George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
They are not common but may well be natural and explainable.These are NOT normal. If you need an explanation of why not, I truly believe you are playing dumb.
Vindog's Contrail Questions [Contrails Near Boston]
- Thread starter Vindog
- Start date
Hama Neggs
Senior Member.
These are NOT normal. If you need an explanation of why not, I truly believe you are playing dumb.
Define "normal". I believe one of those was taken with an image-altering lens or isn't a real photo, but the rest are easily explained and already HAVE been, on contrailscience.com . You are now starting to Gish Gallop and I, for one, am not going to play.
jonnyH
Senior Member.
No, the majority of people on the planet have not even been polled on the subject. Most have never come across the chemtrail nonsense online nor considered their sky to contain anything unusual.
Hama Neggs
Senior Member.
You have a habit of claiming what someone said, but not quoting it. You certainly misrepresented something I supposedly said, so I'm not going to accept your word for it now. You have been TOLD what the main reason is. Accept it or not- your choice.
captfitch
Senior Member.
These are NOT normal. If you need an explanation of why not, I truly believe you are playing dumb.
All of these have explanations. Heck, the second one is just the product of the lens used to take the picture. I am also a pilot who works in the environment all the time. Can I help you with one question to start with? Whatever you want.
Hama Neggs
Senior Member.
We are taking great pains to answer your questions.
Last edited by a moderator:
Vindog
Member
Not common? that goes against everything ive been told buy people here thus far. So far I have been told that this is normal, common and highly documented....so now im getting conflicting stories....
Vindog
Member
How old are you and how long have you been flying?
jonnyH
Senior Member.
its a 360 degree panorama of what looks like altocumulus undulatus
Vindog
Member
honestly I just want to know which story Y;all are gonna go with? that those are uncommon, or that they are common and highly documented...cant have it both ways is all
Vindog
Member
whats bunk? that its common or uncommon, surely it cant be both.
deirdre
Senior Member.
posting a video without an explanation of context and/or timestamps is against posting guidelines.
deirdre
Senior Member.
that you have been told 'this is normal'. BEFORE you posted any of those pics.
some of the pics are normal for planes doing maneuvers etc but they aren't all common occurrences... meaning things people often see.
Vindog
Member
I see this almost every day. how can you tell me that its not common. Other people all around the planet see it everyday....this is the whole reason we are even having this debate....this is the whole reason this website exists.....
Last edited by a moderator:
captfitch
Senior Member.
34, flying professionally for over twelve years.
deirdre
Senior Member.
Last edited by a moderator:
captfitch
Senior Member.
Sorry everyone appears to be ignoring the video but radar loop videos are not usable because of a number of reasons. If you are a professional radar technician and would like to explain what the video shows go ahead. I have a higher than normal understanding of radar technology and I easily see how the images are twisted to represent a point. Simply put, unless you are an expert on that stuff I would leave it alone.
Last edited by a moderator:
TWCobra
Senior Member.
Also, 54 and been flying since 1978. Current A330 captain.
SR1419
Senior Member.
I believe George was referring to those specific photos which show extreme examples.
The first photo has been discussed here:
http://contrailscience.com/why-do-some-planes-leave-long-trails-but-others-dont/
Contrails that persist and spread are common.
Do you have a specific claim of evidence that you would like addressed?
Last edited:
Vindog
Member
then you have no information for me that would be helpful, as the phenomenon has only been ongoing for roughly that same time. Thanks anyhow.
deirdre
Senior Member.
Last edited:
Vindog
Member
wow, you ask for evidence, yet turn it down when presented with it...moving goal post
Vindog
Member
those are only a handful of the THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of similar photos. The videos i have presented are only a handful of the hundreds of videos...
Last edited by a moderator:
Vindog
Member
And also, I find it QUITE contradictory for you to say that, yet you use Contrailscience.com, a website run by a videogame software developer who has no expertise in the things he tries to debunk, as your own evidence...Cause thats fair right? Only if it suits your viewpoint i guess.
jonnyH
Senior Member.
You do not see the Chinese air force practicing high altitude dogfights every day.
Last edited by a moderator:
Vindog
Member
Can doppler pick up cirrus clouds?
captfitch
Senior Member.
Probably not cirrus per se but you can manipulate both the output and the image to show virtually anything you want including temperature changes, clouds, birds, mountains, buildings, etc. and you can color those returns an a number of ways to highlight a point. As far as cirrus, I have seen versions of high level clouds on many occasions. The main point I would like to make is that unless you have a very high understanding of radar systems it would be easy to misinterpret what is shown.
deirdre
Senior Member.
last one (except for the fake pic):
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/contrail-pattern-simulator.3157/#post-90843
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/contrail-pattern-simulator.3157/#post-90843
SR1419
Senior Member.
If that is the case then how do you explain these?:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pre-1995-persistent-contrail-archive.487/
Efftup
Senior Member.
OK, let's discuss your "Evidence" i.e this video.
Firstly what are YOU claiming it shows? The author of the video has presented it as being Pulse doppler radar and showing chemtrail formation.
How do THEY know that;s what it is? How do I know they aren't totally normal weather patterns? I can't see anything on the video that looks like 300 mile long almost perfectly straight lines., for example.
YOU stated that the pulse doppler radar CAN NOT detect Cirrus clouds. Where is your source for this? I am looking at sources on the radar and they aren't specifying what clouds they can and cannot see.
HOWEVER, they DO state that the radar can see birds, bats, and even cars on the interstate depending on conditions: http://www.meteorologynews.com/2008/12/31/doppler-radar-can-detect-more-than-just-weather/comment-page-1/
if you aren't going to state your source for the comment about not being able to detect cirrus clouds, I can only conclude it was bullshit, made up to strengthen the "claim" on this video.
