Vindog's Contrail Questions [Contrails Near Boston]

[Efftup]

Those are interesting dimensions. Converting it to metric it works out at around 1.35 x 10 to the 12 power cubic metres. You told me to do the math before. Well, do some as well and figure out how much that trail weighs at even 0.1 grams per cubic metre

It weighs 135 million kg. Which is another interesting point.
The Largest plane in the world, the Antonov AN225 Mriya has a Maximum Take off weight (including the plane itself and fuel )of 640 tonnes or 640,000kg.


Now even at this very silly tiny weight of 0.1 GRAMS per cubic metre, the trail weighs 210 times the Maximum take off weight off the largest aircraft in the world. So how is this possible to carry this trail in the aircraft?

it doesn't matter whether you claim it is "nano" particles of whatever you think is sprayed or whether you think the spray is in the fuel or in a tank.
It clearly can not possibly fit inside the aircraft. This alone should show that the whole chemtrail thing is a myth.

The only possible source for MOST of the material in the trail is that it was already in the air in the first place.

 

[Ross Marsden]

Also, those sounding data do not provide accurate humidity readings at contrail altitude. The humidity sensors basically freeze up and stop working. All in all, they are not very useful for determining ice-supersaturation.

Well, actually the sensor keeps working and there is a "dry bias" meaning that the RH is a reported tad low ... 10s of %. This does not make the data useless. There are (crude) corrections that can be made, and the result is a useful depiction approximating the truth. Admittedly, the margin of error is unknown (to me at least).

 

[Mick West]

Well, actually the sensor keeps working and there is a "dry bias" meaning that the RH is a reported tad low ... 10s of %. This does not make the data useless. There are (crude) corrections that can be made, and the result is a useful depiction approximating the truth. Admittedly, the margin of error is unknown (to me at least).

Actually in many cases the sensors DO stop working. See:
http://www.eol.ucar.edu/homes/junhong/paper/Refsonde-GRL.pdf

Via discussion at:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/ac...midity-soundings-for-contrail-prediction.758/

 

[Peter]

Hi everyone, and especially Vindog who has the courage to enter the devils' den, so to speak, and actually debate Chemtrails. This is a trait that's pretty rare among chemtrail believers, in my experience anyway. In my adventures in youtube comments, the replies have so far mostly consisted of calling me a paid government shill (the default canard thrown at anyone who doesn't immediately believe in chemtrails, it seems) and a lot lot worse.

Anyway.. I just wanted to ask Vindog a few questions, and hopefully he'll still find the time to provide a reply.

1- Describe what a contrail is. How does it form, what circumstances are involved? You've hinted that you do believe that contrails can sometimes persist, so under what circumstances would that happen, and how often do you think these circumstances occur?

2- I think you know what a cirrus cloud is. Still just some questions, so we can arrive at my point. What is a cirrus cloud, at what altitudes do we find them, and what do they consist of?

3- And finally, in what way is a cirrus cloud different from a persisitent contrail?

And just to help you out a bit, I'd like to provide a couple of youtube clips.

First a clip of someone spraying hot water in freezing air (-42C). What you see happening in the clip is how the water freezes almost instantly and becomes an ice cloud of sorts.



Now imagine a jet taking of in the same circumstances. It's jet engines produce mainly H2O and CO2 as they burn fuel (1.3 litres of water per 1 litre of fuel, apprx). In effect those jet engines are spraying hot water vapor, not unlike the gun in the previous clip. So if the circumstances are similar to what you just saw in the previous clip, what do you think happens?

have a look here. This a a jet taking off in -45C:



See any similarity?

Now if you realize that the temperature at 30.000 ft alt is usually around -50C (or lower) then it shouldn't be a surprise that we see the phenomenae we've seen in those clips happen quite regularly. There's more involved than just low temperatures though.. things like relative humidity and whatnot, but at least this gives an idea of what persistent contrails are.

of course there's a lot more to answer.. stuff like all the patterns you've shown in the pictures you've posted, but I think some pretty good explanations for those have been provided here and in other places on this site already. But if you still have questions, feel free to ask

btw in my eagerness to explain I seem to have answered above questions for the most part already.. but still, give it a go

 

[Vindog]

This question is really central to the whole thing, and while you may have "gone over" it, I don't think you've given a clear answer to it. I can't imagine why you would take the time to type 3 sentences explaining that you refuse to answer it, instead of just answering it in one.

