Deciphering what I once saw, and what I now see

Cloudsorchems said:
Interesting point, but it is not so simple due to the entanglement of ideas, memories, beliefs, emotions, etc. It comes down to : 1) past sky appears in memory and personal photos to be a certain way. 2) Present sky appears to have changed in quality and form due to aircraft contrails. 3) If aircraft contrails have existed as long as planes have, why the change?
I have no belief in chemtrails at the moment. What I do believe is that there has been a change in present sky conditions. Chemtrail believers are asserting the change is caused by sprayed aerosols. Contrail science claims there has been little to no sky change, or the change is caused by an increase in aircraft.
Click to expand...

This is interesting (for me) as I recently got stumped in another debate by someone who conveyed the idea that his creative mind determines his "truth" even if it does deny science and facts.

ETA for clarity; Your truth in this respect being that you claim there is a case for chemtrails to be disproved.
 
Last edited:
Cloudsorchems said:
Have not contacted anyone, as I am just beginning to research this subject.

Yes, it is odd that I did not notice or photograph contrails in the late 90's and the first decade of 2000, while others did. I don't have an explanation for it.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should focus on finding an explanation. It seems to be a pivotal point.

P.S. Please try to correctly quote a post. It makes it much easier to follow a thread. Some simple instructions can be found here:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/how-to-quote-another-post-using-quote-tags.2561/
 
I too flinch a bit at what seems to me an opening position of, essentially: "Well, it seems to me..." when it's clear that no
special attention was ever paid in the past...but that that hunch (or recently viewed internet sites) have led to, essentially:
"Well, therefore there's likely something to it (the claim of 'chemtrails')." :confused:
 
Regarding the old books in Mick's videos, I have a question : can a lot of people in the USA use interlibrary loan services, like the one described here ?
http://www.nypl.org/help/research-services/interlibrary-loan

I use a lot the french system (the SUDOC), which allows me access to documents in every university library in France. However, I'm not sure if it is as easy to use in the USA. But if it is, it would be easier for people who want to check, than searching for an used copy and buying it.
 
LouV said:
Regarding the old books in Mick's videos, I have a question : can a lot of people in the USA use interlibrary loan services, like the one described here ?
http://www.nypl.org/help/research-services/interlibrary-loan

I use a lot the french system (the SUDOC), which allows me access to documents in every university library in France. However, I'm not sure if it is as easy to use in the USA. But if it is, it would be easier for people who want to check, than searching for an used copy and buying it.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think pretty much all the public libraries can use the system, even fairly small ones. e.g. Shasta (although possible $3 fee applies here):
http://www.shastalibraries.org/spl/index.php?ref=HowDoI/RequestILL

Example book search finds Clouds of the World 81 miles away, which would be free:
http://www.california.worldcat.org/...ncyclopedia/oclc/278315&referer=brief_results
 
I know this is from Contrail science so you might decide it is produced by Government shills (lol) but this page is a very good visual example of the increase in air traffic over the last 30 years or so.. http://contrailscience.com/30-years-of-airline-travel/.

that suggests to me that it is very likely the increase in contrails and whiteouts is due to the increase in air traffic. I live in Bristol, UK and there are loads of corridors that go near enough over head (traffic from London or other European countries to and from North America, traffic from various places up to Scotland etc) that I often see several planes making trails at once. I am sensible enough 9and interested enough in aircraft) that I don't call this "flying in formation like some chemtrailers do.
THAT's flying in formation.
 
(**)P.P.S.: Anecdotal -- some Flight Attendants that I used to work with (when I was a pilot for a major U.S.-based airline) would jokingly refer to the term "crop dusting" when they happened to walk down the aisle between seats, in the cabin, and let out a fart. So, that could also, in a very loose sense (pun), be considered a "chem"trail too. ;)[/QUOTE]

Not sure whether to laugh my guts out, or take offense that the colloquial moniker for my chosen profession has been co opted for such vile behavior. Ok, decided to laugh.
 
So you are an actual real cropduster?
Do you ever get tired of telling chemtrail believers that 27,000+ feet is a hopelessly inefficient way to spray anything?

How high do YOU fly over the fields you dust? 50 feet?
 
Fifty feet is where he probably turns, ok a wee bit higher. You would need to kiss the ground when he did a pass over your head...as he is trying to mow the grass...with his prop and tires.
 
