|
Author
|
|
Topic: Will Someone Please Explain This? | Topic page views:
|
|
GAS_MASK
Open-Minded
151 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 07-29-2002 06:48 AM
  
 "Oh Lucy, you gotta lotta splainin' to do!" Cheers! 
[Edited 2 times, lastly by GAS_MASK on 07-29-2002] 
|
Unhappy Trails
Senior Member
Seattle, WA
256 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-29-2002 07:14 AM
Goodmoanin Gas mask! Great shot there, did you take it? What altitude do you think that is? Looks pretty low to me.
|
WFETZER
New Member
Hopland, CA, Mendocino
15 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 07-29-2002 07:33 AM
Where was that photo taken? I cannot see the ground how could you tell if it was low? Maybe she was on a hill...hahah
|
GAS_MASK
Open-Minded
151 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 07-29-2002 10:33 AM
Heh-heh.....Unfortunately, I didn't take that photo, I pulled it from Cliff's site. But it is most definitely a breathtaking shot of the infamous wingtip-to-wingtip megasprayer. I just wanted some non-believers' comments about the montrosity pictured above. (This should be interesting.) Here's something to compare the top photo with: LINK Cheers!
[Edited 6 times, lastly by GAS_MASK on 07-30-2002]
|
eyesopen
This Space For Rent
Ventura CA
627 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 07-29-2002 11:21 AM
I think Raven's photos are the best. He had the telescope rig and really got some close ups. Check out the featured photos in the new image database. He sent me a bunch that I scanned, I'll maybe post some...
|
GAS_MASK
Open-Minded
151 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 07-30-2002 05:25 PM
I ran that top photo past the Air Disaster forum, and this is what someone by the name of Louis (I believe he his a pilot) emailed me:
----------------------------
Looks like a Boeing 767-300 to me!
>
> ...never seen such a thick contrail before, though!
>
> Was it over an area of high heat/humidity?------------------------------- I told him I'd have to check when and where Cliff took the photo and what the weather conditions were at 150mb.
|
Alpha-Theta
Superior
ª×µ»ƒ³²²
694 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-30-2002 06:28 PM
quote:
red/orange engine cowlings, red trailing edges, etc, and NO insignia
quote:
5-piece, self-adjusting nozzle
quote:
NSA + National Guard Tankers
Cloverleaf
RaindanceIt's not the air force. Although Edwards is no doubt constantly buzzing with national gaurd tankers and those clever orange and white birds, or did for some time at least. Go figure. NSA-ONR. Most of the AIR FORCE is probably oblivious as well. A picture is worth a thousand words.
[Edited 4 times, lastly by Alpha-Theta on 07-30-2002]
|
Bonehead9
Senior Member
suburb of Chicago, IL US
176 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-30-2002 09:25 PM
Some real chemtrails:
Or how about a real "megasprayer"
 Notice that the spray bars don't go from wingtip to wingtip, as that would interfere with the aileron (the control surface)
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Bonehead9 on 07-30-2002]
|
Alpha-Theta
Superior
ª×µ»ƒ³²²
694 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-30-2002 09:36 PM
A totally irrelevant and asinine comparison, but good entertainment value! Hey Bonehead where's Duncan? I wonder what he thinks about Boeing's decision to venture into 'non-existent' areas of physics?? ROFL.