Without me or you knowing anything about radar and what the returns look like, all this video is is a bunch or pretty patterns and that is almost certainly while others ignored it.
You talk about distracting and detracting but you have repeatedly NOT answered important questions.
So I will ask again: If contrails can and always have persisted, what is different about the ones you (and I in Bristol) see almost every day that makes them "suspicious" or shows they MUST be chemtrails? If you have determined that they are chemtrails and not contrails, HOW have you determined that?
Interesting you mentioning this site as a scam. Mick has posted precisely how much it costs to run this site and he pays for it all from his own pocket. There are NO adverts and NO donate buttons here.
Geoengineering Watch on the other hand, has a few Donate buttons and a few bits of "Merchandise" like Videos which you will get in exchange for a "donation"
Prison Planet (Alex Jones' site) has blatant advertising ALL over it, and mostly for INFOWARS BRANDED merchandise like a 1 oz bottle of "lung cleanser" for ONLY $29.95
If you actually point out any information on contrail science or metabunk that is wrong, mick will amend it. He does not need to answer to sponsors, or worry about revenue streams.
If you show Alex Jones that any information on Prison Planet is wrong, he will just call you a shill or ignore it completely lest you stop being afraid enough to buy his crap.
I have 2 low paid jobs. My car was inherited, every single item in my house, apart from my washing machine was either inherited, hand me down or obtained by freecycle. Being a paid shill is not very lucrative.
My hours are erratic, enabling me to be online at odd hours of the day to come on here, plus being in the UK, I am also 5-7 (I think) hours ahead of anyone in the USA.
Firstly what are YOU claiming it shows? The author of the video has presented it as being Pulse doppler radar and showing chemtrail formation.
How do THEY know that;s what it is? How do I know they aren't totally normal weather patterns? I can't see anything on the video that looks like 300 mile long almost perfectly straight lines., for example.
YOU stated that the pulse doppler radar CAN NOT detect Cirrus clouds. Where is your source for this? I am looking at sources on the radar and they aren't specifying what clouds they can and cannot see.
HOWEVER, they DO state that the radar can see birds, bats, and even cars on the interstate depending on conditions: http://www.meteorologynews.com/2008/12/31/doppler-radar-can-detect-more-than-just-weather/comment-page-1/
if you aren't going to state your source for the comment about not being able to detect cirrus clouds, I can only conclude it was bullshit, made up to strengthen the "claim" on this video.
Without me or you knowing anything about radar and what the returns look like, all this video is is a bunch or pretty patterns and that is almost certainly while others ignored it.
You talk about distracting and detracting but you have repeatedly NOT answered important questions.
So I will ask again: If contrails can and always have persisted, what is different about the ones you (and I in Bristol) see almost every day that makes them "suspicious" or shows they MUST be chemtrails? If you have determined that they are chemtrails and not contrails, HOW have you determined that?
Interesting you mentioning this site as a scam. Mick has posted precisely how much it costs to run this site and he pays for it all from his own pocket. There are NO adverts and NO donate buttons here.
Geoengineering Watch on the other hand, has a few Donate buttons and a few bits of "Merchandise" like Videos which you will get in exchange for a "donation"
Prison Planet (Alex Jones' site) has blatant advertising ALL over it, and mostly for INFOWARS BRANDED merchandise like a 1 oz bottle of "lung cleanser" for ONLY $29.95
If you actually point out any information on contrail science or metabunk that is wrong, mick will amend it. He does not need to answer to sponsors, or worry about revenue streams.
If you show Alex Jones that any information on Prison Planet is wrong, he will just call you a shill or ignore it completely lest you stop being afraid enough to buy his crap.
I have 2 low paid jobs. My car was inherited, every single item in my house, apart from my washing machine was either inherited, hand me down or obtained by freecycle. Being a paid shill is not very lucrative.
My hours are erratic, enabling me to be online at odd hours of the day to come on here, plus being in the UK, I am also 5-7 (I think) hours ahead of anyone in the USA.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ross Marsden
Senior Member.
RPK is probably Route Passenger Kilometres (in billions).
Vindog
Member
I never stated that. I simply asked if it can. Again words being put into my mouth. this makes me question your comprehension skills.
I have already gone over this question. I am not going to answer it. If you cannot decipher for yourself what is different from today's chemtrails and old pictures of persistent contrails, than you have no business even talking about this topic.
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.
Belfrey
Senior Member.
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.
SR1419
Senior Member.
@Vindog - you do not really seem to be able to address any of the material provided to you...nor present any evidence of your own
This paper from 1972 describes exactly what you claim "never" happened before some random time in the 90s- please explain this contradiction
http://ciresweb.colorado.edu/science/groups/pielke/classes/atoc7500/knollenberg72.pdf
Try to focus. Pick one specific claim of evidence and clarify why you think its odd or suspicious.
This paper from 1972 describes exactly what you claim "never" happened before some random time in the 90s- please explain this contradiction
http://ciresweb.colorado.edu/science/groups/pielke/classes/atoc7500/knollenberg72.pdf
All of those photos ypu posted were explained- some werent even from planes...but you ignore this and keep hammering away with misdirection.It is often observed that contrails spread considerably...Under favorable conditions, a lateral spread of kilometers is observed...If sufficient air traffic exists, and entire overcast of contrail cirrus may develop and persist for hours with rapid growth in the ice budget of individual contrails.
Try to focus. Pick one specific claim of evidence and clarify why you think its odd or suspicious.
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.
Unless you actually address the things being discussed, you will not be allowed to post again. It's your call.
SR1419
Senior Member.
you said photos werent applicable because you couldnt tell how long they trails in them persisted. now you want to use them as evidence- which is it?
How are those photos different from these:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pre-1995-persistent-contrail-archive.487/
Similar threads
