Debunked: Look-up.org.uk's"Smokers" video

TEEJ

Senior Member.
[Admin: this thread split from the thread focussing on the "smoke rings", here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/de...chemtrail-missing-link-hybrid-contrails.3206/ ]

Ian Simpson has now released the video. Lots of non-sense in the video captions. The aircraft the video was filmed from is a Turkish Airlines Boeing 737, registration TC-JGY.

http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/Boeing/737/35738,TC-JGY-Turkish-Airlines.php


Update: for an explanation of why trails can seem dark, while the planes remain light, see:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/explained-dark-contrails-behind-bright-planes.5957/
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TWCobra

Senior Member.
Ian Simpson... a hypersonic propulsion system on a wing and airframe designed for operations in a flight envelope no faster than Mach 0.92? Really? You should read up on supersonic aerodynamics. There is a reason why Concorde was shaped the way it was, and it wasn't even hypersonic.

These aircraft you film; 737, 767, 747, 777, A320, A330, A340 et al... would break up in flight in the transonic region. Back to the drawing board for you.
 

TEEJ

Senior Member.
Ian's filming of the Flight Radar portion is very poor, but with the help of the registration of the Boeing 737 it is easy enough to work out the events. He has busted himself with the non-sense in regards to the aircraft not appearing on Flight Radar. :)

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/TCJGY/history/20140224/1120Z/LTBA/EGBB/tracklog

http://www.flightradar24.com/2014-02-24/13:34/12x/THY1969/2c59d04

The following snapshot from 05:21 in the video. This is Flight THA931 / TG931, registration HS-TUF, Thai Airways Airbus A380







From

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30058910@N08/12351783955/sizes/l/in/photostream/

You can see from the Flight Radar 24 link the sequence of events and the identities of the aircraft that he filmed!
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
in the long shots the black smoke lingers a while...
No, the contrail isn't "black"...it is in shadow.

And, about that sequence around the 6:30 point? I saw the airplane that had the camera filming as they cross nearly perpendicular to another airplane's contrail. Then we had a changing of perspective, and the other airplane possibly entered a slight left turn as well.

The captions on that ridiculous "film" are terribly inaccurate. [...]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Fixed @TEEJ's post with clearer screenshots.

Just before that there's a nice shot with three planes at once, including the Thai Airlines plane closest:
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Just a reminder ... Show, don't tell.
Yes. Along those lines -- seems a daunting project to tackle a 22-minute long exhibition (since as yet I lack any video-editing software), but seems to me a good way to debunk that "Smokers" video would be to grab segments, especially showing the added text, and then use in a video to thoroughly explain how and why they are incorrect.

I have no experience in making videos, but off-hand it looks like a rather large undertaking. And no guarantee that it would be viewed by the target audience?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I have no experience in making videos, but off-hand it looks like a rather large undertaking. And no guarantee that it would be viewed by the target audience?
Indeed. I don't really feel it's worth address in full depth. It should suffice to point out that the planes are regular scheduled planes, and that dark contrails are just a function of the lighting.
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
From the Flightradar log, the Thai aircraft and the Turkish aircraft passed each other over southern Germany around 2.40 pm local time. The date is the 24 February. Local sunset in southern Germany for that day is 5.59 pm. The Sun would have been behind the camera, to the left and about midway between it zenith and the horizon.

The dark contrail is very probably due to a layer of cirrus that is also causing the contrails. It is reducing the light reaching the trail.

The "PDPS" powered jet filmed is probably an Air Berlin 737-800 NG with a MMO (maximum operating mach number) of M 0.82. To suggest this aircraft is hyper-sonic is ludicrous.

The THY jet is the one at the two o'clock position to the Air Berlin here. They are both at 38,000 feet.

air berlin.JPG
 

TEEJ

Senior Member.
upload_2014-3-4_3-16-7.png

It appears that the Airbus A319 is the other aircraft that features later on. Black arrow marks Ian's aircraft (Boeing 737).

