deirdre
Senior Member.
wait til the chemmies see it. looks like the trail is floating down on all the countries
Pre 1995 Persistent Contrail Archive
- Thread starter Mick West
- Start date
A magazine cover from 1973:
The new contrail is mentioned on the contents page, but there look to be several other aged ones there too:
Source: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...Nsyd7ga1pYjIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=true
The new contrail is mentioned on the contents page, but there look to be several other aged ones there too:
Source: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...Nsyd7ga1pYjIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=true
The aftermath of the Loma Prieta earthquake in 1989, showing downtown Santa Cruz.
Leifer
Senior Member.
In a new YouTube video, this person makes the claim that in an episode of "The Outer Limits", this episode shows "chemtrail conditioning" or "changes" the experimental jet (rocket)trails from scene-to-scene, thereby showing other (?) "chemtrail conditioning" even during the early 1960's.
I replied, and proposed that the editors of the episode simply used whatever available "stock footage" was available, and that some of the footage had trails, and the other footage did not........and that this is a common but un-ideal technique (when inserting stock footage into a TV or film plot)....and that even though the footage does not "match" the other one, it does not necessarily need to be technically accurate. This is/was how stock (real) footage is often used in "Hollywood".
(linkable info)
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--kBRbDtKl--
/wcluubo0icras2wxwutm.jpg
I replied, and proposed that the editors of the episode simply used whatever available "stock footage" was available, and that some of the footage had trails, and the other footage did not........and that this is a common but un-ideal technique (when inserting stock footage into a TV or film plot)....and that even though the footage does not "match" the other one, it does not necessarily need to be technically accurate. This is/was how stock (real) footage is often used in "Hollywood".
(linkable info)
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--kBRbDtKl--
/wcluubo0icras2wxwutm.jpg
Last edited:
Not pre 1995, but from 1995, in the music video to "This is Music" by The Verve. Persistent contrails forming an X over the Trellick Tower in west London:
The trails are visible in the first 5 seconds, but out of focus, and appear to jump across the sky in segments filmed at different times.
Then they are visible again at the end:
And there are more at 0:23.
The trails are visible in the first 5 seconds, but out of focus, and appear to jump across the sky in segments filmed at different times.
Then they are visible again at the end:
And there are more at 0:23.
World Trade Center from Staten Island Ferry, November 1973.
Critical Thinker
Senior Member.
It is always most interesting when a chemtrail conspiracy believer actually looks into whether there were images of long lasting contrails captured in pictures/films in to order to produce evidence that the images of the long lasting contrails had been edited into older footage.... and when they do find that the original footage (in this case from 1973) had captured long lasting contrails, it doesn't make them question their chemtrail conspiracy beliefs.
Z.W. Wolf
Senior Member.
This documentary is from the early '60's. It's full of persistant contrails. Why are they simultaneously doing a speed run and spraying chemtrails over a remote area, poisoning only their own people... and then show it as part of a commercial for this plane?
This specific flight won the Thomson Trophy in 1961.
More to the point, since those shots could have been taken anywhere, anytime... This shows that persistent contrails were something normal and unsurprising. They're so normal that they aren't even mentioned. Which means people at the time knew all about them.
This specific flight won the Thomson Trophy in 1961.
More to the point, since those shots could have been taken anywhere, anytime... This shows that persistent contrails were something normal and unsurprising. They're so normal that they aren't even mentioned. Which means people at the time knew all about them.
Last edited:
Z.W. Wolf
Senior Member.
Re: The Outer Limits Episode.
[...] At 2:35 the author of the video points out that the main engine is "clear" but "this hose is spraying." That "hose" is the exhaust of one of two generators.
Many unique systems and subsystems had to be developed to meet a host of new power requirements and functions. The auxiliary-power requirements, in particular, were severe, for not only is there large demand for hydraulic and electrical power but the aerodynamic controls will not function without hydraulic power. Therefore, dualization is used in critical components, from fuel tanks to hydraulic actuators. The hydraulic pump and electrical generator are driven by a 50 000-rpm, high-temperature steam turbine, which operates on hydrogen peroxide. The hydrogen-peroxide tanks supply the reaction-jet control system.
She also points out that the engines of the "bigger plane" aren't leaving a white trail, while the "rocket type of jet" is leaving a trail.
The B-52 has jet engines burning kerosene. The X-15 engine is a rocket engine burning anhydrous ammonia (NH3) and liquefied oxygen. So it's not too surprising that a contrail is forming with a reaction that produces more water.
In addition, rocket engines can form vapor trails from acoustic shock:
...this also results in contrail or a vapor trail as the ionized air forming due to acoustic shock (supersonic exhaust velocity) and temperature difference draws in more atmospheric moisture that evaporates or even disassociates on contact with high temperature exhaust products. Rockets whose main engine exhaust product is water (such as STS Space Shuttle launch vehicle that used cryogenic liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, or LH2/LOX for short) will of course produce much more vapor.
