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

Hama Neggs said:
I think it would mean an eclipse every month, once, not 14 times per month.
Click to expand...
I think it would mean an eclipse, somewhere on earth, every day the moon is inboard of earth's solar orbit. Er, no. You're right. I'm off to collect my eyeballs. :)
 
upload_2014-3-9_13-40-45.png


https://www.facebook.com/pages/Look-Uporguk/1410029482561123
 
TEEJ said:
View attachment 6418

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Look-Uporguk/1410029482561123
Click to expand...

There's nothing between the sun and the moon, and yet half the moon is in shadow.

But where exactly is the sun in this image?
smokers_1280x720.mp4_20140303_181644_20140303_181647.jpg


Things appear dark not because they are not lit, but because they are darker than the background. Here the background is haze. The light comes from scattering from a volume of air that is a hundred miles deep. The contrails are thick enough to block most of this light, so most of the light we get from the contrails is that which is reflected off them (or more accurately, refracted and scattered by them). In this shot there is simply less reflected light than the light from the haze, so the contrails look darker.

Not very intuitive, unfortunately.
 
Last edited:
Hama Neggs said:
"Nothing between the sun and the plane"? That's just a wild guess, and would seem to be incorrect. Children aren't automatically right just because they are "innocent".
Click to expand...
that kid 'not being lead' is incredibly hard to believe. I can see an adult saying that (without thinking things through) but a child is a lot less likely. a child (missing the clouds, which is odd because clouds shadow our day sun on the ground all the time) would say 'how can it be in shadow if theres nothing between the sun and plane?'. at which point the adult would say 'there are clouds between the sun and plane and the kid would say 'oh yea'.

of course, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, so who knows.

and considering how dark the entire video is, a child would assume its a very cloudy day. you know, like it is when its that dark out.
 
Ian Simpson said:
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.
Click to expand...
Why does a coordinate jump not explain (most of) the effects you are seeing?

I strongly recommend reading the FR24 page called "How it works". Also bear in mind that FR24 uses data from volunteers who operate ADBS receivers and upload the data.

This is a very important point: the coverage is far from complete and the data quality is not guaranteed !

So the server software may be 100% error-free - if there is a gap or glitches in the data delivery, what will it do?

P.S. If you post the reply from FR24, make sure that you include your request as well. And please don't redact it.
 
Hama Neggs said:
"Nothing between the sun and the plane"? That's just a wild guess, and would seem to be incorrect. Children aren't automatically right just because they are "innocent".
Click to expand...
I posted something to that effect, and the anti-crepuscular ray page at atoptics.co.uk at Look Up.org's Facebook page, but it doesn't seem to have arrived. But I know he received it. I don't care so much about my contribution, but now it is evident that Ian Simpson deliberately conceals science to promote his views I am thinking of a less passive approach to this shyster.

I also filled out his "questionnaire", pointing out in the "anything-to-add?" that the questionnaire just on its own contained twenty-eight spelling mistakes. Actually there were twenty-seven, but, you know…. LOL :)
 
Last edited:
Wasn't this video recorded at local evening, and didn't someone post a satellite image showing high cloud west of the location where the video was recorded?
How does this kid know there is not high cloud shading the scene?
 
Ian himself has no idea what high level cloud was on the left hand side of the aircraft. How could the 8 year old?
 
M Bornong said:
I'm sure that MI5 is right now finding blank paper, inks, and binding materials that are properly aged to reprint these books, and place them on library shelves and Ebay, just to confuse Ian. ;);)
Click to expand...

Why not, they photoshop chemtrails into old movies?
jackScreenshot (1103).png
 
cloudspotter said:
I know he got the -57C figure from a balls up by the Met Office but where did he get 37000ft? o_O

He was shown this video some time back but must have forgotten about it
Click to expand...
I'm confused with the 'false altitude point'
is he saying the planes he sees ARE leaving contrails (at 37,000) but their altitude on fr24 is fake?
 
Ian's inventing ways to dismiss or uphold FR24 data, according to "if it fits" his argument. ie, the seemingly impossible feat of commercial airfcraft suddenly accelerating to warp speed and capable of travelling large distances without extra fuel is perfectly possible , whereas a difference of a few tens of thousands of feet altitude is obviously very questionable indeed, in his mind!
 
Mick West said:
No. He's saying they are leaving "chemtrails", at under 20,000 feet (his visual estimate), and are falsely reporting being at 37,000 feet.
Click to expand...

Um, this is patently absurd. It is an Air Traffic Control factor, firstly. To imagine the sort of "complicity" required is...well, it is just nonsense; dozens of Air Traffic Controllers, hundreds of pilots? The mind reels at even the mere suggestion of such a claim.

Makes me think to ask this: Has anyone ever heard of "LiveATC.net"?

http://www.liveatc.net/

You can enter various FIR codes, airport ICAO codes, and ARTCC codes (for the USA, I presume other high-altitude control sector equivalents in Europe and elsewhere will have codes, too. These can be found on the appropriate Aeronautical Charts).

For example, in Europe, here are some listings for Charles DeGaule (IATA code CDG, ICAO code LFPG):
http://www.liveatc.net/search/?icao=lfpg

When I looked, the feed status was flagged as 'DOWN'.

Searching around, I have found frequencies up and active for Amsterdam Schiphol (IATA code AMS, ICAO code EHAM):
http://www.liveatc.net/search/?icao=eham

For our airline pilots in Europe (or those that have WorldWide Jeppesen coverage) they may be able to assist further. I no longer have any of those needed Charts.
 
