chemtrails

[414Flyer]

They arent seeing low altitude anything...They are seeing things up high and in their paranoid mind, assuming it is at medium to low altitudes. Do you not think someone here would notice something low like that?

The kooktrail crowd stopped talking about behind low altitude trails a while back, and now focus on trails that linger more than a few seconds. Fin.e, except that lingering contrails existing during WW2

I suggest that if you have time, see if you can tour an air traffic control facility, or get ahold of an IFR chart, so you can see how planes are navigating. Maybe even use flight explorer too.

BTW. how did you arrive at an altitude of 12,000 ft for these

 

[Denver130]

chemtrails at 40K

By the way, lets do the math at 40,000ft.

2.5 times 40 = 100 (thats the amount of decreasing temperature at 40K)

90 - 100 = -10F

Is -10 cold enough for a "normal" jet contrail to form if its 90F in Houston?

Not according to NASA or NOAA. They both have done contrail studies and produced charts that show that it takes a -40F or lower to generate a jet contrail. (-70 for a lingering trail)

So how often would you see a jet contrail in Houston? rarely ...
and thats what the citizens of Houston have observed for years.

At 60F, we would see them if the jet was at 40K.

Which also explains why jet contrails typically appear pencil thin. It takes extremely low temps, high humidy and HIGH ALTITUDE generally to form jet contrails. (NASA and NOAA are also in agreement on this fact)

This is just plain and simple science.

So why are we seeing low altitude contrails in Houston? You guessed it. Chemicals can be dispersed at low altitudes and they can hang around for hours.

Which is what we are seeing. (Hard to believe huh?)

 

[414Flyer]

Yes, we can all do math, and we all know our lapse rates.

You have done nothing to prove these 12,000 ft contrails exist. You keep operating on the assumption they are, but you never have proved they do. None of us have ever seen any.

So before the next math lesson on lapse rates, show us these trails and tell us how you measured the altitudes.

 

[VNugget]

Low altitude trails? I have found our culprit!!

And look, they are not even coming from the engines! A careless chem pilot forgets to turn off the nozzles and reveals their secret location!

LOL

 

[414Flyer]

Here is the link

Oh well, looks like you got it to work anyways

 

[Denver130]

low altitude trails

Are people seeing low altitude contrails in Houston or high altitude contrails in Houston?

Houston typically has low hanging cloud cover and its very easy to get a shot of low altitude below cloud cover contails on film. And film doesn't lie.

Someone now is going to tell me that those clouds that we see in Houston are those high flyin cirrus clouds.

I can't think of a time when Houston was noted for cirrus clouds.
Literature will bear that fact out.

So what are we seeing. Is it too X-file-i-ly to say that its chemicals.

How can you or I ignore the FACT that the military has a history of testing chemical and biological agents on citizens and cities. Thats what the mainstream press has been telling us for the past 2 years. We just can't seem to phantom that or believe it. You can see it on the Discovery Channel in a special or read about it in books such as "Clouds of Secrecy".

 

[Denver130]

chemtrail

Chemtrails.... I hope its false.....I hope its a lie.....
But we have to look at the facts. We have to look at science. We have to look with an open mind.

And so far I haven't found a better answer......

Some write it off as chemtrail religion.
Some write it off as faith in God.
Some think that citizens are dumb and "what do they know about contrails anyway".
Some claim they've seen different.
Some say "it can happen", "its possible to have low altitude contrails".

But theres a few who say "I never read a posting by someone who actually researched the topic before typing on his keyboard. He actually makes sense!"

 

[414Flyer]

Or how about there is no proof of anything other than normal contrails at normal altitudes. They can look different, just like clouds can look different. Because thats what they are, clouds made by jet engines.

Has it crossed your mind that not a single pilot has ever seen your trails at 12,000 that you insist exist. But the small group of people that are so insistent those trails exist, are looking from the ground, with no way to judge altitudes except perception and guessing?

Planes have altimeters...I have flown for about 8 years, never once see these trails. And I have flown to Houston too.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Give it up, guys. I spent a couple of weeks trying to explain the reality of condensation trails to Denver130. At one point he sent me the links to four documents that he claimed proved his point.

One was an international study of the contributions being made to atmospheric pollution by jetliners...specifcally CO2.