|
Bonehead9
Senior Member
suburb of Chicago, IL US
176 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-31-2002 09:41 AM
You missed my point, A-T. First and foremost, the plane has to be able to fly. Any equipment added for what ever reason can not interfere with the ability of the plane to fly. Equipment added to a plane also must not interfere with the planes flight control surfaces (either externally block the movement of the surface or internally interfere with the actuators and hydraulic systems). Nor should it compromise the structural integrity of the aircraft. Have you ever looked at the wing of a modern jet plane? The entire trailing edge is taken up by control surfaces (flaps and ailerons). The unimpeded operation of these surfaces is critical. How do you expect a plane fully loaded with "chemicals" to take off without the use of the flaps? An airplane in flight causes a myriad of air pressure changes to occur immediately adjacent and behind it. These changes are caused by the wings (generating lift, wingtip vortices etc.), the engines (the increased pressure of the exhaust is what generates the thrust.), and the tail ssurfaces (they have to steer the thing). Add to this the localized air turbulence caused by the passing of a plane, throw in the moisture and soot from the engine exhaust, and you have a perfect cloud forming machine. This is especially true if you have a condition known as super saturation where the relative humidity (RH) is greater than 100%. Do you notice the wing tip vortices on either side of the contrail in Gas mask's picture? When I looked at that picture, I came up with two possible explanations: Theory 1) The contrail is the result of physical and thermodynamic processes caused by the movement of the plane through the air. These scientific principles underling these processes have been established for over 100 years and are currently taught in college and even high schools around the country. In addition, at the time the picture was taken, the plane was flying through common atmospheric conditions that are conducive to the formation of contrails. These atmospheric conditions have also been studied and documented for decades. Theory 2) The plane is part of a super secret program run by an unknown agency, government or space aliens and consisting of thousands of people who are systematically spending billions of dollars a year to spray the Earth (just under major air traffic corridors, however) with unknown chemicals for unknown reasons. This program has gone on for about five years and so far no tangible evidence or credible testimony has been produced to expose it to the public at large (the sheeple). In addition, the plane has been extensively modified with millions of dollars of high tech spray equipment. This equipment has been ingeniously added to the plane in such a way so as to make it indistinguishable from other planes, yet it does not compromise the performance characteristics of the aircraft at all. I think I will go with theory number one, thank you.
|
eyesopen
This Space For Rent
Ventura CA
627 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 07-31-2002 10:38 AM
Same thing here Bonehead????
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000195.html
|
David
Chemtrail Information Agent
1290 posts, Oct 2000
|
posted 07-31-2002 11:09 AM
Nero fiddles while Rome burns.
Can someone explain this. Why is the board commited to arguing with these debunker fools. On and On it goes. They are keeping any real progress from taking place with their constant denial of ANYTHING important. Read this site to see what garbage they spew about the people and issues posted here and other boards. http://pub31.ezboard.com/fcontrailsandchemtrails22884frm1?page=1
They have not the least shred of respect for anyone, including themselves. They, in all their vast wisdom, would debunk Jesus Christ if he made a personal appearance.
Who gives a rats ass what they do or do not think, is it important to you, me or the fact that this country is going down the toilet. Or the fact that this administration is selling us out to the NWO? Or the fact that the spray program is ongoing, deadly and killing the planet? Or the fact that our civil rights are going out the window? I think not.
Thread after thread is polluted with their stench.
They are doing what debunkers do, derail, sidetrack and deny.
Is the opinion of people like canex(minnis),pacer,bonehead,maverick, seeker, dippy deb or any of the other debunkers important?
It is an insult to our intelligence to let them continue...
|
Alpha-Theta
Superior
ª×µ»ƒ³²²
694 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-31-2002 11:42 AM
Hey David,
I will be the first to agree that much in the form of ad hominems and persistent trivialisaion is presented by these debunkers. (with the exception of Seeker and Pacer, who seem to be more respectful creatures) I won't even bother reading their comments on some other board as I am all too aware of their inability to not defame anyone who disagress with them. I suggest that we endure their repeated and transparent obfuscation, if only to realize that ultimately the joke is on them. In the mean time David, I think your sense of urgency is relevant and it's clear that something needs to be done and soon!
[Edited 10 times, lastly by Alpha-Theta on 08-01-2002]
|
Bonehead9
Senior Member
suburb of Chicago, IL US
176 posts, May 2002
|
posted 07-31-2002 02:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by eyesopen:
Same thing here Bonehead????
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000195.html
Yes, absolutely. Remember that super saturation can occur when parcels of warm moist air rise up into the atmosphere. Haven’t you ever heard of thermals? How do you think that thunderstorms form? There are definite boundaries to thermals (ask any sailplane pilot)
|
eyesopen
This Space For Rent
Ventura CA
627 posts, Apr 2001
|
posted 07-31-2002 02:43 PM
well BH, how I see it is that it was a heavy chem day when I took those and also that is a mighty giant wing to wing "contrail"...
|
WiseQuakker
Senior Member
Mt. Vernon, WA, USA
141 posts, Aug 2000
|
posted 08-01-2002 04:28 AM
quote:
Pinhead said:
First and foremost, the plane has to be able to fly. Any equipment added for what ever reason can not interfere with the ability of the plane to fly. Equipment added to a plane also must not interfere with the planes flight control surfaces (either externally block the movement of the surface or internally interfere with the actuators and hydraulic systems). Nor should it compromise the structural integrity of the aircraft.
