[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Consequences of Mild, Moderate & Severe Plagiarism

Plagiarism: 5 Potential Legal Consequences

When Philadelphia’s Foul-Mouthed Cop-Turned-Mayor Invented White Identity Politics

Trump Wanted to Pardon Assange and Snowden. Blocked by RINOs.

What The Pentagon Is Planning Against Trump Will Make Your Blood Run Cold Once Revealed

How Trump won the Amish vote in Pennsylvania

FEC Filings Show Kamala Harris Team Blew Funds On Hollywood Stars, Private Jets

Israel’s Third Lebanon War is underway: What you need to know

LEAK: First Behind-The-Scenes Photos Of Kamala After Getting DESTROYED By Trump | Guzzling Wine!🍷

Scott Ritter Says: Netanyahu's PAINFUL Stumble Pushes Tel Aviv Into Its WORST NIGHTMARE

These Are Trump's X-Men | Dr. Jordan B. Peterson

Houthis (Yemen) Breached THAAD. Israel Given a Dud Defense!!

Yuma County Arizona Doubles Its Outstanding Votes Overnight They're Stealing the Race from Kari Lake

Trump to withdraw U.S. troops from northern Syria

Trump and RFK created websites for the people to voice their opinion on people the government is hiring

Woke Georgia DA Deborah Gonzalez pummeled in re-election bid after refusing Laken Riley murder case

Trump has a choice: Obliterate Palestine or end the war

Rod Blagojevich: Kamala’s Corruption, & the Real Cause of the Democrat Party’s Spiral Into Insanity

Israel's Defense Shattered by Hezbollah's New Iranian Super Missiles | Prof. Mohammad Marandi

Trump Wins Arizona in Clean Sweep of Swing States in US Election

TikTok Harlots Pledge in Droves: No More Pussy For MAGA Fascists!

Colonel Douglas Macgregor:: Honoring Veteran's Day

Low-Wage Nations?

Trump to pull US out of Paris climate agreement NYT

Pixar And Disney Animator Bolhem Bouchiba Sentenced To 25 Years In Prison

Six C-17s, C-130s deploy US military assets to Northeastern Syria

SNL cast members unveil new "hot jacked" Trump character in MAGA-friendly cold open

Here's Why These Geopolitical And Financial Chokepoints Need Your Attention...

Former Army Chief Moshe Ya'alon Calls for Civil Disobedience to Protest Netanyahu Government

The Deep State against Trump


Miscellaneous
See other Miscellaneous Articles

Title: Video Shot by Pilot Flying Along side several Chemtrail Planes
Source: [None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Mar 13, 2010
Author: kevin604bc
Post Date: 2010-03-13 16:18:34 by wudidiz
Keywords: None
Views: 21020
Comments: 715

.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-544) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#545. To: PSUSA (#541)

Sorry but you have agreed that there is such thing as seeding clouds and those are chemicals put into the air.

So the question is while cloud seeding with a sprayer from an airplane does it leave a trail. I am certain we could easily look up pictures even from old newspaper articles and reliable sources to get our answer. The farmers have known about cloud seeding for years or so I have heard.

MiracleRose7  posted on  2010-03-16   15:32:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#546. To: PSUSA, Miraclerose7, James Deffenbach, wudidiz, FormerLurker, all (#541)

simply because we call a spade a spade, and can show that chemtrails are bullshit.

Except that you can't - you can only do so by denying the obvious differences in how a contrail is formed and for how long they normally persist, AND by denying the thousands to hundreds of thousands of photographs showing the different persisting characteristics of Chemtrails.

As well you must deny the eyewitness testimony of intelligent, responsible, people who have seen them with their own two eyes.

The entire anti-chemtrail/debunker argument relies solely and only upon on the denial of evidence.

"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-03-16   15:59:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#547. To: Original_Intent (#546)

The entire anti-chemtrail/debunker argument relies solely and only upon on the denial of evidence.

I thought that was hilarious!

There have been only a few that have posted evidence on this thread. You aren't one of them. Even though you were invited to present your evidence, as have others, but you people have consistently and explicitly refused to do so.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Live free or die kill ~~ Me

PSUSA  posted on  2010-03-16   16:26:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#548. To: MiracleRose7 (#543)

Chemtrails are spraying chemicals into the air. Contrails are a natural condensation that occurs from planes. They are not the same.

