If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?

Are we not talking about the SAME persistent TRAILS in the sky. . . one group calls them chemtrails and one group calls them persistent contrails and contrail induced cirrus cloud banks???????? A rose by any other name is still a rose!!!!

In terms of radiative forcing, CO2, CH4, NO2, etc. are positive. Clouds, including cirrus, are negative.

Although I admit I love aviation, It has nothing to do with this particular subset of the discussion. Even if you replaced 20% of aviation with other methods, The amount of CO2 would likely INCREASE because of the use of other transportation methods which would have to be used to ferry goods and people around the world. Not to mention all the other types of pollution which would increase Including, but not limited to, increased oil/grease/fuel in the seas...and all the garbage associated with shipping. Millions of tons of brake dust and tires. And probably MORE CO2 into the atmosphere. Using thousands of less efficient engines instead of a few efficient engines to transport people and goods in a TIMELY manner, seems stupid to me.

I think it's YOUR disgust/hatred for aviation has blinded you.

What makes you believe that it's being poorly managed now? Because there are trails in the sky? More flights? More air-routes? What do you base that suggestion on? Where are you getting your inside information?

And again, suggesting that cutting down aviation, which contributes 5% to the TOTAL problem doesn't eliminate the 5%...it lowers it.

There are other ways to work on the other 95% which would help more.

Please feel free top provide data which shows that the other 95% can't be "managed" better...and that "they" have done everything they could to lower that number..

GOOD LUCK!

But the two are in opposite directions.

It also goes on to say

"The only difference is that CO2 has a longer life than that of the contrails, and can still continue to cause warming even hundreds of years down the road."

But one has any trouble with the conclusion.

"Solutions for this could include such things as creating flight plans at lower altitudes and the development of new airplane engines which would either reduce the water vapor released or immediately condense the water into ice that would drop to the ground below."

But of course that would totally freak out the chemtrail crowd, then we would have aircraft induced snow.

Me thinks the research does not support you statement. . . .cirrus cloud banks on the whole trap more long wave radiation than reflect short wave radiation back into space . . . this is particularly true after sunset . . . so if one were to MANAGE this situation one would primarily fly early in the day like before sunrise . . . and hope the cirrus would dissipate by nightfall . . .

I have presented the research over and over before. . . you won't read it. . . . It is called look at what I have posted . . .

But we know what contrails are, water vapor and ice, and that is what we see in the sky. Calling them chemtrails, and you do, infers some sort of chemicals injected into the atmosphere that is water vapor involving millions of people (pilots, ground crew, aircraft manufactures, chemical manufactures, oil refineries, shipping, and so on). Using the term chemtrails reinforces hysteria. It does not solve problems.

So the two are not the same.

Scientists have been looking at the effects contrails have on weather for quite some time. It is not chemtrail conspiracy nuts forcing them to do so.

You can both reduce CO2 and persistent trails and contrail induced cirrus. . . . it is called being aware of what you are doing and using reasonable mitigation processes to reduce their numbers and frequency . . .

If you have not noticed. . . .this thread is involving both chemtrail conspiracy advocates and debunkers. . . .one cannot talk to one group and ignore the other . . .

Cirrius clouds reflect sunlight, hence negative

OK , my friend, link the research which says cirrus clouds and persistent contrails have an overall cooling effect on the global climate. . . . It might on a local scale compress the highs and lows of ground temperatures . . . but that is it. . . . it does not reduce the average temperature . . .

I'm sorry..

Your unrelated information overloads of the past have resulted in me scanning your "advocate exhibits" instead of actually reading them.

Please direct me to the post about how the other 95% has been properly managed to the point that the only way to reduce the total CO2 in out atmosphere is to "better manage" aviation.

And then point me in the direction of the information which shows that Aviation needs to be "managed" in a particular way which will lead to a reduction of the 5% SHARE of the TOTAL CO2 output of the human population.

Thanks.

Yes you can. You work with good science and ignore pseudoscience. Chemtrails at its best isn't even pseudoscience. It is junk science, no basis in reality. We can safely ignore junk science. Studies of radiative forcing are good science, it uses scientific principles and ignores hysteria. Granted we don't know everything yet and that is why scientiests are studying the radiative forcing effects.

Looking at another paper, the radiative forcing in the short wave is negative (reflection) but the long wave radiative forcing is positive (traped heat). The net effect is positive.

Then, I'll need you to show me how reducing the CO2 output of the human population has any effect on the TOTAL CO2 output from natural sources...and I'll need you to show me how a reduction in a fraction of the total human related output when combined with the natural output, is going to make a rats ass of a difference in the overall CO2 levels.