[Admin: Edited for Politeness]
[...] At 2:35 the author of the video points out that the main engine is "clear" but "this hose is spraying." That "hose" is the exhaust of one of two generators.
Many unique systems and subsystems had to be developed to meet a host of new power requirements and functions. The auxiliary-power requirements, in particular, were severe, for not only is there large demand for hydraulic and electrical power but the aerodynamic controls will not function without hydraulic power. Therefore, dualization is used in critical components, from fuel tanks to hydraulic actuators. The hydraulic pump and electrical generator are driven by a 50 000-rpm, high-temperature steam turbine, which operates on hydrogen peroxide. The hydrogen-peroxide tanks supply the reaction-jet control system.
She also points out that the engines of the "bigger plane" aren't leaving a white trail, while the "rocket type of jet" is leaving a trail.
The B-52 has jet engines burning kerosene. The X-15 engine is a rocket engine burning anhydrous ammonia (NH3) and liquefied oxygen. So it's not too surprising that a contrail is forming with a reaction that produces more water.
In addition, rocket engines can form vapor trails from acoustic shock:
...this also results in contrail or a vapor trail as the ionized air forming due to acoustic shock (supersonic exhaust velocity) and temperature difference draws in more atmospheric moisture that evaporates or even disassociates on contact with high temperature exhaust products. Rockets whose main engine exhaust product is water (such as STS Space Shuttle launch vehicle that used cryogenic liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen, or LH2/LOX for short) will of course produce much more vapor.
[Admin: Edited for Politeness]
Last edited by a moderator:
Trailspotter
Senior Member.
I have never heard about ammonia (NH3) being used in a rocket fuel. I think it was a chemically related compound, hydrazine (N2H4), or its methylated derivatives, monomethylhydrazine, (CH3)NH(NH2) (also known as MMH), and unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine, (CH3)2N(NH2) (also known as UDMH), which were/are commonly used as propellants. However, the reactions of these compounds with oxygen do not produce more water than burning hydrocarbons.
EDIT: It may well be that the rocket engine did produce more water because it burnt more fuel per unit of time than the aircraft engines.
Last edited:
Z.W. Wolf
Senior Member.
All the references I can find identify the fuel as anhydrous ammonia. I accept your correction that this reaction wouldn't produce more water per volume.
I have to correct myself. There was only one generator and neither one of the things on the sides of the main engine are the exhaust for the generator. The "hose" the video author points to is the liquid oxygen jettison, and its twin on the other side is the ammonia jettison. The gas generator exhaust is closer to the main engine. The generator is producing water.
http://www.sierrafoot.org/x-15/aft_view_large.html
Lurking behind the XLR-99 is the turbopump and a maze of assorted devices and plumbing. One of the devices is a gas generator, which is the X-15's breed of catalytic converter. When you feed 90% hydrogen peroxide into it, the H2O2 decomposes into superheated steam and oxygen on its catalyst beds. The resulting gases drive the centrifugal turbine in the turbopump, which then drives separate compressors for the ammonia and LOX.
I have to correct myself. There was only one generator and neither one of the things on the sides of the main engine are the exhaust for the generator. The "hose" the video author points to is the liquid oxygen jettison, and its twin on the other side is the ammonia jettison. The gas generator exhaust is closer to the main engine. The generator is producing water.
http://www.sierrafoot.org/x-15/aft_view_large.html
Lurking behind the XLR-99 is the turbopump and a maze of assorted devices and plumbing. One of the devices is a gas generator, which is the X-15's breed of catalytic converter. When you feed 90% hydrogen peroxide into it, the H2O2 decomposes into superheated steam and oxygen on its catalyst beds. The resulting gases drive the centrifugal turbine in the turbopump, which then drives separate compressors for the ammonia and LOX.
Trailspotter
Senior Member.
Agree. It appears that, although ammonia, upon combining with oxygen, releases less energy than other fuels, it nevertheless has its own advantages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonia#As_a_fuel
Not as powerful as other fuels means they needed to burn more of it per second resulting in more water in the exhaust.External Quote:
Last edited:
Z.W. Wolf
Senior Member.
The liquid oxygen jettison was always venting because the LOX was constantly boiling off. Little to no insulation on the LOX tank because every bit of weight was precious. The LOX had to be topped off from a tank on the B-52 just before release.
At 4:02 the author points out a strange line in the contrail behind the X-15.
In the comments section:
Harold Saive - The diagonal gap in the X-1 trail appears to be an error in editing where an extended trail was "photoshopped" to the original trail to make the plume larger.
-Did Photoshop exist in 1965?
