How were you introduced to the concept of the Chemtrail conspiracy?

There may be nothing we can do . . .

My concern is that at this time we can do something but it won't be done because people will misunderstand the seriousness due to the chemtrail fix.

It is like putting things on the credit card and paying more and maybe never being able to pay it off.

Fly around in secret and don't tell anyone there is a huge problem so it doesn't get taken care of. There was a time and maybe there still is that this could be healed. Not if we are unaware. So maybe there is another motive for the chemtrails like laying out a grid for HAARP or something.

I heard about the conspiracy on Coast to Coast AM. Previous to this, I had thought the presence or absence of the trails had to do with atmospheric conditions.

They are not real George!

Yes, the atmospheric conditions have to be correct for persistent trails to form . . . normally above 30,000 feet, below -40 C and at least 30% humidity . . .

What Contrails, Persistent Contrails and Contrail Induced Cirrus Clouds and Cloud Banks?

I called them manufactured clouds. My car was in the shop and I sat on a park bench one afternoon, around 2007, and that was when I first noticed them. I saw the planes and the long contrails they were leaving, and nothing seemed strange for a little while. But then I couldn't help noticing that the contrails didn't go away, they grew and puffed up into big banks of clouds. While I sat there waiting for my car, maybe about an hour and a half, the weather went from a bright sunny day to completely overcast. After that I started watching the sky a lot more. I saw weird clouds of all kinds. Giant ones with holes in the middle. Iridescent, rainbow-like clouds. Endless rows of contrail cloud banks, and when the wind blew, they would get stretched out and look like lines, look very artificial. Sometimes they had rippled patterns in them, like ripples in water. A geeky guy at my work was making time-lapse films of the city with the sky. I tried to talk to him about it, certain that he must have seen this. I was shocked by his reaction when I asked him, "Have you taken pictures of those manufactured clouds yet? Have you noticed those, too?" He said he didn't know what I was talking about and became very annoyed with me. This was someone very smart. I couldn't believe it, and still don't know what to think. No matter who I tried to talk to about it, they ALL acted like they didn't know what I was talking about and that I was crazy.

I gotta get out of this area. Most people here are dreadful zombies or fearsome vampires. Hardly any real people left.

Yes. They come out of the plane looking like piped icing trim on a cake, or stitching, or ruffles -- I have seen this, too. It looks like blasts of whatever the stuff is, aluminum powder? -- shooting out or something.

For the life of me I don't see how people can miss these things. You have to really be a zombie

Thanks for your participation!!!

Yes, there are more persistent trails in the skies than in the decades before . . . that is a scientific fact . . . there are more high flying aircraft, with more efficient jet engines and thus more cirrus cloud banks and haze created because of them . . . what else that might be up there is up for debate . . .

IPCC Special Reports on Climate Change - Complete online versions

[link to www.grida.no]

Executive Summary

In the future, contrail cloudiness and radiative forcing are expected to increase more strongly than global aviation fuel consumption because airtraffic is expected to increase mainly in the upper troposphere, where contrails form preferentially, and because aircraft will be equipped with more fuel-efficient engines. More efficient engines will cause contrails to occur more frequently and over a larger altitude range for the same amount of airtraffic. For the threefold increase in fuel consumption calculated for a 2050 scenario (Fa1),a fivefold increase in contrail cover and a sixfold increase in radiative forcing are expected. The contrail cover would increase even more strongly if the number of cruising aircraft increases more than their fuel consumption. For other 2050 scenarios (Fc1 and Fe1), the expected cirrus cover increases by factors of 3and 9, respectively, compared to 1992. Higher cruise altitudes will increase contrail cover in the subtropics; lower cruise altitudes will increase contrail cover in polar regions. Future climate changes may cause further changes inexpected aircraft-induced cirrus cover.



Last Edited by George B on 02/14/2013 08:42 AM

POLL: How were you introduced to the concept of the Chemtrail conspiracy?
3) I notice them first in the sky and started to ask questions 51.0% (125)
2) I visited a website and they talked about them 15.5% (38)
1) Someone (a friend, family, etc.) told me about Chemtrails 12.7% (31)
4) I was reading about a different conspiracy and they mentioned them . . . 7.8% (19)
9) Other . . . please specify 7.8% (19)
5) I saw a discussion on a YouTube video 3.3% (8)
7) I was watching TV and I saw a documentary on the History Channel 0.8% (2)
8) I had a dream about them and just knew 0.8% (2)
6) I was watching TV and there was a news story about them 0.4% (1)
Blank (View Results) (30)

Non-Blank Votes: 245

Thanks for your participation . . . !!!

