Discussion in 'Contrails and Chemtrails' started by Jay Reynolds, Sep 19, 2013.
Not so much.
The way I understand CCN is that it is required for water vapor to form into precipitation, as the water vapor needs something to attach to. And the more water vapor there is, the larger the water droplets will be. I can't see how the amount of CCN would become a factor in the whole process unless it was a very LARGE concentration, such as from forest fire smoke, volcanic ash, or very concentrated pollution such as you would see at times in China, as you said. In such cases I would think the water vapor would be somewhat "absorbed" by the high density of CCN, but the raindrop size would still be a factor of the amount of water vapor, more than a factor of the CCN. The only example that I have experience with is rain with forest fire smoke, and the rain was normal, droplet size was normal, but it was very "dirty" rain. If it fell on your car windshield, it would be clouded and brown and you couldn't see through it.
The available water in the air gets divided by the available CCN.
(simplification) If you've got a parcel of air that has become saturated, then the water in that air will condense out on any available nucleation site (either a CCN or any water surface, like another droplet) until it is no longer saturated. If there's a lot of CCN then you end up with a lot of small microdroplets. Condensation continues until the air is no longer saturated. If there's a small number of CCN, then this means the end result is a lower number of larger droplets, which are then more likely to precipitate out. If there's a large number of CCN, then the end result can be a larger number of smaller droplets, which can be too small to precipitate out.
Ok, obviously need to do more study on CCN. On another note:
Found this under the "Breaking News Section" of geoengineeringwatch.org. Wash, rinse, and recycle, seems to be Dane's plan for his latest "expose". A claim that was debunked earlier this year, regarding pylon drains on the Airbus A320 and other Airbus aircraft. This latest is "proof/smoking gun" that "they" are spraying us covertly using these "nozzles", and is being tweeted as new information, including an email from Airbus saying that there is NO drain tubes on the "pylons", just on the nacelles. It really irks me that these false claims keep getting put out as new info, over and over again. Even if these nozzles were spraying something, where would the chem juice come from? And it's a pretty small pipe, at what rate would it be able to spray? And they seem to make the leap to "all aircraft could have this retrofit".
Well, if he wants to post an article every day then recycling and repeating stuff over and over is unavoidable. And apparently it works well as a marketing strategy.
And if he wants to post something new he just posts the latest weather map and explains that it shows the engineered weather.
The latest from Dane in an interview with Global Research.org which happens to be from my hometown of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, to my great shame
The interview can be heard here http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/...-dane-wigington-and-guy-mcpherson/#more-28466
What follows is a transcript of the interview, done by myself, it's kind of a lot to read, but it really gives insight to Dane and what he is trying to accomplish. (The impossible IMHO)
I see this type of credit being given to Dane's background " extensive background in the fields of solar energy " in this article, sometimes " Solar energy expert ", " Solar engineer ", " alternative energy expert " etc, and he allows this mischaracterization of his actual experience. Dane owns a large home, 4000+ square feet, and it required a quite large solar system. He hired a solar installation contractor to do the work, and Dane helped this man in parts of the installation. He told me before that he needed to maintain a relationship with this man, despite some issues with him, because he did not know his system well enough to understand problems with it that occurred at times. Besides this, Dane used to be a union electrician, and they got hired onto various projects, and one of them was the Solar One facility ( now no longer in operations, its gone I believe ) near Barstow, California. It was a Bechtel project, so he was just a basic electrician, hired along with the many other types of contractors to work on the building of this facility. He cites that he was a Bechtel employee, so perhaps this company temporarily assigns employee status to contractors who work on their project. This seems odd to me, as I was an electrical contractor for many years working for a home construction company, but this arrangement never made me an employee of their company. Why would they, what benefit? Anyway these titles combined with Dane's work at the Bechtel facility morph into the implication I see in the way he is referenced in his various presentations that Dane somehow is some high up solar engineer who did work with the Bechtel Corporation. I think that Dane purposely allows this type of mischaracterization of is background, seeing it as a means to increase his stature and credibility in the eyes of those he conveys his beliefs too. I know of no other experience that Dane has with anything related to Solar energy. So, do those types of titles apply to one who is just a private citizen with a large solar system, installed by an actual solar contractor, and who worked as an electrician at a solar energy facility?
Thanks for the mammoth transcription job, @Dan Page!
Looks like Dane quoted a laundry list of just about every piece of his "evidence" there.
Indeed - well done.
Does anyone have a link to these 750 pages of evidence that Dane claims show "it" has been happening for ages?? I'm feeling too happy today to want to browse any of his sites.....
It was discussed here:
More understanding of how a person could become so convinced as this guy has, and how he could have escaped misleading himself and others can be found by reading this article.
What a great article. I especially liked this passage:
I am adding the whole piece to my syllabus.
I hope the sentence structure and punctuation aren't the reasons you liked it.
