Well, now there's a nice horizon to horizon contrail from http://www.flightradar24.com/ASA222/2999caa
Alaska AS222 SFO->PVR
(Darkness in the sky is due to using a polarizing filter on a very wide angle lens)
The weather here in Los Angeles today has a cloud layer that might be described as either "normal", or "HAARP clouds", depending on your disposition.
Contrail forecast (this is for 7AM today) does not indicate any contrails. Maybe later though.
sweet. the third pic must be one of those Slyphs I read about. he's even got little rainbow orbs. awesome ; )Well, now there's a nice horizon to horizon contrail from http://www.flightradar24.com/ASA222/2999caa
Alaska AS222 SFO->PVR
Same contrail.
(Darkness in the sky is due to using a polarizing filter on a very wide angle lens)
"Science's reasoning" ... "does not agree with the actual science" ????For many years people have noticed persistent contrails coming from jets and lingering in the sky for hours. Science’s reasoning for what we are seeing is that these are simply contrails, or condensation trails of jet exhaust. The problem with this explanation, leading to what the mainstream media has termed as the “chemtrail conspiracy theory,” is that it does not agree with the actual science of flight and weather.
Contrails are very short, last only a few plane lengths behind the aircraft, and only occur at altitudes above 30,000 feet. They are composed of ice crystals that dissipate quickly behind the plane. Chemical trails can happen at much lower altitudes, and now with the Plane Finder App for smart phones, many lay people have been documenting persistent trails at lower altitudes.
I can understand people in warm weather climates believing this since they have no experience with cold, but does this thought get passed in cold climate areas as well?It's very unfortunate that the myth "ice crystals that dissipate quickly behind the plane", that I addressed six years ago in my very first chemtrails debunking post, is still going strong. It's bunk by assertion, plain and simple.
Absolutely brilliant!! Complain they called the cops, then complain they sent one cop and then complain about the public expense of that one cop. Then complain about corporate censorship while posting on Facebook. That really is comedy gold ;-)
I was there and shot a lot of video of their march. I'll try to edit it down this week.@Steve, did you attend? Anything interesting transpire?
It was really frustrating trying to reach these people with the simple reason of why some contrails persist.
As soon as you get half way in to an explanation they jump in with a completely new claim like "what about the patterns" or "what about the test from scientist that shows high levels of barium in the water". They don't really want to know any explanation because they truly believe that they know the whole story.
Several of them came close to physically attacking me for shooting them threating to grab my camera and pull out the chip. The combination of their pure conceit over their misunderstanding about the science of contrails and their complete distrust in anything to do with the government makes these people a real threat to our culture.
I don't understand that. Isn't the purpose of marching to be seen? Why would they be upset that someone else was recording and possibly redistributing their attempts to spread their message. Is there something I'm missing? You would think that they would be happy to answer questions instead of trying to suppress a record of what they said and did.
Your right Mick, we need post cards or half sheets explaining basic facts to be used as hand-outs. They could be given to these activists and to the general public that these people are trying to reach with their nonsense. When I counter protest the Truthers I always hand out half sheets with the websites that debunk their claims to anyone that they are talking to. If you could put together a nice bullet point postcard size hand-out that we can print out and use at these demonstrations, it would be very helpful.
Personally I think a standard "Metabunk" handout an extremely bad idea. After the event it will just be used to prove Metabunk is a disinformation organisation rather than a bunch of independant posters.
disinformation organisation
"Contrail science is a troll site. Mick west is a software engineer and disinformation agent, not a scientist."
Bizarre. "Disinformation agent."
Mick west is a software engineer and disinformation agent, not a scientist."
I don't understand that. Isn't the purpose of marching to be seen? Why would they be upset that someone else was recording and possibly redistributing their attempts to spread their message. Is there something I'm missing? You would think that they would be happy to answer questions instead of trying to suppress a record of what they said and did.
How about a standard "Contrail Science" handout.
And the idea would be to encourage people to "look it up!" - not take the flyer at face value.
"But Mick, I AM in love with you and your band of marauding minions!"
Just basic facts like what causes persistence, why there are patterns, why the test showing high levels of Al are bunk and what the weight of a contrail can be. Most of the people these chemmies encounter have no idea what they are talking about, so a concise bullet point hand-out would give them some counter reference to these many misunderstood claims.
Me thinks the major issue is the distrust of government and anything that is institutionalized or funded by them . . . also including academia, major multi-national corporations, banking and international political interest groups CFR/Trilateral Commission/ UN and so forth . . . which also includes all things based exclusively on the scientific method . . . if it is not divisible by common sense, intuition, or pronounced OK by one of the acceptable ones . . . Alex Jones, Project Camelot, Jessie Ventura, FOX Network, etc . . . it is simply not reliable or to be believed because all conventional mainline sources such as NASA, NOAA, FAA, UN, ABC, CBC, NBC , CNN are controlled propaganda information outlets to control the Sheeple . . .While that may be a generally good idea, I think we need to understand that they have zero trust in anything contrailscience or metabunk claims. I wonder if it's at all possible to kind of show them how to validate claims, by looking at sources, fact-checking etc. Sometimes I feel what's needed is not so much factual knowledge, but the means to acquire and validate this knowledge - basic research skills, if you will.
Now, there are several things that will stand against this. One, the distrust they have for metabunk may extend to any scientific study which does not confirm their views. There's several ways to look at this, I guess, such as a pessimistic view as these people being too far down the rabbit hole, or a more optimist view of hoping that having these skills and studies out there could eventually give them reason to reconsider, and if not, well someone might find the skills and knowledge useful. Now, on to the second point, which concerns skills. Chemtrailers have, like it or not, their own set of skills, circular as they may be. They also have a conceived notion of what critical thinking is (mostly: which positions critical people have, not so much which skills.) What's needed is to show that these skills give them an advantage: the ability to verify for themselves the validity of claims. They often point to the need for critical thinking and waking up and looking for yourself, so it would make sense to show how the skills of fact-checking and research actually empower them to do things they pride themselves with.
To be honest, I have tried this sometimes. And while I have mostly not faced outright rejection, as opposed to full-on debunkers, I don't see much success. But maybe patience is a virtue here. It's at least not a confrontative style of debate, but an attempt to take serious the intents and views of the person and to empower them to critical thinking.