Because, you already know the answer to the question. Its the reason this webpage even exists to begin with. stop playing dumb

 

[Mick West]

Vindog has been banned for two days for the above post.

 

[Vindog]

Vindog, you seem to be ignoring when people actually give you explanations for the things you post. Can you at least acknowledge the explanations for the photos you posted above, and discuss how your opinion is changed by the new information you have received about them?

Unless you actually address the things being discussed, you will not be allowed to post again. It's your call.

I havent had the time yet to go over all the infomation that was posted about the pictures i posted (we are talking about when i posted the 5 or 6 pics right?)
Im just trying to keep up with the, what, 5 different conversations im having?

 

[Mick West]

I havent had the time yet to go over all the infomation that was posted about the pictures i posted (we are talking about when i posted the 5 or 6 pics right?)
Im just trying to keep up with the, what, 5 different conversations im having?

Well now you've got two days. That should be plenty of time to catch up.

 

[Mick West]

And apologies especially to @Peter for cutting things off. But the universe will not change on jot in two day - and hopefully a little focus can be achieved.

 

[Peter]

Ok wel I hope Vindog will take the time to address the info that's been posted so far then.. And yes some focus would be nice.. Maybe this is bound to happen when there are quite a few chemtrail skeptics here, and just one chemtrail believer. I guess we all sortof jumped on him.

 

[Joe]

Ok wel I hope Vindog will take the time to address the info that's been posted so far then.. And yes some focus would be nice.. Maybe this is bound to happen when there are quite a few chemtrail skeptics here, and just one chemtrail believer. I guess we all sortof jumped on him.

Thats what everyone does around here . Dogpile

 

[Efftup]

This is an ad hominem attack. Attack his evidence, and not his character. And on another note, am I supposed to ignore everything a news source says because they have sponsors? if thats the case than we should just stop watching Cnn, NBC, ABC, FOX, PBS, all because they have sponsors? bullshit.

Actually it was simply an example of who actually gains financially from what they are doing. but spreading any and every theory that comes along to feed people to a site you are directly selling from (selling products to mitigate the effects of the terrors they are warning you about) seems like a scam to me. If it doesn't seem like a scam to you, I have a bridge I can sell you as well as a timeshare apartment and some mineral rights.

Alex Jones' evidence has pretty much ALL been refuted and debunked countless times. Anything he says that IS true is taken out of context and twisted.
I actually think that any news channel that DOES have sponsors who might interfere with content should be watched carefully. If a report comes out that would be detrimental to the main sponsor, I bet they wouldn't cover it.

 

[Belfrey]

Thats what everyone does around here . Dogpile

Well, few believers post here, so naturally there's a skewed ratio. I'd be happy to go to the Global Skywatch forum to be on the bottom of the "pile," but I got perma-banned there after one polite post. Questioning the existence of chemtrails there ist ganz und gar verboten, and the same is true on their FB page.

Vindog, I hope you come back and make the effort. When it comes to "you already know the answer to the question" (of how one decides whether it's a contrail or "chemtrail"), I really don't know what your answer is, because there are many different versions of the "chemtrails" belief. So, please state your criteria.

 

[Efftup]

well this was my point. You can't see where someone is coming from if they simply refuse to tell you why they think something which is extremely important to the topic at hand.

 

[Joe]

Well, few believers post here, so naturally there's a skewed ratio. I'd be happy to go to the Global Skywatch forum to be on the bottom of the "pile," but I got perma-banned there after one polite post. Questioning the existence of chemtrails there ist ganz und gar verboten, and the same is true on their FB page.

Vindog, I hope you come back and make the effort. When it comes to "you already know the answer to the question" (of how one decides whether it's a contrail or "chemtrail"), I really don't know what your answer is, because there are many different versions of the "chemtrails" belief. So, please state your criteria.

I agree but you guys should be better than that . Its hard to answer so many people here the have a difference of opinion so it makes people rush for a quick comeback answer .

 

[deirdre]

I agree but you guys should be better than that . Its hard to answer so many people here the have a difference of opinion so it makes people rush for a quick comeback answer .

he wasn't helping though. he himself was jumping from point to point. which just added to the confusion. its not that complicated of an original post but here we are on page 10.

ex: instead of focusing on his original premise he throws in a bunch of pics (that we now have to debunk). There was absolutely no reason for that other than using the gish gallop technique.