As far as Mr. Wigington's credentials are concerned, it certainly seems a bit disingenuous to represent yourself as both an expert in the field of solar technology and as a former Bechtel employee when in fact it appears he was just a customer of a solar installation company and and a temporary contractor for Bechtel. In my experience contractors are indeed employees of the corporations they are contracted out to. per se, but they are always given a special designation due to the temporary and project based nature of their employment. I can't imagine Bechtel is pleased to have their name associated with the chemtrail CT so often.
His misrepresentation certainly speaks to his integrity and character, but with respect to the effect contrails are having on solar energy gains, this is an area where (some of) Dane's assertions are backed by some actual science. Some studies show reductions as great as 72%.
Don't look now...but a scientist from NOAA used the term "accidental geo-engineering" in relation to contrails at the AGU meeting in San Francisco this week. Somehow this will be twisted into "proof" of chemtrails
Jim Lee is calling out Mick and Ken Caldeira over this. @3:15
As if there was a question about that.
But he does not claim that, so the fact that it is true is not backing him up at all.
In fact, he claims that modern planes are nearly incapable of creating contrails (when they actually make them more frequently than older engines, as they have cooler exhaust). He also claims that UV-B radiation if 10x what it used to be, which is not consistent with sunlight being blocked.
And since nobody ever said that contrails do not block the sun, it would hardly be relevant even if he were getting things right.
I've heard/read that UV-B is increased by cirrus cloud cover, see e.g.
The effect of clouds on enhancing UVB irradiance at the Earth's surface: A one year study
Yeah, a possible maximum 8% increase. Dane is saying a thousand times that. Higher than the UV-B in space.
Oh! Got it. (I have weekend brain already!)
He has made many claims about the reduced solar capacities. Here is an article written by him in which he discusses it.
http://arizonaskywatch.com/article/articles/Diminished Solar Capacities.pdf
....and a excerpt from his website making the claim.
Obviously his claims about the high bypass jet engines are completely misinformed and I am amazed he is still using that as a selling point for chemtrails. Thank you by the way for your excellent post on that subject which I thought addressed the factual information very well...pictures included!
I think any relevance the CT's could get out this issue would be that it was part of the broad conspiracy to reduce the effectiveness of this form of alternative energy in order to perpetual a petroleum based energy economy. I'm not sure if they have gone there and I certainly don't want to give them any more fuel for the fire, but certainly it is a likely unintentional negative consequence of the increase in contrail activity in regional areas where solar energy is being implemented.
But not about contrails doing it.
Yes of course although his description of them as "the occasional long and very lingering trails left behind aircraft" and "jet trails" can mean nothing else. His misunderstanding of the causes of these trails and further characterization of them as chemtrails was not made in the article I quoted but obviously became the basis for many of his future claims.
I think it's unlikely that his observations of declining solar output had anything in particular to do with contrails though, more likely just ordinary problems with his system. He mad the connection because he's just moved from a region that had less flyover traffic.
Dane built his current home in the hills of Redding, Ca in 2000, then not too long later he noticed the decline in his solar system output on cloudy days. In his looking through internet info to learn more about this problem, is when he came across info on chemtrails, and we now see where that discovery has taken him. If he had never had a house with solar panels, I think he would, like the rest of his life before this time, have never even thought of chemtrails. Before Dane moved to Redding, I had told him about that area for a many years since I worked near there as a Forestry Firefighter back in the early 80's, and I thought it would be a great place to live someday. Dane then finally in 2000 went up there to check it out, partly because he was experiencing persistent drought repercussions in the Hualapai Mtns where he lived near Kingman, AZ. So if I had not told Dane about Redding all of those years, trying to talk him into it as a place to live, then he may have never lived in a situation off the grid with solar panels ( he never had before ). Never would I have imagined that just trying to get my brother to move to a beautiful forested area that I liked, would have turned into what it has for Dane. Life really throws us all some curve balls at times.
Dane has picked up on a recent news release from the DoD regarding purchasing new C130J aircraft for Youngstown Air Reserve Station. This unit, the only one of its kind in the US, does low level aerial spraying of pesticides in most cases to kill insects like mosquitoes, and other insects that damage crops. They have been and are deployed all over the world since 1947. Of course Dane sees "aerial spraying" and his eyes go wide open. They currently have 8 C130s and are asking for 10 more new ones. These are 4 engine turboprops capable of reaching maybe 30000' if they are not loaded, so they would unlikely create a contrail. And most of, if not all of their missions are done low level, like 1000' or so. So Dane capitalizes on this by saying, "oh yes they say they are only used for XXX purpose, but what are they REALY using them for" Suggesting that 8 C130s would be responsible for the entire "chemtrail/geoengineering" program, or even a part of it is just ridiculous.