From 07:14 in the video and likely the A319. Ian thinks these airliners are turning and flying parallel with his aircraft. It is purely perspective that is confusing him.

upload_2014-3-4_3-19-14.png
 

Eden

New Member
What's the consensus regarding the aircraft without contrails? Was it not at the altitude required for contrail formation?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
What's the consensus regarding the aircraft without contrails? Was it not at the altitude required for contrail formation?
It was not in air that met the conditions required. This is often, but not always, a function of altitude - as planes separated by a mile or so horizontally (or a few tens of feet vertically) can be in quite different regions of air.

Even planes side-by-side can leave or not leave contrails - but generally it's going to be down to altitude.
http://contrailscience.com/why-do-some-planes-leave-long-trails-but-others-dont/
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
oh sorry. my brain is stuck on what supersonic engines have to do with chemtrails so I'm not processing properly. my mistake.
Ian is still convinced that aircraft are diverting to a mythical base at O'North 0'West to pick up chemtrail shipments. I pointed out numerous problems with this theory to him including the flight time required to get to and from this base and maintain schedule.

Rather than accept the flaw in his reasoning he has now invented Pulse Jet powered, Mach 5 capable Boeing 737's.

I suppose I could point out the flaws in THAT reasoning to him but he would simply invent another technology... time travel perhaps?
 

Ian Simpson

New Member
Ian Simpson... a hypersonic propulsion system on a wing and airframe designed for operations in a flight envelope no faster than Mach 0.92? Really? You should read up on supersonic aerodynamics. There is a reason why Concorde was shaped the way it was, and it wasn't even hypersonic.

These aircraft you film; 737, 767, 747, 777, A320, A330, A340 et al... would break up in flight in the transonic region. Back to the drawing board for you.
This is a good point and one we don't have the answer to yet, so we have to concede. The fact that we have witnessed many planes travelling at hypersonic speed on FR24 (Flighradar24.com), and under commercial passenger flight details, would suggest that either military craft are operating covert missions under civilian guises, or that some commercial jets, and we suspect the larger Boeings, have been modified to travel at least faster than their normal stated speeds if not actually at hypersonic speeds. The catch is exactly as stated... how do large cumbersome craft manage to travel so fast, or if they are military craft, then how do they carry the cargo as they would be smaller if fast, or also slow if large. We simply don't know at this stage, but we have research being carried out as I type. It is impossible to tell at this stage if they are commercial aircraft as we have not physically seen them in situ, only the trace on FR24 This would make total sense and explain our proposed theory about the Gulf of Guinea. Even now, despite the best efforts of the airlines involved to mask their activity, we see continued evidence of activity in that area from many airlines. We have also seen many airline initiate scheduled flights to that areas since we broke that story. Funny that.

The explanation about a glitch in FR24 software was completely disproved by an email from them some time ago. I will post it soon. Someone here claimed to have reported the glitch, or at least know of someone who had reported it, and that FR24 had fixed it. Utter nonsense as always on this site. FR24 software is purely reactive, as described by them. The fact that we see planes approach that location, stop, and then move on a short time later (or did), is proof enough that the glitch theory simply does not stand up to scrutiny. We posted an album some time ago on our Facebook page that showed planes from all sorts of airlines that had no reason to be in that area, in many varied positions around that spot, but not actually on 00N 00E. If this were a glitch as suggested here that simply would not happen. Busted we think. We also noticed your comments were amusingly absent on that album. Hmmm.

To clarify a point on the 'Smokers' video... it states very clearly that what we see 'might' be a PDPS (Pulse Detonation Propulsion System). We have watched carefully the videos you have all posted that show other examples of similar trails, but giving more examples does not prove the idea is not possible. The technology exists. The characteristics of the PDPS are similar to what we see in the video, so it is reasonable to suggest a possible connection.