-Could the most powerful supercomputer in the world in 1965 run a program like Photoshop?
-What digital video format existed in 1965? How would you transfer images from each frame of film into a digital format and then transfer the altered digital image back onto film?
What they are talking about is the shadow of the B-52 on the X-15 contrail. I think it's the shadow of the right wing.
At 4:02 the author points out a strange line in the contrail behind the X-15.
In the comments section:
Harold Saive - The diagonal gap in the X-1 trail appears to be an error in editing where an extended trail was "photoshopped" to the original trail to make the plume larger.
-Did Photoshop exist in 1965?
-Could the most powerful supercomputer in the world in 1965 run a program like Photoshop?
-What digital video format existed in 1965? How would you transfer images from each frame of film into a digital format and then transfer the altered digital image back onto film?
What they are talking about is the shadow of the B-52 on the X-15 contrail. I think it's the shadow of the right wing.
Agreed, you can follow the shadow right the way through the sequence from the separation:
Lisa P
Senior Member
Is this an official Vatican coin or has some random person made it?
Antarctica is in an odd place and I can find no reference on any official Vatican sites regarding the coin.
keefe
Active Member
The CTer's are already onto that one
External Quote:
Lisa P
Senior Member
I cannot find a link to an official site it seems to me that a random person made a coin or it may not even exist.
I think it is a hoax.
External Quote:
Last edited:
deirdre
Senior Member.
its a real coin. design by guido veroi. couldnt find specific info on what the design represents and the artist is deceased now.
i think the plane and world represents the Popes travels, which was a big deal then.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pastoral_visits_of_Pope_John_Paul_II_outside_ItalyExternal Quote:
this is the 1,000 lire coin, from the same year and the pic i think it represents
Lisa P
Senior Member
Can you find any official links to the coin or the artist? I can't find anything and it isn't mentioned on Wikipedia https://translate.google.com.au/tra...it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guido_Veroi&prev=search
deirdre
Senior Member.
coin sellers and coin books only. i didnt save my coin book links (gotta use "Google books")
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/VATICAN-C...281?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item565f404269
http://www.gcoins.net/en/catalog/view/45523#.Vfd3mhFViko
https://books.google.com/books?id=-...Y-Ch1Nwglt#v=onepage&q= 1985 100 lire&f=false
Lisa P
Senior Member
Still not proof enough for me, I am about to buy one on ebay just waiting for the seller to advise the postage. There is no official information anywhere about that coin. I am a coin collector anyway so don't mind paying to see it with mine own eyes! The stamp of Veroi is on the pope side of the coin and is exactly the same as the 10 lire for 1985 so not sure if that means he only designed the pope side. I am very wary that it is real, happy to prove myself wrong tho.
*ok 3 different reliable sources, looks like I am wrong. Sorry didn't click on the links til after I commented.
*ok 3 different reliable sources, looks like I am wrong. Sorry didn't click on the links til after I commented.
deirdre
Senior Member.
yea. theres alot of coins in the world
i imagine only a very small percent have 'official statements' about the designs. But i'm not a coin collector so who knows.there are forums of "coin people" ..i link one on my "UFO coin" thread...maybe if you try some of those type forums you'd be able to find more info.
I wasnt really interested since ( i think the design matches what was happening in Vatican City at the time) and according to the chemmies, it cant be a chemtrail because of noone remembers there being chemtrails when they were young.
Spectrar Ghost
Senior Member
No way to tell about persistence from the footage, but I thought this might be useful as a Russian turboprop contrailing in 1967.
Perhaps some contrails here in 1986; certainly lots of "suspicious" cirrus.
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/61631236
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/61631236
More from the fertile ground of Flickr. Apologies for any repeats.
1985, Alberta.
https://flic.kr/p/4rvqUC
1980, Kansas.
https://flic.kr/p/4zNe6e
1980, Scotland.
https://flic.kr/p/FUNFV
1981, unknown location.
https://flic.kr/p/FUNG2
1978, Alaska.
https://flic.kr/p/9pRCUx
1982, Germany.
https://flic.kr/p/3oGj5h
1977, England.
https://flic.kr/p/geGjxt
1970, Greece.
https://flic.kr/p/6gFTpq
1985, Wyoming.
https://flic.kr/p/6CYxdq
1984, Indiana.
https://flic.kr/p/eA7MC1
1973, California.
https://flic.kr/p/6KD5kR
1986, in flight over Europe.
https://flic.kr/p/qEs6Qs
1986, in flight over Florida.
https://flic.kr/p/pxNRyG
1990, from the Space Shuttle over the Mediterranean.
https://flic.kr/p/fjzCpX
And three from 1945, in Germany:
https://flic.kr/p/dT6Pou
https://flic.kr/p/dT12V6
https://flic.kr/p/dYfuHT
1985, Alberta.