"Report it to CAA"? In Canada that would be the Canadian Automobile Association, the Canuck equiv of the AAA. They will arrange for towing disabled or stuck vehicles, battery boosts, etc., and offer hotel discounts to members.
Odd!
Shadowed contrails certainly is more plausible than the contortions lookup has to perform to get to its conclusions. One wonders what they would have made of an old 707 taking off, those dinosaur engines belching black.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/0541868/L/
 
So tptb are capable of modifying standard aircraft such that while the look enough like the standard design, they are capable of transonic or even hypersonic, flight. They are capable of masking their evil plans by manufacturing fake commercial flights with fake manifests. They are capable of co-opting the acquiescence of hundreds of ATC personnel who watch these aircraft perform feats of speed unknown to the general public, and operate a covert MI5 task force to combat internet warriors who stumble across these activities, yet they are unable to supply more mundane data to fr24 and mask their abilities from the general public.
 
I am disturbed by the claim by Ian that aircraft have been observed to be travellng much faster than published design limits. This is one aspect of Pilots for 911 Truth bunk concerning the flights that hit the WTC towers. It puts Ian in some very bad science company.
 
Last edited:
WeedWhacker said:
I wonder if the fact that all of these "theories" are not only mutually exclusive, but fly in the face of (pun intended) logic, reason, science and physics is even a factor, when the assertions are made?
Click to expand...
Not in 911 bunk, and quite obviously not for Lookup and other chemtrail adherents either.
 
jaydeehess said:
So tptb are capable of modifying standard aircraft such that while the look enough like the standard design, they are capable of transonic or even hypersonic, flight. They are capable of masking their evil plans by manufacturing fake commercial flights with fake manifests. They are capable of co-opting the acquiescence of hundreds of ATC personnel who watch these aircraft perform feats of speed unknown to the general public, and operate a covert MI5 task force to combat internet warriors who stumble across these activities, yet they are unable to supply more mundane data to fr24 and mask their abilities from the general public.
Click to expand...

Or make the chemtrail juice invisible.
 
JRBids said:
Or make the chemtrail juice invisible.
Click to expand...

Do you mean, when you refer to "chemtrail juice", the material that is allegedly being transported to airports (as would be physically necessary....IF such "chemtrail juice" actually existed, as it would need to be transported, somehow, to an airport, in order to be "loaded" onto airplanes);

Or, by "invisible" did you mean, once this (imaginary) "chemtrail juice" was "sprayed", that the effects should be "invisible"?

(Sorry for being overly rhetorical...I think we all already know the answers).

At the risk of sounding like a "broken record" in this thread, for any "Look-Up" members who (hopefully) are reading: When it comes to contrails, as commonly understood and scientifically defined for decades (they are merely a form of cirrus cloud), IF one wishes to assert otherwise, one must then find the science, and present the evidence, to validate such assertions that whatever "material" is claimed to be sprayed (and cited via photographs and videos as being "suspect") ... whatever this "material", as claimed, it must be also proven that such "material" would exactly match in appearance, color and behavior all other cirrus clouds, cirriform clouds, and contrails, as observed and documented for many decades.

Finally, a very simple fact: The burden of proof on a claim is incumbent upon the one making the claim...it is NOT the requirement of a person disputing a claim to "prove a negative". This is a fallacy called "Argument from Ignorance" (or, conversely "Appeal to Ignorance"):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

External Quote:
It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa).
EDIT: I understand that the "claim" was of contrails appearing to be "smoke", per the Opening Post of this thread. Seems this has been explained well, already, as a result of lighting and shadow.

So, to repeat to any "Look-Up" members, please feel free to comment, and provide evidence to the contrary.
 
Last edited:
My comment referred to making the them chemtrails invisible. Since tptb are experts in hiding every other aspect of the operation, why do they fail miserably at the final step. The one you just have to LOOK UP to see?
 
TEEJ said:
Ian Simpson still standing by his 'Smokers' video.
View attachment 7702
Click to expand...

Hmmmm....I do not know what else to say, but "Hmmmm".

I mean, if ONLY Mick West's name is mentioned, and not MINE?! Well, I am shocked, and a little bit insulted.

(Signed....Tim Duggan).

EDIT...it's pronounced "Dooogan" (please add the Scottish brogue, if you wish)....not "Dug In". I know, many in the land of Eire will take issue, but that's the family....eh? What can we do??

(Or, an Ellis Island mistake....hmmmmm).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TEEJ
Claimed "UFO" filmed from airliner over Turkey, 21st March 2018 [Passing Contrail at 90°]
Replies
9
Views
13K
JMartJr
JMartJr
deirdre
Debunked: Look-up.org.uk's Chemtrail "Missing Link" [hybrid contrails]
Replies
16
Views
11K
Mick West
Mick West
Trailspotter
Explained: Dark contrails behind bright planes
Replies
10
Views
17K
derwoodii
derwoodii
Trailblazer
Debunked: Look-up.org.uk's claims of aerial spraying over London on April 12 2015
Replies
21
Views
12K
Trailspotter
Trailspotter
TWCobra
EasyJet 737 incident debunks Pilot for 9/11 truth V-G diagram video
7 8 9
Replies
325
Views
139K
Mick West
Mick West

Latest posts

Trending content

Back
Top