I would like to thank all you guys for your continued efforts, and for producing some great images that we can use on the professional edit of the film coming soon.. that is, of course, if you don't mind ;-)

best regards,

Look-Up.org.uk

[Email From FlightRadar24 Support]
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
The fact that we have witnessed many planes travelling at hypersonic speed on FR24
I'm sorry, Mr. Ian Simpson, but I felt compelled to interrupt there. In no way is FR24 (and for those not familiar, this is in reference to a website called FlightRadar24)...in re: that site, there will be momentary data "glitches", which is not unexpected in such a FREE site, available to anyone with Internet access.

Hence, these momentary "glitches" in data being processed, and updated to the viewers of FR24 result in the "apparent"...and I emphasize "apparent" implausible speeds.

As an analogy...if you were watching a major motion picture, and suddenly all of the action in a scene seemed to 'speed up', how would you justify your interpretation of what you just witnessed?

Also, BTW...anything that actually exceeds the speed of sound for its pressure altitude WILL leave a sonic footprint, a sound that WILL be heard by any person on the ground, near its flight path.
 
Last edited:

TWCobra

Senior Member.
WRT to airliners flying at supersonic/hypersonic speeds, they simply cannot. Their wings and general design is optimised for the high subsonic range.

An aircraft designed to cruise faster than Mach One needs to have the same general characteristics as the Concorde. Long and sleek to minimise form drag and a wing designed much different from subsonic aircraft.

The engine is only part of the story. These common airliners simply do not possess the shape required to go faster than sound.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
So the visual glitches of FR24 led to a theory that it represented real bursts of hypersonic speed, over the more mundane explanation?

Perhaps a visual gif of the FL24 glitches can be provided so the proposed hypersonic speed can be measured?
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
So the visual glitches of FR24 led to a theory that it represented real bursts of hypersonic speed, over the more mundane explanation?

Perhaps a visual gif of the FL24 glitches can be provided so the proposed hypersonic speed can be measured?
That would be nice, if someone has the ability to "grab" animation and make a short video. This is something that I know others can do (I assume), because when I see some great examples on YouTube, I think to myself..."Self? Let's find the program or software, and learn how to do THAT!"
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
WRT to airliners flying at supersonic/hypersonic speeds, they simply cannot. Their wings and general design is optimised for the high subsonic range.

An aircraft designed to cruise faster than Mach One needs to have the same general characteristics as the Concorde. Long and sleek to minimise form drag and a wing designed much different from subsonic aircraft.

The engine is only part of the story. These common airliners simply do not possess the shape required to go faster than sound.
if you MAKE the plane out of "chems" then its ok if it disintegrates in flight. then you wouldn't need to go back to n'0w'0 for more chems, youd have enough.
 

cloudspotter

Senior Member.
Even now, despite the best efforts of the airlines involved to mask their activity, we see continued evidence of activity in that area from many airlines.
You mean by broadcasting their registration, position, speed, altitude etc for anyone to pick up? Those kind of efforts?
 

Balance

Senior Member.
I would like to thank all you guys for your continued efforts, and for producing some great images that we can use on the professional edit of the film coming soon.. that is, of course, if you don't mind ;-)
Hi Ian, I'm fairly new here myself but it's good to see you posting repsonses directly, thank you.

I don't think I've contributed anything (yet) that you could use but I do hope this is the start of something good for all... as we know, it is entirely possible for people with opposing views to productively work together, should the will be there.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
To clarify a point on the 'Smokers' video...
Dear Mr. Simpson:

I can assure you, with ALL of my 36+ years in aviation (as a pilot) and my last 24 of those years as a pilot at a major airline, to include being a Captain on the DC9/MD80, the B737 (almost all variations, including the 'NG's) and also retiring from the B757/767 (they share a common Type Rating)...I can verify, with NO reservations that modern High By-Pass TurboFan engines do NOT "smoke"!