Have you ever looked at the wing of a modern jet plane? The entire trailing edge is taken up by control surfaces (flaps and ailerons). The unimpeded operation of these surfaces is critical. How do you expect a plane fully loaded with "chemicals" to take off without the use of the flaps?
Man, we’d better put the University of Colorado in touch with you right away before they crash their little Cheyenne...
From photo collection at the RAP Press Room
quote:
Pinhead said:
Remember that super saturation can occur when parcels of warm moist air rise up into the atmosphere.
Yes, it can...
quote:
Pinhead said:
Haven’t you ever heard of thermals? How do you think that thunderstorms form? There are definite boundaries to thermals (ask any sailplane pilot)
Gee, I didn’t know it was that simeple. And all this time I thought it might also be convective instability, real mean lookin’ cold fronts, stuff like that... And, if I’m not mistaken, glider pilots prefer the kind of thermals that do not threaten runaway cloud formation. They like it when the atmosphere is a little drier...
_____________________________
“We should be on our guard not to overestimate science and scientific methods when it is a question of human problems and we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express themselves on questions affecting the organisation of society.” — Albert Einstein, May 1949......
[Edited 2 times, lastly by WiseQuakker on 08-01-2002]
|
GAS_MASK
Open-Minded
151 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 08-01-2002 12:06 PM
Nice find, Wisequaker!Just out of curiosity, what kind of equipment is mounted to that plane's wing? Are those the cloud seeding flares?
[Edited 4 times, lastly by GAS_MASK on 08-01-2002]
|
WiseQuakker
Senior Member
Mt. Vernon, WA, USA
141 posts, Aug 2000
|
posted 08-01-2002 03:47 PM
Correct, GAS_MASK. The photo description reads, “Seeding with hygroscopic flares over Monclova, Coahuila Mexico”...
_____________________________
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” — George Orwell......
|
GAS_MASK
Open-Minded
151 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 08-01-2002 06:29 PM
Here's an interesting email I received about the megasprayer:
----------------------------------
Hello Steve:
No sir, I'm not an MD-80 pilot. I'm not a pilot at all. I have an Engineering
background & I'm an Airliner Enthusiast since childhood and unofficial
historian. I've taken courses in Aircraft Design and follow the Industry
very closely. I've also sold Airliner slides to ATP in CA and had a few
illustrations published, one in Airliners magazine.
I enjoy participating in the AirDisaster Forum. Since the group has been
so very helpful in providing information to me, I want to contribute too.
I am not one of the moderators, I'm just a member. But if I see a question
that I truly know the answer to, I will post a comment or reply. I will not
reply to a question which I have no knowledge about.
The reason I asked about the weather is that usually when there's more
humidity, condensation becomes visible at the trailing edges, especially
off of surfaces such as flaps, wingtips, etc. I've seen lots of condensation
trails on takeoffs and landings, some where it almost looks like the aircraft
is burning up! But like I said before, I've never seen a contrail like the one in
the picture you posted. I don't know the answer to that one.
What I am very sure about is that it's a Boeing 767-300. I'd be willing to
bet some money on that! (I've been told I have a good eye for identifying
aircraft)
Hope that's helpful.Kind regards, ::name omitted:: -------------------------------------------
[Edited 2 times, lastly by GAS_MASK on 08-01-2002]
|
GAS_MASK
Open-Minded
151 posts, Jul 2002
|
posted 08-01-2002 07:07 PM
Here's an awesome photo of what heavy contrails are supposed to look like:
LINKAnd another, not quite so heavy: LINK2 Same thing: LINK3 Again: LINK4 And again:
LINK5 Note that none of these photos (including the 747) bear any resemblance to the photo at the top of this page. Which is why I say, "Oh Lucy....", well, you know the rest. Cheers!
[Edited 6 times, lastly by GAS_MASK on 08-01-2002]
|
Chemtrail Central Forum
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