Out of the 11 responses Dane has received so far, only one had a clue:
Here is the letter from Senator Portman to Lt Gen Jackson:
And here is the history of the Youngstown Unit:
Well there you go, If you read the VERY FIRST LINE of the letter, you can see that they don't want 10 ADDITIONAL aircraft, they want to REPLACE the current 8 C130Hs with at least 10 C130 Js.
The water level in Lake Shasta is now at 106% historical average, and still shooting up:
In his latest radio show, Dane Wigington admitted Lake Shasta (which he can see from his house) has now normalized, but he is still not satisfied as a number of other reservoirs in California are still below average. He also claims the "aerosolized" atmosphere reduces the amount of orographic rainfall.
But I wonder, after he has claimed for years that the California drought was deliberately caused by geoengineering, how come those geoengineers have allowed Lake Shasta to refill again, and why did they allow the drought to ease up anyway?
He's correct in that, but there are reasons.
Look at the lowest one there, New Melones from spring 2011 to spring 2016
Look first at the sold cyan (light blue) area - that's the historical average. Notice how it's fairly flat compared to Shasta. This is because it's got a smaller net inflow relative to its size. Every year it has ended up with lots less water than it started with. But with the limited inflow it's practically impossible for it to get above the historical average in one year. The last time that happened was in 1983, when the nearly empty dam filled up in the middle of historic flooding.
So what we have here is simply a very good rainy season, where levels are going up twice as fast as they normally do. Enough to fill many reservoirs, but not the slow filling ones.
Yes, this is a problem. So much of the meme lately has been "geo-engineered" drought via Chemtrails and then zapping storms with HAARP etc...and yet his home town of Redding- despite the "spraying" has received almost 120% of its average rainfall for the date. It nullifies the correlation that his premise is based on cant just be hand waved away (although he likely will try). Never mind that the entire country is seemingly "sprayed" equally and drought level as whole in the US is lower than it has been in years.
This drought map is before last weeks rains which brought multiple inches of rain to most of the northern 2/3rds of the state- most of SoCal is still well below normal:
A key fact here is that rainfall in California is highly variable. There are years of drought, there are years of plenty.
He'll just claim They stopped the drought because of the publicity he brought onto TPTB.
They'll probably say after the ground dried out they sent all the rain to create mudslides and wash away topsoil and saturate the ground with aluminum so you can't grow anything there etc etc.
That's the thing about conspiracy theories. They can and will always be modified to fit existing data because they believe in the existence of the conspiracy above all else. The details are quite secondary.
Is it true that California goes through cycles of rainy years and dry years. It's an El Nino winter, more precipitation is anticipated during these years. The pattern shifts between La Nina and El Nino years. Do people forget about these cycles since there can several years of La Nina?
Its not quite that simple- as there have been dry El Nino years and wet La Nina years. This year the phenomenon of El Nino (warm sea surface temps) was one of the largest on record- comparable to 82/83 and 97/98- so, from that huge sample of 2, people, the media etc.. extrapolated that into an expectation of huge precipitation - especially for SoCal as it happened before. That it hasnt played out that way- the ONLY possible reason must be they are zapping storms with HAARP and abetted by chemtrails...or so the story goes.
Ok...if I understand what you are saying... since the recent storm only released a large amount of rain in certain areas of California, didn't dump in SoCal, and hasn't matched the El Nino years of 82/83 and 97/98 is reason to suspect the use of HAARP and/or chemtrails?
So Dane doesn't consider that there is variation within weather patterns?...that while one reservoir may fill quickly another reservoir may not due to several reasons other than directed weather manipulation?...that forecasting weather has it's limitations and that the greater the distance into the future the accuracy decreases?
Dane Wigington has posted an article today on Geoengineeringwatch.org, but apparently removed it pretty fast. Google's cache still has it:
Essentially he posted this youtube video:
FOX NEWS: Obama signs Executive Order for possible MARTIAL LAW in AUGUST 2016 (pls share), which was posted yesterday, and Dane apparently believed it is actual news.
Dane has probably realized his mistake. The video contains a report by Fox News from March 2012, more than 4 years ago. It is about Executive Order 13603, signed by Obama in March 2012, which was misinterpreted by some commentators claiming that it allows the government to confiscate private property and to declare martial law. In fact, it does not allow anything like that. Even Snopes.com debunked the misinterpretations, but the report still gets reposted regulary on youtube and various conspiracy web sites.
But it's good that Dane has recognized his mistake this time. Maybe he will realize that fact checking is better done before posting articles, not thereafter.
Dane Wigington has posted an episode of the Go Green radio where he and George Barnes talks to Greenpeace scientist David Santillo about geoengineering.
It's not very interesting because they almost completely avoided any argument.
However, I searched for this episode on the radio's web site and found that it is from January 2014, more than 2 years ago. Dane posted it like it was something new or recent.
Separate names with a comma.