A case study of the radiative forcing of persistent contrails evolving into contrail-induced cirrus

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 114, D24201, doi:10.1029/2009JD012650, 2009

[link to www.met.reading.ac.uk]

The development of the contrail-induced cirrus is tracked using
a number of high-resolution polar orbiting and lower-resolution geostationary satellite
instruments and is found to persist for a period of around 18 h, and at its peak, it covers
over 50,000 km2. The shortwave (SW) and longwave (LW) radiative forcing of the
contrail-induced cirrus is estimated using a combination of geostationary satellite
instruments, numerical weather prediction models, and surface observation sites.

A single aircraft operating in conditions favorable for persistent
contrail formation appears to exert a contrail-induced radiative forcing some 5000 times
greater (in W m2 km1) than recent estimates of the average persistent contrail
radiative forcing from the entire civil aviation fleet.




:Chemtrail Time L:



[46] This work indicates that a confident assessment of
the total effect of aviation on climate, and the efficacy of
possible mitigation options (for example, changing flight
routing or altitudes to avoid contrail formation, with the
possibility that CO2 which has a radically longer lifetime
will increase as a result) is heavily dependent on reducing
the uncertainty in the size of the contrail-induced radiative forcing.

Last Edited by George B on 02/14/2013 12:30 PM

Radiative forcing means something, I am not sure what. :)

Contrails, by affecting the Earth's radiation balance, act as a radiative forcing. Studies have found that . . .
. . .contrails trap outgoing longwave radiation emitted by the Earth and atmosphere (positive radiative forcing) at a greater rate than they . . . .

reflect incoming solar radiation (negative radiative forcing).

Global radiative forcing has been calculated from the reanalysis data, climatological models and radiative transfer codes. It is estimated to amount to 0.012 W/m2 for 2005, with an uncertainty range of 0.005 to 0.0026 W/m2, and with a low level of scientific understanding.[4] Therefore, the overall net effect of contrails is positive, i.e. a warming effect.[5] However, the effect varies daily and annually, and overall the magnitude of the forcing is not well known: globally (for 1992 air traffic conditions), values range from 3.5 mW/m2 to 17 mW/m2. Other studies have determined that night flights are mostly responsible for the warming effect: while accounting for only 25% of daily air traffic, they contribute 60 to 80% of contrail radiative forcing. Similarly, winter flights account for only 22% of annual air traffic, but contribute half of the annual mean radiative forcing.[6]
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Last Edited by George B on 02/14/2013 12:59 PM

If contrails/chemtrails had a negative effect on peoples health and they couldn't be helped or no one cared, no studies of negative or positive effect would be made.

I think "THEY" think . . . contrails may worsen global warming . . . if so how much and what can be done about it . . . it is thought global warming is generally a BAD thing . . .

That is much clearer. I think about the "chemtrails" and their purpose and if they make us sick. Also what is the purpose of completely blocking the sun on a nice sunny day? Contrails and their negative side effects are problematic as well. Ground all the planes! Let's do an experiment.

That experiment was done unintentionally on at least two well known occasions . . . 911 and the more recent volcanic eruptions in Iceland in I think in April 2010 . . . some results below . . .

WOW

I went to see facebook and someone had posted this. It doesn't say much but the weather manipulation idea, more than cloud seeding, is out there. I don't care if the weather is manipulated. I don't think it should be manipulated by just anyone, that is what is scary.

The grounding of commercial flights for three days after last September's terrorist attacks in the United States gave David Travis at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater and colleagues a chance they never thought they'd have: to study the true impact that contrails from jet engines have on our climate1.



Travis's team compared the average daily high and low temperatures over North America from 11 to 14 September 2001, with climatic records from 1977 to 2000, matching the weather over those three days with similar weather in September from historical records.

They found that the difference between daily high and nightly low temperatures in the absence of contrails was more than 1 oC greater than in the presence of contrails. Comparing the three-day grounding period with the three days immediately before and after, the impact was even larger - about 1.8 oC.

"It's obviously a significant effect," says Andrew Carleton, an atmospheric scientist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park and a member of Travis's team.

The researchers suggest that in regions with crowded skies, contrails work just like artificial cirrus clouds, preventing days from getting too hot by reflecting the Sun's rays, and keeping nights warmer by trapping the Earth's heat [link to www.nature.com]

There won't be any limits on plane travel until they start running into each other.

You are probably correct . . .

Sometimes guessing is easy.

Its not up for debate what else is up there, they are spraying chemtrails or call them what you'd like, what is up for debate is "Why?" and 'Who?"

I would pin who on corporations and government and military.

The why would be blamed on what the corporations agenda is at the time.

Last Edited by WindyMind on 02/14/2013 03:16 PM

Guess maybe one day we will see. Can't go on forever this way..

Maybe there is no such thing as forever.