Discussion in 'West/Wigington Geoengineering Debate' started by Mick West, Aug 14, 2013.
It isn't just doubling RTs posts it appears.
Believe it or not, I spent tons of time outside as a child, much of it looking at the sky or clouds. Never saw planes with contrails that did not disappear shortly after the plane. They certainly never remained suspended in the sky all day.
Realtruth, I'm a biologist who specializes in tree problems. There are and always have been many, many pests and diseases that affect trees. There are also many environmental stresses, including those due to relatively recent human causes (such as pollution), which can both affect trees directly and cause them to be more susceptible to opportunistic pests and pathogens. You seem to be first jumping to the conclusion that UV is responsible for your tree problems, and then using those tree problems as evidence for an increase in UV. The first claim is unsupported; the second is circular.
You might have heard those UV warnings each year because the UV index naturally increases during the summer months, but measurements from reliable sources do not indicate that UV has been on the rise in your area. Here's a graph I just made from data I downloaded from the UV-B Monitoring and Research Program website, showing UVA and UVB irradiance (summed daily) measured in Ontario over the past 4 years (they have data going back to 1998 for that location, but the server gets bogged down with long time series). As you can see, there is an annual cycle, but no apparent positive trend over multiple years:
Not that you remember, that is.
Did you stare at the sky all day to confirm this?
Seriously, how do you explain decades of photographic evidence and scientific study that contradicts your assertion?
Are you aware of the science and nature of contrails? how they form, why they form- how long they can last and what conditions lead them to persist and spread or dissipate?
I know its hard when so many reply- but you are not addressing the reality of persisting, spreading contrails and the resultant "contrail cirrus" - you just keep asserting that you dont remember them so they must be new...
Please comment on the evidence of persisting spreading contrails dating back since planes have flow high enough.
Please comment on the science of contrail formation and persistence and the dynamics of the atmosphere that allows multiple trail types in the same sky.
I showed a picture of 2 planes side by side - one leaving a contrail, one not- please comment.
THIS, I appreciate. I don't know, like I said. My friend (old neighbour) did a study on local plants and somehow supported her findings on the plants discussed (don't know how well she did on the paper but she is a 'dean's list' student). I actually believe the trees are something else, a disease of some kind. They look sick. But the plants have been struggling with washed out, white coloured leaves. Any idea what this might be? As previously mentioned, she suggested that this was UVA/UVB and temperatures here are always pretty hot in the summer. Any other ideas? I just refuse to believe they are not putting SOMETHING in our air. I just want to know what it is. The government does talk about it and We know they often test their science before they approve it. This is common practice.
Not going here. Because I've seen new explanations for old phenomenon. Ideas 'changing', situations and positions 'changing'. If I can't trust what I see, I can't trust anything. If We believe everything We are told, We are fools.
sorry, where is the pic?
Interesting. I bet similar comments were heard when people were first told the Earth was round.
Why would you ignore the historical precedent and scientific reality of persistent, spreading contrails?
This is an interesting read that speaks directly to your experience:
This may be worthy. It's snowing here now. It's also +3 degrees Celcius. What do You make of that? Remember, I'm Canadian, We get lots of snow. It should be heavy, packing snow, melting as it hits the ground. It's not. It's light, it's fluffy. Never in My life have I seen snow like this and I get skeptical when a news report tells Me to forget what I thought I knew about snow and that this is 'perfectly normal'. There is frankly nothing normal about it. Seriously.
Okay, got it. What is Your point? I think that quite clearly demonstrates that these two planes have substantially different exhaust. No?
Too many possibilities to guess based on that. I'd be happy to take a look at images when you're able to take them.
At this point, all of the academic and goverment literature indicates that they are not yet at the point where they're doing real-world tests; there's a lot of discussion about how to set policies and standards in place in order to regulate and guide real-world experiments in the future.
You mentioned at the outset that you demand a lot of evidence, but it sounds like you are starting from a conclusion that you assume to be true. You seem smart enough to realize the pitfalls of that approach.
Great link. On the left of the page there is a contrail forecast. Does that in and of itself not prove that there is something going into the air that is affecting Our planet? Why are the high density areas so important, and why do they correlate with the weather pattern in the last link I sent? They are clearly related. You could almost superimpose one over the other to see the effects the pattern has had on Our weather this year. Best post to support My position so far. Thank You!
Indeed. It demonstrates that there are a number of variables that go into contrail formation- both from the plane and the surrounding atmosphere....such that its understandable why you might see 2 planes in the same sky with different types of trails or one with a trail and one with out etc... Something you mentioned as being suspicious in an earlier post.
Good you are asking the right questions.
The weather patterns are naturally linked to the atmospheric conditions which have been recorded for flight condition information.
It appears you have your chicken mixed up with the egg here.
No, it does not indicate that.
The exhausts are substantially the same in composition, since the engines are burning the same fuel.
The reasons are discussed in the paper that het picture is a part of - link here]
As Rns pointed out...the conditions that allow contrails to persist are related to the current conditions in the surrounding atmosphere...thus they make contrail forecasts based on the expected conditions to be found at typical flight levels. How does that support your position that the trails are purposefully sprayed?