I have pictures taken from my yard of Chemtrails in their various stages throughout a four hour period. Whether it was cloud seeding which some people feel is not the same as chemtrails (I believe it is the same) and what substance was used to make the impact on sky above I do not know.

Earlier, I asked you to read this thread from top to bottom. I already dispelled your opinion two days ago. See below:

#350. To: wudidiz (#344)

Thank you.

Your picture and YouTube presentation use a similar theme: a very high altitude jet aircraft is emitting water vapor and a relatively low flying jet aircraft has emitted water vapor. In the case of the "contrail" the water vapor quickly freezes changing the reflectivity index, so you don't see the apparent trail for very long based on the angle of the pictures to the craft and the angle of the Sun at that time.

And for the lower flying jet aircraft wherein the "Chemtrail" appears to linger forever.... at the altitude flown, freezing did not occur. And there are other factors as well, air temperature, air velocity, time of day and actual chemical composition of the exhaust since air and jet fuel components need to be factored into the water vapor mixture that has been expelled.

If I showed pictures or videos of the twin towers disintegrating on 9/11 to someone who believes they 'pancaked' due to airplanes hitting them would it make a difference?

The trigger mechanism or ignition of 9/11 about the twin towers collapse was about jet aircraft pounding into the twin towers. Jet aircraft fuel is very flammable which leads us back into Chemtrails. That same combustion mixture (depending on the aircraft) gets transferred (although, very small trace amounts) into the exhausted water vapor. This leads to the variations you see in the sky.

"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves." -- Ronald Reagan, circa 1977

buckeroo posted on 2010-03-14 20:16:45 ET

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-16   17:10:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#549. To: James Deffenbach (#544)

t seems that the naysayers can't tell us why the chemtrails hang on and on while contrails dissipate rather quickly and don't make a hazy mess of the sky. They deny the evidence seen by their own eyes. Willfully blind and you can't help them.

See post just above.

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-16   17:11:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#550. To: MiracleRose7, PSUSA (#545)

The farmers have known about cloud seeding for years or so I have heard.

Cloud seeding and/or crop dusting and/or fuel ejection (for landing purposes) have all been dispelled to the central theme or suggestion of the thread.

Please read my new banner below to describe the core issue(s). You can click on it to zoom into the details.

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-16   17:29:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#551. To: PSUSA (#515) (Edited)

Appear foolish? It is foolish. How twisted does this have to get?

Some people think those who believe there was government involvement in the 9/11 attacks aren't only foolish, but are domestic terrorists.

So do you agree with them and believe that 9/11 truthers are all misinformed, blind, and misled, and are all terrorists at heart?


"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-03-16   17:47:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#552. To: PSUSA (#541)

The silly geese cant even agree what "chemtrails" are for. They are trying to assign a purpose for something that doesn't even exist! How funny is that?

Being the fact there is official denial that they even exist makes it sort of difficult to know exactly WHY they are doing, or even exactly WHAT they are doing.


"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-03-16   17:52:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#553. To: James Deffenbach, MiracleRose7 (#544)

It seems that the naysayers can't tell us why the chemtrails hang on and on while contrails dissipate rather quickly and don't make a hazy mess of the sky.

They'll just turn around and claim that it's either perfectly normal, or that it doesn't really happen, roll the dice and see which answer you get.


"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-03-16   17:53:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#554. To: FormerLurker (#553)

They'll just turn around and claim that it's either perfectly normal, or that it doesn't really happen, roll the dice and see which answer you get.

Oh, I am not going to bother much with people who won't believe their own eyes. Life is too short.

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton

James Deffenbach  posted on  2010-03-16   17:56:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#555. To: FormerLurker (#551) (Edited)

So do you agree with them and believe that 9/11 truthers are all misinformed, blind, and misled, and are all terrorists at heart?

Apples and oranges. Stick to the topic.