https://flic.kr/p/4rvqUC
1980, Kansas.
https://flic.kr/p/4zNe6e
1980, Scotland.
https://flic.kr/p/FUNFV
1981, unknown location.
https://flic.kr/p/FUNG2
1978, Alaska.
https://flic.kr/p/9pRCUx
1982, Germany.
https://flic.kr/p/3oGj5h
1977, England.
https://flic.kr/p/geGjxt
1970, Greece.
https://flic.kr/p/6gFTpq
1985, Wyoming.
https://flic.kr/p/6CYxdq
1984, Indiana.
https://flic.kr/p/eA7MC1
1973, California.
https://flic.kr/p/6KD5kR
1986, in flight over Europe.
https://flic.kr/p/qEs6Qs
1986, in flight over Florida.
https://flic.kr/p/pxNRyG
1990, from the Space Shuttle over the Mediterranean.
https://flic.kr/p/fjzCpX
And three from 1945, in Germany:
https://flic.kr/p/dT6Pou
https://flic.kr/p/dT12V6
https://flic.kr/p/dYfuHT
Last edited:
Also from Germany in the war, I don't know if these are contrails or smoke trails, though.
More wartime contrails, this time over Yugoslavia in 1945:
SR1419
Senior Member.
Interesting that the higher planes have no contrails whilst the lower ones are leaving substantial ones.
It's hard to tell but I think they may be aerodynamic contrails?
Carla R.
Member
Play Misty for Me, 1971
Persistent contrail on opening titles.
Clip - opening titles is here
«Play Misty for Me is a 1971 American psychological thriller film, directed by and starring Clint Eastwood, in his directorial debut. Jessica Walter and Donna Mills co-star.»
Wikipedia
«Technical Specifications
Runtime: 1 hr 42 min (102 min) ...
Sound Mix: Mono (Westrex Recording System)
Color: Color (Technicolor)
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Camera: Panavision Cameras and Lenses
Laboratory: Technicolor, Hollywood (CA), USA
Negative Format: 35 mm
Cinematographic Process: Spherical
Printed Film Format: 35 mm»
imdb
Full movie: here
Persistent contrail on opening titles.
Clip - opening titles is here
«Play Misty for Me is a 1971 American psychological thriller film, directed by and starring Clint Eastwood, in his directorial debut. Jessica Walter and Donna Mills co-star.»
Wikipedia
«Technical Specifications
Runtime: 1 hr 42 min (102 min) ...
Sound Mix: Mono (Westrex Recording System)
Color: Color (Technicolor)
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Camera: Panavision Cameras and Lenses
Laboratory: Technicolor, Hollywood (CA), USA
Negative Format: 35 mm
Cinematographic Process: Spherical
Printed Film Format: 35 mm»
imdb
Full movie: here
Last edited:
Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989) was on TV tonight. I switched on partway through and noticed a long persistent contrail about 25 minutes from the end. If anyone has the DVD I think it was visible just after the police station escape scene.
Auldy
Senior Member.
FYI its definitely on netflix, I watched it (for the first time!) last weekend. 5 out of 10.
Marin B
Senior Member
When I was first told about chemtrails about 2 years ago I was told that they are recent (past 10-15 years). Now the same person tells me that "they" have been spraying us for over 50 years. It looks like that this revised history of chemtrails is coming from geoengineeringwatch.org, which says "
" I don't recall seeing this claim before when I first started looking into this. Is it relatively new, perhaps in response to information on this site?External Quote:
Spectrar Ghost
Senior Member
5/10? Really?
It's like you think the eighties should stay dead...
Bogus Journey is better anyway.
TWCobra
Senior Member.
Dane Wigington from GEW does not differentiate between cloud seeding and Geo-Engineering, so from his point of view he is correct. Cloud Seeding, (Weather Modification) has indeed been going on since the 40's.
It is a common fallacy, perhaps the most prevalent one, that chemtrail believers indulge in.
Auldy
Senior Member.
I'm must be broken
I watched Blazing Saddles for the first time recently too, wasn't impressed. And unless there was contrails flying out of butts during the beans scene, then we're straying OT 
deirdre
Senior Member.
i hope youre happy. you just made me watch Napolean go down the water slides
didnt see anything after the jail scene cept cumulous. before the water slide are some linears but they could just be regular clouds.Attachments
It has not aged well. Or I haven't. One of the two.
@deirdre That wasn't it.
I found a low-quality version on YouTube and I couldn't find it. I could have sworn it was at around the 1:23:40 mark but there's nothing there. Weird!
And @Auldy - to drag this back on topic, there are contrails in Blazing Saddles: http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0071230/goofs
The only possibles I could find though were in the quicksand scene, at top right here (contrast enhanced).External Quote:
Might be just a cloud though.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Sticky