Again, you seem to be ignoring the physical reality of persisting, spreading contrails...Why?
if we know that contrails can and often do persist, spread and cover the sky in haze of cirrus cloud...and always have done this...then how are we to jump to the illogical conclusion that its "new" and "different" and evidence of a purposeful spray campaign? Please explain.
firstly: no, that is NOT the very definition of Geoengineering - additives in Jet fuel are just part of the jet fuel!
Secondly - patents for additives are pretty much irrelevant. The makeup of Jet A1 is set by Def Std 91-91, which is currently at Rev 7 - only the additives allowed in that are permitted in Jet A1 - adding anything else without approval is actually a crime in at least most civil societies.
Indeed. Like I said, I don't know. I MUST trust My own observations and intuition to some extent because there is disinformation on both sides. I was on Your side of the argument for a long time. My personal research has led Me to what I feel is an informed opinion and not one I take lightly. I am HOPING it is a hoax and just some lame conspiracy. That would please Me. Sadly, I just don't believe that's the case. The weather is too wild and the potential for HAARP and the knowledge that such weapons need reflective particles in the air suggest there is something going on. They didn't build HAARP for decoration, it is a weather manipulation tool. It does not receive transmission, only sends out radiowaves. My thinking is that if they invest that much in HAARP, they would want to make sure it is working as effectively as possible. I don't think it's a conspiracy because it seems logical to Me that governments would want to keep this technology under wraps as long as possible. But Russia has these instruments, too and I'm sure they are aware of the benefit reflective particulates are to HAARP.
because forming clouds at high altitudes as You describe is NOT natural. Cloud seeding, involves nucleating water crystals at high altitudes. They are colder, which is why it's still snowing when it's 3 + degrees outside. What does Your chemistry say about that?
Where did you get the idea that HAARP can affect the weather? Have you ever looked into the conventional explanations for what the HAARP facility is for, how it works, and the published research that has come out of it?
You say you dont know...but also say this "I just refuse to believe they are not putting SOMETHING in our air" Sounds like a contradiction or inconsistency.
There have been persisting spreading contrails long before HAARP...and never mind that HAARP is shut down:
You think that every plane leaving a trail in the sky has these 'tanks' in it instead of passengers?
No, actually cloud seeding involves releasing materials (usually silver iodide) into relatively low-altitude storm clouds. It's not done at jet cruising altitudes where contrail cirrus forms, and it doesn't create clouds where none exist.
There have always been times when wet snow falls when it's above freezing at ground level, as a Canadian I'd think you'd remember that.
Exactly. Problem is, it's not wet.
Of course. The implication was that "chemtrails" were produced by fuel additives you talked about. It's simply not true.
Based on what measure?
You are correct- contrails that spread into cirrus clouds are not natural...but they are merely an unintended consequence of air travel.
How do you jump to the conclusion that seeing a persistent contrails is somehow evidence of a spray campaign?
Cloud seeding is weather modification- not geo-engineering. It takes place at mid-level altitudes in already existing storm clouds- typically flares burned from small planes directly in the storm cloud- its also done from the ground as well,.. It has nothing to do with the persistent, spreading contrails you see.
My chemistry tells me that when the snowflake formed- higher up in the cloud- it was 32F degrees or less. That its above freezing on the ground does mean that flakes cannot reach the ground.
FWIW weather modification does not always require and often does not need clouds to be already present.
It depends upon the method and atmospheric conditions in the area to be worked with.
Quite a bit of weather modification takes place from ground methods too.
Cloud seeding for precipitation enhancement does.
You absolutely suggested that it didn't happen before(persistent contrails). OF COURSE it wasn't happening as much 20+ years ago, for reasons already posted. Are you even reading what people are saying here?
NOT packing snow, as it should be at this temperature. Surely You know the difference between them both. Powder snow You get on the high mountains or extreme cold, doesn't 'pack' into a snowball. But at this temperature, it should be awesome packing snow. It's not. It doesn't stick together.
Not in expansion methods.
The air does need to be saturated but it does not need to have large enough nucleation to be seen as a "cloud"
We are venturing into a semantics issue methinks.
RT- you dont really seem to be addressing the evidence contrary to your assertions...simply moving on the next straw man.
Have you not seen all the people online who, in the past few years, swear that the sun is setting in the wrong places on the horizon because they don't REMEMBER it ever setting "THERE" before? How about those who claim that the moon shouldn't appear to "rotate" as it crosses the sky because they don't REMEMBER it ever doing that before? I suggest you do a search for "sunset wrong" and "moon tilt" and see just how unreliable people's memories can be.
Enjoy? Why, because its more entertainment than factual information?
I remember seeing persistent contrails as a child in the 60s. Certainly not as common as they are now, but that's not surprising since there wasn't nearly as much air traffic. My uncle flew military jets, so I was fascinated by them, so I remember looking for them often.
Separate names with a comma.