 

[Joe]

he wasn't helping though. he himself was jumping from point to point. which just added to the confusion. its not that complicated of an original post but here we are on page 10.

ex: instead of focusing on his original premise he throws in a bunch of pics (that we now have to debunk). There was absolutely no reason for that other than using the gish gallop technique.

Maybe so but he is New and not used to what required of him here . Are you trying to convince him or drive him away ?

 

[deirdre]

Maybe so but he is New and not used to what required of him here . Are you trying to convince him or drive him away ?

he's not new.

 

[Mick West]

he's not new.

He's new in that he joined yesterday. But he's also had 129 posts and MANY warnings. He should know how it is by now. He asked questions, he got answers, he's just not addressing those answers. So I put a pause on things. This isn't a brawl.

 

[Joe]

he's not new.

He is quite combative . Coming from me thats pretty bad

 

[Efftup]

I was about to make a comment about you Joe.
For all your combativeness, you are clearly here to actually thrash ideas out, and although I disagree with almost everything you say, I admire you for sticking it out in here when you obviously feel a bit picked on at times. You don't just throw random insults out to anyone who asks you a simple question or call everybody paid shills.

After a few initial quite promising posts, Vindog seemed to quickly degenerate into someone who was trolling just to get banned so he could claim the site was full of shills. Was that the intention right from the beginning? Or was it the attitude by some of the members in here who kind of flipped him? Is it that we could have answered better in the first place? Can we all learn lessons from this on how to engage with others?

 

[Joe]

I was about to make a comment about you Joe.
For all your combativeness, you are clearly here to actually thrash ideas out, and although I disagree with almost everything you say, I admire you for sticking it out in here when you obviously feel a bit picked on at times. You don't just throw random insults out to anyone who asks you a simple question or call everybody paid shills.

After a few initial quite promising posts, Vindog seemed to quickly degenerate into someone who was trolling just to get banned so he could claim the site was full of shills. Was that the intention right from the beginning? Or was it the attitude by some of the members in here who kind of flipped him? Is it that we could have answered better in the first place? Can we all learn lessons from this on how to engage with others?

Because he came here thinking he was going to prove something he belives is happening and is concerned or worried about . I used to be a lot worse and used o throw a few insults from time to time usally after what I perceived was a Insult to me . Im just here to balance things a little

 

[Mick West]

Because he came here thinking he was going to prove something he belives is happening and is concerned or worried about . I used to be a lot worse and used o throw a few insults from time to time usally after what I perceived was a Insult to me . Im just here to balance things a little

You'll be a moderator in a few years Joe

 

[Steve Funk]

Heres a question, and its totally off topic...but what the hell do you guys do for a living? im thinking its this...which really make me wonder...

Right now I am on vacation from work, so i HAVE the time to be on here talking with you people. How is it that you all do the same? so far, its been almost 24 full hours of at least 3 of you being able to immediatly respond to me...

I honestly think you all are govt paid shills.

That is an ad hominem argument, and we would be justified in saying it's irrelevant and none of your business, but I am retired from the US Forest Service. I live an a town with a lot of chemtrails believers, and got tired of being harangued about it. That is why I became a debunker.

 

[WeedWhacker]

There are also videos of timelapse captures though which i believe could be used as more credible evidence.



{snipped extraneous videos}

....thoughts?

Well, that video example shows the cognitive disconnect displayed by "chem"trail believers. That time-lapse clearly shows perfectly ordinary CONtrails forming and behaving exactly as all do.

The "title" given to that video is pure hogwash (or, since it is from England, 'bollocks').

 

[captfitch]

That is an ad hominem argument, and we would be justified in saying it's irrelevant and none of your business, but I am retired from the US Forest Service. I live an a town with a lot of chemtrails believers, and got tired of being harangued about it. That is why I became a debunker.

Yes, I didn't want to say it but I have lots of time on my hands right now because I was recently diagnosed with lymphoma so I spend the majority of my time resting in bed after my recent chemo treatment. I could type all day.

 

[Jazzy]

You'll be a moderator in a few years Joe

Or maybe even an old rhinoceros.

 

[Pete Tar]

I'm on welfare, so technically I am paid by the government.

 

[cloudspotter]

an example would be the fact that I have stated clearly like at least 10 times that I know its possible for a contrail to act like a chemtrail, yet you keep going back and acting like I say that contrails could never act that way....