Then I'll be needing the cloud data...

How man made clouds are shown to be any more of a problem than natural clouds in the OVERALL radiative forcing.

And then provide evidence of the consequences of the aviation induced clouds and where they have caused the most concern and how.

In other words...direct negative documented consequences.

And please...not some earthy/crunchy site which sells homeopathic "remedies"...

A site which states, without a doubt, that eliminating/reducing contrail cirrus is the only thing we have left...

[link to onlinelibrary.wiley.com]

This thread is nonsense.
chemtrails are chemtrails,
contrails, contrails.
End of story.

George knows all this. That's what makes George such an evil fuck.

Anyone George comes into contact with that isn't smart enough to see though his snake oil and bullshit will fall prey to his dumb ass and that's why George needs to be jailed and sued by his victims for every single fucking dime George has or will ever have.

George is a parasite, beneath contempt and as such is lower than the lowest layer of amphibian shit on the ocean floor.
George's highest and best use would be to inadvertently walk in front of a round meant for someone else.

The reason all these factual posts debunking the BS George spews have no effect is because George already knows it!

You can stop trying to explain reality to George because George already KNOWS!

I have already done too much work for you already. . . . what do you think the EPA has been doing for years and the clean air act, catalytic converters, etc . . . and they have had considerable success with reducing air pollution in general particularly in he the area of sulfur concentration, lead and hydrocarbon reductions, increasing miles per gallon, encouraging mass transit, and so forth. . ..

I choose not to ignore Chemtrail Conspiracy Advocates. . . .it is my choice and not yours. . ..

:Insult Purchase:

I am so glad you are not confused . . . however, others might disagree. . ..

No. . . . it is simple. . . persistent contrails and contrail induced cirrus cloud banks are a concern of atmospherics scientists all over the world . . . Of course except for you . . . LOL!!! Much research, money, satellites, etc. have been devoted to,in your words, a non issue. . . .BULL!!!! Sorry, if you refuse to smell the roses. . .

And you can help too if you are over 11 years old . .. .Do you qualify????




Science Project:  Contrail Studies
Image courtesy Forrest M. Mims III.
Web Id: P4

Purpose: Serious students, citizen scientists and regular weather watchers can use a camera and simple weather instruments to monitor and study contrails and to determine their possible environmental effects.
Age Range: 11 to adult

Time Required: Contrails can be observed, photographed and reported in only a few minutes a day. Scientific studies of contrails take more time and can provide important scientific information.
Background:

Contrails can spread into cirrus clouds that reduce sunlight during the day, thus causing a cooling effect. But contrails also trap heat during both the
day and the night. It is not yet certain if the net result of these effects warms or cools the Earth, but most studies indicate that contrails have a net warming effect on our planet.

[link to mynasadata.larc.nasa.gov]

Last Edited by George B on 03/29/2013 08:15 AM

Thanks!

Note to anyone of limited intelligence.....

Do not pay any attention to George. George is owning you if you do. You don't want to be owned, do you? Don't let George own you.

Cirrus clouds are of NO CONCERN to anyone. Con trails are of no concern and George is only using them to fuck with you; to scare you.

George is evil. Since George has no life at all, George is content waste your time with evil intent trying to scare you. Pay no attention to this evil fool.

George is a worthless waste of skin. Rise up and cast off George's evil fear mongering with righteous self-confidence that you cannot be swayed by George's bullshit and refuse to be fucked with in this manner.

Are you Noble's evil twin????

[link to onlinelibrary.wiley.cot] finding quite what I asked for there. could you direct me to the passages which you believe answers my questions? Thanks

Please consider the keywords in MY post.

"Overall"

"More of a problem"

"direct negative documented consequences"

"A site which states, without a doubt, that eliminating/reducing contrail cirrus is the only thing we have left..."

Thanks

Also, within the conclusions..

"] Although great advances have been achieved in simulating global contrail radiative forcing by sophisticated GCM models, various uncertainties remain and prevent a more precise forcing determination. "

Sounds like doubt to me...

No George, you PRETEND to have done too much work for me.

You can't tell me that it's impossible to reduce emissions on the other 95% of sources, and that the only remaining option is to scale back aviation and that the NATURAL sources of CO2 and clouds aren't more of a problem that human sources.

And when you say " and they have had considerable success with reducing air pollution in general particularly in he the area of sulfur concentration"..you are referring to sources related to HUMAN activity. What about all the natural sources? What are we doing about them? And what do we WANT to do about them?!



And yes, use of public transportation is GREAT...on a local level..