Edit to add: Do it, but I wont see it. This is just too stupid to continue and the thread is going on ignore.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Live free or die kill ~~ Me

PSUSA  posted on  2010-03-16   17:58:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#556. To: James Deffenbach (#554)

Oh, I am not going to bother much with people who won't believe their own eyes. Life is too short.

Chemtrails and contrails are not the same things. To say otherwise is to deny what is very obvious.

Lets see your critical analysis interpret the difference.

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-16   18:00:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#557. To: buckeroo (#556)

You have a severe comprehension problem don't you? I just said--you even copied and pasted it--that LIFE IS TOO SHORT TO BOTHER WITH PEOPLE WHO WON'T BELIEVE THEIR OWN EYES. That certainly includes you. Be off with you.

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton

James Deffenbach  posted on  2010-03-16   18:20:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#558. To: James Deffenbach (#557)

You have a severe comprehension problem don't you?

No, I don't ... I am holding your feet to fire as you casually make posts not addressing the specific technical details beyond just some silly assumption.

I just said--you even copied and pasted it--that LIFE IS TOO SHORT TO BOTHER WITH PEOPLE WHO WON'T BELIEVE THEIR OWN EYES. That certainly includes you. Be off with you.

Earlier you suggested ... just a few posts ago:

I may get back to you on it someday but if I were you I would not hold my breath and stand on one foot.

Notice the way you are abusive. Notice the way and manner you are condescending in attitude.

But, there are no facts to back up your self-opinionated posts; none, zero, zilch, nada. You are defensive. You don't know what you are talking about.

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-16   18:32:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#559. To: buckeroo (#558)

No, I am not defensive at all. I don't doubt my own eyes. Apparently you have some kind of vision problem and think your eyes are playing tricks on you or you just stay close to blind drunk. I don't know what other major malfunction you might have and don't have time to keep talking about it. This will be my last post to you on this thread so go ahead and have the last word. I think I can safely rest knowing that it will be as ignorant as the first one.

Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton

James Deffenbach  posted on  2010-03-16   18:54:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#560. To: James Deffenbach (#559)

No, I am not defensive at all. I don't doubt my own eyes.

No facts, no data, no research .... just yammering.

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-16   19:16:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#561. To: Original_Intent (#546)

hundreds of thousands of photographs showing the different persisting characteristics of Chemtrails.

As well you must deny the eyewitness testimony of intelligent, responsible, people who have seen them with their own two eyes.

can you look at a picture of an airplane and tell what altitude it's flying at, what the temperature is at that altitude, and what the relative humidity is at that altitude?

can you look at an airplane passing over and tell, with your "own two eyes", what altitude the airplane is flying at, what the temperature is at that altitude, and what the relative humidity is at that altitude?

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-16   23:07:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#562. To: groundresonance, Original_Intent (#561)

can you look at an airplane passing over and tell, with your "own two eyes", what altitude the airplane is flying at, what the temperature is at that altitude, and what the relative humidity is at that altitude?

The humidity and temperature would be impossible (unless it's raining), but the altitude isn't that hard to approximate given the size of the aircraft in the sky, especially when viewed with binoculars. The exact altitude no, but a rough approximation is in fact possible.

It's not difficult to see how high an aircraft is in relation to cloud cover, where if a certain type a cloud forms at X number of feet, and the plane is below those clouds, then it is flying at an altitude less than X. The inverse can also be said about aircraft flying above certain types of clouds, yet are visible when passing over breaks in the clouds.

I've never seen chemtrails form BELOW cloud cover of ANY type, but HAVE seen contrails form from aircraft flying ABOVE or BETWEEN clouds.


"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-03-16   23:14:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#563. To: FormerLurker (#562) (Edited)

can you look at an airplane passing over and tell, with your "own two eyes", what altitude the airplane is flying at, what the temperature is at that altitude, and what the relative humidity is at that altitude?