The second was a NASA proposal to look into how contrails influence weather and climate.

The third was a bare-bones explanation of what contrails are.

The fourth was a NOAA page that explained contrails in great detail. It did state that contrails are usually found at high altitudes where the temperatures are generally -40 degrees and below. Generally. It also stated quite clearly that contrails can linger for hours and are not caused by anything being sprayed into the atmosphere.

He also referred me to a picture of one of these "chemical" planes at work, saying that you can clearly see some sort of mist being sprayed from the tips of the horizontal stabilizers. It was, in fact, a photograph of a Continental 767 with a condensation plume forming about fifty feet aft of each engine.

This was his compelling "evidence."

These people (1) have no understanding of aerodynamics or meteorology, (2) got their hands on some highly technical documents they didn't understand, and (3) have an almost fanatical mistrust of the federal government. (It's been said before, but it bears repeating: does anyone really think our government could pull off such a wide-ranging conspiracy?) The result: "chemtrails."

Denver130's credibility fell apart when I looked at those links. He's like the homeless guy who stops you in the street and tells you the CIA is trying to steal his brain.

Denver, why haven't you answered 414Flyer's question? Why is it that...

...in as long as this hoax has been going on, not a single photo has been taken of a chemplane...?

 

[Typhoon1244]

...the small group of people that are so insistent those [low-altitude] trails exist are looking from the ground, with no way to judge altitudes except perception and guessing...

That's the heart of the issue right there.

I probably didn't help matters any when I told Denver130 I'd seen condensation trails at low altitudes. Under certain conditions, you can even see them on takeoff and landing, as VNugget
pointed out.

 

[Mogus]

How can you or I ignore the FACT that the military has a history of testing chemical and biological agents on citizens and cities. Thats what the mainstream press has been telling us for the past 2 years.

Well, then, it MUST be true!

 

[VampyreGTX]

Um... did anyone not notice in his discussion of lapse rates, he is using 2.5 degress per thousand feet, which is correct, when applied to CELSIUS. He is using Fahrenheit! Therefore, when it's 90* in Houston, or in other words, 32* Celsius. A lapse rate of 2.5* C/1,000' would have the freeze level at 12,800. A temp of -40* F is equal to -40*C. So for -40*C the standard lapse rate would make that at an altitude of 28,800'. Not all that high, given that the majority of airliners fly above 30,000. With contrails able to form to the freeze level given the level of moisture in the atmosphere, we can see that it is possible to see contrails as low as the freeze level, which on a 90*F 'standard' day would be at 12,800' and all the way up into the flight levels.

But, we'll never convince these conspiracy nuts otherwise. I love how they take facts and documents that actually disprove their argument and contort them to fit what they believe....

 

[skeezer]

The average temperature decrease is 2.5 degrees per 1,000ft. So what is the temperature at 12,000ft?

2.5 times 12 = 30
90 – 30 = 60 (temperature at 12K)

By the way, lets do the math at 40,000ft.

2.5 times 40 = 100 (thats the amount of decreasing temperature at 40K)

90 - 100 = -10F

Denver130, I feel the need to correct your math here. If you are talking about temperature decrease with altitude. The lapse rate is 2 degrees CENTIGRADE per 1,000ft. The number you are using is in CENTIGRADE yet you are using it as if it were degrees F.

So.... to re-visist your math:

Temp at 12K with surface temp of 90F

90F equals 32C

32C- 2(12) equals 8 degrees C or 48 F

at 40K you get:

32C- 2(40) equals -48 degrees C or -54F cold enough for contrails eh?

Just tryin to help

Peace!!

Skeezer

 

[skeezer]

Dangit it VampyreGTX, you type too fast!!

You beat me to it.

Peace!

Skeezer

 

[Typhoon1244]

Holy smokes, guys.

Early in our electronic "conversation," Denver130 asserted that contrails could not exist in Houston during the summer because of the extremely high temperatures. In other words, he'd never heard of the adiabatic lapse rate.

I have just now realized that I told Denver130 that the standard lapse rates are 2 degrees C per 1000' and 2.5 degrees F per 1000'. It's supposed to be 3.5 degrees F per thousand! (My apologies. It's been a long time since I've used Farenheit...or studied for the P.P. written!)

This proves, however, that Denver130 is pretty selective about what facts he checks up on!