Whenever a photo, or video is taken, or made that show a contrail...let me emphasize...a CONTRAIL as looking "dark"? It is merely a factor of the lighting...specifically the ANGLE of the Sunlight that is illuminating the scene. I hope I do not have to steer you towards a college course in photography and cinematography? Because, these standards of lighting angles are well understood by professionals in the business of either making still photos, or motion pictures.

I would encourage you to seek out some qualified photographic experts, before you continue to make claims that can be so easily debunked!

EDIT: Many years ago I was given, as a birthday present, a Minolta SLR camera, with two lenses. I learned a LOT about photography, with that camera...it was an SRT-101...you may look it up online. Sadly, I no longer own it, but I still treasure what I learned from it.

EDIT #2: When contrails "appear" to be "dark"...it is ALWAYS a factor of the Sunlight angle. Think about this....when you look at other clouds (BTW, a contrail is merely a form of cirrus cloud)...when you look at clouds, depending on the angle of the Sun...do you ever see those clouds with "dark" sides? (Usually, closer to the ground, but again, depends on your angle of view).

THINK about it, please.

Adding....just as contrails, when viewed against a setting or rising Sun, low on the horizon, will appear "red". As ALL clouds will.

Recall a very, very old sailors' ditty:

"Red clouds at night, sailors' delight.
Red clouds in mornin', sailors take warnin'"

Please feel free to look that up on Google (or Search Engine of your choice). That ditty has variations, but they ALL make the same point. Please, THINK about it!
 
Last edited:

Ian Simpson

New Member
Dear Mr. Simpson:

I can assure you, with ALL of my 36+ years in aviation (as a pilot) and my last 24 of those years as a pilot at a major airline, to include being a Captain on the DC9/MD80, the B737 (almost all variations, including the 'NG's) and also retiring from the B757/767 (they share a common Type Rating)...I can verify, with NO reservations that modern High By-Pass TurboFan engines do NOT "smoke"!

Whenever a photo, or video is taken, or made that show a contrail...let me emphasize...a CONTRAIL as looking "dark"? It is merely a factor of the lighting...specifically the ANGLE of the Sunlight that is illuminating the scene. I hope I do not have to steer you towards a college course in photography and cinematography? Because, these standards of lighting angles are well understood by professionals in the business of either making still photos, or motion pictures.

I would encourage you to seek out some qualified photographic experts, before you continue to make claims that can be so easily debunked!

EDIT: Many years ago I was given, as a birthday present, a Minolta SLR camera, with two lenses. I learned a LOT about photography, with that camera...it was an SRT-101...you may look it up online. Sadly, I no longer own it, but I still treasure what I learned from it.

EDIT #2: When contrails "appear" to be "dark"...it is ALWAYS a factor of the Sunlight angle. Think about this....when you look at other clouds (BTW, a contrail is merely a form of cirrus cloud)...when you look at clouds, depending on the angle of the Sun...do you ever see those clouds with "dark" sides? (Usually, closer to the ground, but again, depends on your angle of view).

THINK about it, please.

Adding....just as contrails, when viewed against a setting or rising Sun, low on the horizon, will appear "red". As ALL clouds will.

Recall a very, very old sailors' ditty:

"Red clouds at night, sailors' delight.
Red clouds in mornin', sailors take warnin'"

Please feel free to look that up on Google (or Search Engine of your choice). That ditty has variations, but they ALL make the same point. Please, THINK about it!