The humidity and temperature would be impossible (unless it's raining), but the altitude isn't that hard to approximate given the size of the aircraft in the sky

...but you think you can tell the type of aircraft (note here that "type" refers to the technical designation of the aircraft model... as in "boeing 747") and you have the dimensions of all aircraft types memorized, so you can "tell" what altitude they flying at.

you're a really talented fella.

i notice you dont want to talk about photographic evidence of "chemtrails"...

why is that?

anyhow, you freely admit that you would have no idea of two of the most important conditions that cause contrails ---temperature and humidity--- and pardon me for being skeptical of your ability to judge altitude.

so, in other words, your "eyewitness" evidence is balderdash, and photographic "evidence" is so preposterous that you dont even want to talk about it.

good enough

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-16   23:25:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#564. To: Original_Intent, PSUSA, Miraclerose7, James Deffenbach, FormerLurker, randge, GreyLmist, christine, all (#546)

evidence

Does this look like 'pancaking'?

Does this look like 'condensation'?


“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy

wudidiz  posted on  2010-03-17   2:30:28 ET  (4 images) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#565. To: wudidiz (#564)

Does this look like 'condensation'?

what altitude are those aiplanes flying at?

what is the temperature and humidity of the air they're flying in?

where does that altitude, temperature and humidity fall on an appleman chart?

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-17   5:29:48 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#566. To: wudidiz (#564) (Edited)

once you give us the altitude, temperature and humidity, we can figure out from the appleman chart if contrails are possible, and whether or not those contrails will be persistent.

if the altitude, temp and humidity fall outside the appleman chart, then we can start wondering about spraying operations.

or, we can try to figure out if the picture has been photoshopped or not...

then, after we decide whether or not the pictures are for real, we can start talking about the finer points: type of aircraft, normal fuel consumption, power settings at the time the picture was taken, how much the contrails were compressed and foreshortened by the telephoto lens... stuff like that.

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-17   6:12:49 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#567. To: wudidiz (#564)

what i mean is... it isnt as if you havent already posted a couple bogus pictures on this thread...

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-17   6:15:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#568. To: wudidiz (#564)

just to cheer you up...

here's a picture of a building in fairbanks being used to spray chemtrails.

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-17   6:21:10 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#569. To: wudidiz (#564)

Does this look like 'condensation'?

What cause have you to believe that the exhaust plume coming from the turbines is something other than H20, CO, CO2 and unspent hydrocarbons?

What chemical would cause those fluffy trails? Barium?

I'm sure that there are a lot of nasty things that could be spread if someone had access to and control of aircraft, and with the appropriate hardware, no one on the ground would notice a thing because a lot of damage could be done quite invisibly.

randge  posted on  2010-03-17   6:41:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#570. To: wudidiz (#564)

I took this thread off of ignore. I just couldn't stay away. Like a dog to its vomit...

Does this look like 'pancaking'?

Apples and oranges. Stay on topic.

THIS looks like pancaking. Let's go pancaking! I love pancakes!

Does this look like 'condensation'?

Yes.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Live free or die kill ~~ Me

PSUSA  posted on  2010-03-17   10:32:03 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#571. To: groundresonance, all, chemtrail believers (#568)

These people are forgetting something important about persistent contrails.

It's the speed of the aircraft.

The cruising speed of a B17 is 150 mph. www.boeing.com/history/boeing/b17.html

I use the B17 example because of the pics I posted earlier that showed persistent contrails.

The cruising speed of a 767 is mach .8, which at 30,000' comes out to about 550 mph, according to the calculator presented here: www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/sound.html

In any given time, a contrail will be 3X+ longer in todays jets, because, for the dense out there, the cruising speed is 3X+ greater.

That will give the illusion of persistence. Now combine that with greater numbers of aircraft flying at any given time.

Taking into account the increase of air traffic over the years and it is hardly surprising that there are so-called whiteouts in appropriate conditions.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Live free or die kill ~~ Me

PSUSA  posted on  2010-03-17   10:46:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#572. To: PSUSA (#571)

It's the speed of the aircraft.

good point...

and then there's fuel consumption, which is higher in a jet than a recip, so they're producing more water.

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-17   10:51:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#573. To: PSUSA, wudidiz (#570)

I took this thread off of ignore. I just couldn't stay away. Like a dog to its vomit...

This is *ONE* of the finest threads under the Sun.

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-17   11:03:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#574. To: groundresonance (#572)

Agreed. But it would be interesting to know how much more water is produced at cruise settings in real terms, and not just guessing. I know there are a lot of variables.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Live free or die kill ~~ Me

PSUSA  posted on  2010-03-17   11:17:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#575. To: buckeroo (#573)

This is *ONE* of the finest threads under the Sun.

