thingy.

Your input is greatly appreciated in this topic. Your assistance and guidance on helping us differentiate between contrails and chemtrails has taken the study to new heights. I will, with diligence pursue any additional links you can provide us, toward a larger, uncompromised understanding.

Could one man really know of "all" the potential atmospheric "programs" that are going on right now?
Could he provide us the key to the lock on the information vault?
Or will it be too rusty to open, because after all, it's just water vapor!

If only you could get past this point, you could see for miles and miles.
Your open mind and patience is to be respected though, thank you.

Keep well all.

From the frozen butt, drought inflicted capital of the World.

posted 03-13-2002 12:59 AM            

I shall continue the search:

"Atmospheric sciences"
"Atmospheric tracers"
"Climate engineering"
"Aluminium"
"Thorium"
"Air force weather squadron"
"Jet turbine modifications"
"Aerosols"
related patents http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html
US6,254,341
US5,003,186
US3,899,144
"SAGE III"
"THESEO"
"SOHO"
"SEC" http://www.milinfoserv.net/BMO.htm
oops that's supposed to be http://www.wmi.cban.com/index.html
"atmospheric particulates"
"CRPAQs"
"DYCOMS II"
"ozone"
"carbon/dioxide"
"nasa"
"boeing"
"GE"
"global radiative budget"
"the big (it used to be) blue sky"
"UV"
"hydrological"
"drought"
"ice age"
"Dead" farmers almanac
"flight tracking"
"flight plan"

Plenty "O" folk have seen something 'unusual' in their skies. Yes, more unusual than simple persistant contrails. Let's not pass them off as inexperienced and ignore their concerns.

Let's find them "all" of the truth, shall we!

Could we:

Perform another study, right here on Thermits board?
There are plenty of "chemtrail" reports on the 'reporting' thread.
We'll pick a few at random, preferably with dated pictures and near weather stations that perform reasonable uppersounding data.
Post archived or active uppersounding charts, related to the observations, that can be deciphered on this public forum.
Compare your interpretation of the results with others on the board.
We will gain from your knowledge and the results may surprise us all.
Just a mid night thought, it's probably been done thousands of times before, and maybe that's why we're all still here.

Onward

posted 03-15-2002 09:15 PM            

You seemed to overlook the good Dr.'s central premise...his sweeping dismissal of ALL atmospheric sounding data because...

1. instruments used to measure humidity are unreliable.

2. balloons drift from their point of release.

3. data can be extrapolated over time.

and of course the capper...

contrails can form in 0% relative humidity.

No data are reliable. If you see a persistent trail, it's supposed to be there. Its very presence proves the necessary physical conditions. This is absolutely obvious to anyone "skilled in the art"...an expert.

And there is no chance that it is ANYTHING other than just normal jet aircraft exhaust.

posted 03-15-2002 10:52 PM            

"Whether you're enamoured by them or just a passive participant, one thing's for sure - you'd better get used to them because they're not going away any time soon."

Awesome journalism on an awesome subject.

posted 03-16-2002 12:39 AM            

Any idea what a SINGLE B-2 bomber costs CANEX? Last price tag I saw was over $2 billion. Please correct me if I'm mistaken (probably now a significant UNDER estimate).

So just how much does ONE of these planes add to our "National Security".

I wouldn't be the one to question Teller's computer analysis for the cost of his proposed spraying program. But let's say that even with all the sophisticated computer modeling and analysis capabilities available at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, he's managed to under estimate by a factor of two.

We've now got a program that's equivalent to the cost of a single airplane.

Ridiculously expensive? I wonder if the insurance companies paying claims for weather related damages would find such proposals so preposterous?

posted 03-16-2002 12:45 AM            

Well jeez Canex...it seems that this "ridiculous" issue has occupied a considerable portion of YOUR time for the past several years.

posted 03-16-2002 06:44 AM            

It's all just normal up there, go back to sleep. Take a look at my avatar, does that look normal to anybody? You want to see the full pic search gridlock (may have to separate the words) in the image data base.

Some of you might want to read the 17 techniques for surpressing the truth in Other Trails, see any of that going on in this thread?

posted 03-16-2002 01:06 PM            

If I were using a technique, why would I use one that is so elementary that any one can do it and see for themselves? It's free -
and just requires a little time and thought.
http://adds.aviationweather.noaa.gov/projects/adds/flight_path/

posted 03-16-2002 01:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by canex:
plot behind every bush

---

That's a good one! ... a loaded post, if ever I saw one.

If chemtrails are a conspiracy, then it's necessary to look at other conspiracies that have taken place in recent years.

You may or may not be a scientist who studies contrails, but if you aren't aware of the true existence of conspiracies, then you're neglecting a major component of the 'why' question, as to why chemtrails exist.

That must be why you contrail believers never seem to have an opinion on; S&L rip-off, multiple assassinations, phony drug war, CIA involvement in narcotics trafficking etc. etc. etc. If you acknowledged any of these conspiracies or addressed them, you might have to abandon your policy of denying the likelihood of a chemtrail conspiracy.