Utter nonsense of course, but I will try and accept the challenge and ask an image expert. Thank you for your comments. They are as always, very helpful.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
derrick06 Debunked: United Nations creates a "NWO" website Conspiracy Theories 2
N Debunked: Google Mail icon shows linkage to Freemasons Conspiracy Theories 4
Mendel Debunked: The WHO did not take the Taiwan CDC seriously Coronavirus COVID-19 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 0
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jesse3959 FE Debunked with water tube level - 187 foot building 21.2 miles away below eye level Flat Earth 0
H Debunked: Cadillac Mountain from 220 miles Flat Earth 7
Jesse3959 FE Claim Debunked: JTolan Epic Gravity Experiment - Flat earther disproves Perspective! (or his instruments.) Flat Earth 0
Mick West Debunked: DoD prepares for martial law in CONUS: Conspiracy Theories 0
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
A Debunked: NASA tampered with the original television audio of the Apollo 11 moon landing Conspiracy Theories 1
Greylandra Debunked: media headline "Judea declares war on Germany" [boycott] Conspiracy Theories 20
Mick West Discovery Channel's "Contact: Declassified Breakthrough" was debunked 2.5 years ago UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Joe Hill Debunked: "The North Face of Building 7 Was Pulled Inward" 9/11 66
A Debunked : Fake Set Moon Landing with TV Camera and Stairs Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Debunked: Photo with Sun Rays at Odd Angles Flat Earth 0
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
Mick West Debunked: Neil deGrasse Tyson : "That Stuff is Flat" Flat Earth 10
Mendel Debunked: Air Map of the World 1945 is a flat Earth map Flat Earth 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Trees being cut down "because they block 5G" (tree replacement in Belgium) 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 44
deirdre Debunked: Exemption from military service doc proves Jews had foreknowledge of WW2 (fake leaflet) General Discussion 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Obama called Michelle "Michael" in a speech. (Referring to Michael Mullen Jr) Quotes Debunked 0
Rory Debunked: 120-mile shot of San Jacinto proves flat earth Flat Earth 39
Rory Debunked: The Lunar Cycle affects birth rates Health and Quackery 26
Rory Debunked: Study shows link between menstrual cycle and the moon Health and Quackery 30
novatron Debunked: California Wildfires Match the Exactly Path of the Proposed Rail System Wildfires 3
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
W Debunked: Qanon claims there have been 51k sealed indictments filed this year. Current Events 11
K Debunked: Audio of David Rockefeller "leaked" speech in 1991 [Audio Simulation] General Discussion 2
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Mick West Debunked: XYO Device Replacing GPS, Saving $2 Million a Day General Discussion 23
Mick West Debunked: "Tip Top" as a QAnon Clue from Trump [He's said it before] Conspiracy Theories 3
Whitebeard Debunked: Nibiru FOUND? Mysterious gigantic rogue planet spotted lurking outside our solar system Science and Pseudoscience 1
Mick West Debunked: "There Exists a Shadowy Government" — Daniel Inouye Quotes Debunked 0
Mick West Debunked: Delta Lambda Compression General Discussion 16
MisterB Debunked: Isle of Man from Blackpool at water level proves flat earth [refraction] Flat Earth 19
JFDee Debunked: Wernher von Braun confirmed that rockets can't leave earth Conspiracy Theories 23
Mick West Debunked: Missing $21 Trillion / $6.5 Trillion / $2.3 Trillion - Journal Vouchers Conspiracy Theories 33
MikeG Debunked: Obamacare Article 54 (Satire FB Page) General Discussion 2
Mick West Debunked: "Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface:" [Stray Light] Contrails and Chemtrails 30
Astro Debunked: Apollo Lunar Module Hatch Too Small for Spacesuit Science and Pseudoscience 0
Mick West Debunked: NIST's Lack of Explanation for WTC7 Freefall [They Have One - Column Buckling] 9/11 38
Jedo Debunked: WTC7 was the only building not on the WTC block that had a fire on 9/11 9/11 0
Mick West Debunked: Thermite Slag on WTC beams [Oxy Cutting Slag] 9/11 2
Mick West Debunked: The WTC 9/11 Angle Cut Column. [Not Thermite, Cut Later] 9/11 137
Mick West Debunked: AE911Truth's Analysis of Slag Residue from WTC Debris 9/11 20
Dan Wilson Debunked: Steven Crowder: The AIDS epidemic was a hoax Health and Quackery 9
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top