These are NOT normal. If you need an explanation of why not, I truly believe you are playing dumb.

I see a contradiction here

 

[WeedWhacker]

@Vindog:

I understand that there is now a "Time-Out" in progress. This is good. (For all).

Also understand that it seemed "as if" there was a "pile-on" here. Certainly was no one's intention, but it IS sometimes the nature of the Internet Forum format...many, many people from multiple time-zones on this planet tend to "chime in". As a result, discussions can sometimes become disjointed, and not "flow" smoothly.

Would you please take this opportunity to review the thread? Perhaps take notes, if so inclined.

There is also a convention (in these sorts of Forae) to ask one question at a time, and focus there. The so-called "scatter-shot" approach is not useful. This takes time...unlike (say) a face-to-face conversation. This is the crux...we Humans are most familiar with one-on-one personal and in-person interaction. The Internet is changing the way we communicate.

I hope this helps.......

 

[Jazzy]

I hope this helps.

I don't expect it to help much. I haven't yet got round to the start of this thread, but I expect it starts with a gallop by the newbie. It's the way it must feel if you're new here - that you have all the reasons behind your belief pressing you forward, and many people rather angrily responding to you - or at you.
When it's a topic which seems within my purview, i'm driven to respond, but resist it nowadays because there are so many members who answer in ways which are sometimes better than my efforts would have been. I therefore try to hold back, and only chip in when I feel that some point has been manifestly overlooked.
Mick's task, which only he has set for himself, is an onerous one, and difficult to fulfill. I wouldn't want it personally, preferring, as I do, freedom. But I think Metabunk's format is the best around.
Perhaps we (or at least Meta members) could agree within ourselves to limit ourselves to a single and more personal one-on-one with newbies. Perhaps ticking ourselves off one by one in, say, alphabetical order. That being easier than drawing lots...

 

[WeedWhacker]

....but I expect it starts with a gallop by the newbie.

No, the "galloping" comes later.

 

[Jazzy]

No, the "galloping" comes later.

Probably because of the increased pressure of many near-simultaneous answers. It would be more creative to not create so much pressure in the first place. Only we can moderate our responses. Perhaps we should limit ourselves. The Meta status gives us the tools.

 

[Mick West]

Probably because of the increased pressure of many near-simultaneous answers. It would be more creative to not create so much pressure in the first place. Only we can moderate our responses. Perhaps we should limit ourselves - somehow.

Generally discussion progress best one-on-one. Although it was largely Hama Neggs for the first two pages, and it did not go too well.

 

[Jazzy]

Generally discussion progress best one-on-one. Although it was largely Hama Neggs for the first two pages, and it did not go too well.

Well maybe Hama should have stayed the course with more determination or bowed out, calling for a single "replacement" from, I'm sure, some willing volunteers. Even a temporary ban strikes me as a clumsier approach.

 

[WeedWhacker]

Even a temporary ban strikes me as a clumsier approach.

I cannot speak for Mick's experience in this, but seems "IF" 'vindog' is truly interested in learning, then this is a reasonable approach.

 

[Jazzy]

I cannot speak for Mick's experience in this, but seems "IF" 'vindog' is truly interested in learning, then this is a reasonable approach.

You (and Mick) may well be quite correct. I'm around 50-50 about it, myself. I thought we were supposed to take a little bit of "stick" from newbies until they learned the ropes, though. Considering Joe…

 

[Mick West]

A temporary ban has proven to be a good way to see if someone is actually willing to engage in constructive discussion. It's also often the only way of indicating that the rules are to be taken seriously. After 370+ posts in the thead (and plenty of "stick", some of which was deleted) something needed to be done to calm things down.

 

[Jazzy]

A temporary ban has proven to be a good way to see if someone is actually willing to engage in constructive discussion. It's also often the only way of indicating that the rules are to be taken seriously. After 370+ posts in the thead (and plenty of "stick", some of which was deleted) something needed to be done to calm things down.

Put like that, who could argue? LOL.

However I still believe we should take steps to make it more one-on-one.

 

[Steve Funk]

Vindog, if you are still reading, you should realize that Dane Wigington's "Geoengineeringwatch" never allows dissent. And Russ Tanner's Chemtrails Globalskywatch facebook page bans anyone who dissents. I got in two posts there. Now I can't even look at that site under my own name. These are probably the two most followed "Chemtrails are real" pages.