I remember right after 9/11, a lot of people I know and a lot of people on television were talking about how noticeable the change in the sky was with most planes grounded.

Non anecdotal version: the few days after 9/11 with so little air traffic (at one point there were only 6 planes in the sky anywhere in the lower 48, Air Force One and five escorts) offered an opportunity to study contrails in a way that had never been possible with modern instruments - their absence was unheard of, and the isolation of those six was also something never seen before or since. More than a few climatologists put other projects on hold to take that chance. Just one example:
http://www-pm.larc.nasa.gov/sass/pub/conference/Minnis.abs.ARAMS.02.pdf

Which also references earlier studies of contrails throughout the 90's and back into the late 80's. He did later studies (I can no longer find the full text of his 2004 paper, only a reference to it from a 2006 episode of Nova) where he tracked contrail coverage over the US as far back as 1971, and even in the 70's contrails created significant extra cirrus cloud coverage.
 
Efftup said:
So you are an actual real cropduster?
Do you ever get tired of telling chemtrail believers that 27,000+ feet is a hopelessly inefficient way to spray anything?

How high do YOU fly over the fields you dust? 50 feet?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing this is addressed to me, and yes, I am. No, I do not tire of telling that to 'chemtrail' believers. I actually enjoy telling them that it is ridiculous when they say that they can smell 'chemtrails' within minutes or hours of seeing one pass overhead, when it will take several days, or even more than a week, for any particles dispersed at that altitude to reach the ground. They would also be several hundred (even thousands) of miles away, given that winds aloft often regularly reach 50+ knots. Not to mention that payload capacity is insufficient in any airliner to carry out what they believe to be 'chemtrails'.

As to altitudes, I try to keep the tires 4-6 feet off the top of the crop canopy for spraying liquid. Higher than that, drift risk increases greatly, so most guys keep it on the lower end. As pseacraft said, if you are average height and were standing in the field with a low canopy crop, the prop or tires would hit you square in the head. Guys that do dry fertilizer work are doing that at around 25 feet, as that is by design for better pattern development and product deposition. Turns, peak probably around 300 feet (it can vary, but generally). Ferry about 500.
 
Agav8r said:
I actually enjoy telling them that it is ridiculous when they say that they can smell 'chemtrails' within minutes or hours of seeing one pass overhead, when it will take several days, or even more than a week, for any particles dispersed at that altitude to reach the ground. They would also be several hundred (even thousands) of miles away, given that winds aloft often regularly reach 50+ knots. Not to mention that payload capacity is insufficient in any airliner to carry out what they believe to be 'chemtrails'.
Click to expand...

Howdy! Yes, yes and yes to ALL of the above ( and yes, I had the Flight Attendant aisle story...all true. :D ).

On the mention of your post snippet above, I was reminded of two videos that are relevant, that you may wish to use:


This discusses dispersion concentration at altitude, and also payloads limits, with just one specific example (The Embraer 135)...


Then, this is shorter, but right on target RE: winds aloft (among other things):
 
Agav8r said:
As pseacraft said, if you are average height and were standing in the field with a low canopy crop, the prop or tires would hit you square in the head.
Click to expand...

Also....this veers OT, but as a fellow pilot, I can't but think you will enjoy this immensely:



("Boys will be Boys").....
 
WeedWhacker said:
Also....this veers OT, but as a fellow pilot, I can't but think you will enjoy this immensely:



("Boys will be Boys").....
Click to expand...


I've seen the first two above before, will now bookmark them for future use, thanks. As to the last one, I have also seen it too. Serious stones, both of them. When that pilot is done with his military service, he could have a bright future ahead of him flying ag, if he can slow it down, oh, about 40 or 50 kts :cool:. He'll have to learn to get lower, though.;)

The guy on the ground could have had a great career as a flagger, if GPS had never come online. BTW, do you know, was that a Harrier? Couldn't pause well enough to get a good look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
What Did I Film, Looking East from Norway?
Replies
7
Views
760
jtorp
J
C
Clouds and The Rain Gods
Replies
4
Views
589
CameronNguye
CameronNguye
M
orb filmed in the daytime
Replies
14
Views
2K
manxmac
M
S
How to ask a conspiracy theorist to prove chem trails exist?
Replies
7
Views
2K
Todd Feinman
Todd Feinman
Mick West
Emails From a Pilot Regarding Starlink and Other Objects
Replies
3
Views
898
Leekster
Leekster

Latest posts

Back
Top