I don't know about that, but it does show some peoples thought processes.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Live free or die kill ~~ Me

PSUSA  posted on  2010-03-17   11:18:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#576. To: PSUSA (#571)

The cruising speed of a B17 is 150 mph. www.boeing.com/history/boeing/b17.html

I use the B17 example because of the pics I posted earlier that showed persistent contrails.

The cruising speed of a 767 is mach .8, which at 30,000' comes out to about 550 mph, according to the calculator presented here: www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/sound.html

In any given time, a contrail will be 3X+ longer in todays jets

apparently a 767 burns about 1,722 gallons per hour, and a B17 burned 200 gallons per hour.

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-17   11:24:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#577. To: groundresonance, buckeroo, all (#576)

Yeah, but it's a completely different kind of fuel. How much water is released? How about other chemicals that are released due to combustion? I barely passed high school chemistry.

There is a way to answer this "chemtrail" nonsense scientifically, in one neat tidy package, and not in a topic approaching 600 posts, a good portion of which is nothing but idiotic nonsense. But I can't do it because I don't know what these variables are exactly. We can only address some of them. That is enough to disprove it, but I know there is more.

This whole thing is based on deception, that you found, regarding photoshopped pics, and a whole bunch of crap spread on the internet. It's unfortunate, but a big part of the programming we all get from our days in school is that if it is in print, then it's true. Especially if it goes along with what we think our government is capable of doing to us. And if a person sounds authoritative, then that makes it true too.

People lie. All the time. And they spread lies. All the time. You can see it here.

Chemtrails are a hoax that took on a life of its own.


Click for Privacy and Preparedness files

Live free or die kill ~~ Me

PSUSA  posted on  2010-03-17   11:53:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#578. To: PSUSA, groundresonance (#577)

Did you see post #565 from groundresonance? He introduces the Appleman Chart. You can follow one link here ....

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-17   12:02:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#579. To: PSUSA, FormerLurker, Original_Intent, buckeroo, ground resonance, all (#577)

Did or did not groundresonance state the following?

a gallon of water, when it's vaporized, occupies thousands of cubic feet...

Now if you look at a trail, whether it's a regular contrail or a chemtrail, it is 3 dimensional, is it not? Cubic feet is a measure of volume (ie. 3 dimensional space) buck, in case you didn't know. The thing is, the LENGTH is MUCH greater than the circular cross section, where the circular cross section of a regular contrail might be say 30 feet in diameter. Since area of a circle is Pi * (radius)Squared, or Pi * (diameter/2)Squared, then 3.14 * (15)Squared is 706.5 square feet. So every 10 feet of length gives you 7065 cubic feet of water vapor, from what he claims, in the area of what he claims as "thousands of cubic feet per gallon". SO, if this were true, and since there are 5280 feet in a mile, then there would have to be 528 gallons of water per mile, or 2640 gallons in five miles. If the water comes from the jet fuel, and even IF there was a 100% conversion of jet fuel to water (which of course there isn't), then the jet would burn 2650 gallons of fuel every 5 miles. In order to fly 500 miles, it'd have to burn 265,000 gallons of fuel. Jets can fly THOUSANDS of miles, yet a 747 only holds 48,445 gallons of fuel, and only consumes about 5 gallons per mile, not 528 or more.

See where this is going?


“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy

wudidiz  posted on  2010-03-17   12:02:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#580. To: PSUSA (#577) (Edited)

How much water is released?

apparently gasoline produces about a gallon of water for each gallon of gas burned... jet fuel produces a little more than a gallon of water for each gallon burned.

burning "gallon of kerosene" "gallon of water"

burning "gallon of gasoline" "gallon of water".

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-17   12:09:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#581. To: wudidiz, Formerlurker (#579)

I didn't know how to answer FL's point of view on that post. I had previously brought up the point and he seems to dismiss it and then refine the idea in terms of a cylindrical volume of gaseous space.

In any event we are not looking at one gallon of water.

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-17   12:11:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#582. To: buckeroo, Formerlurker (#581)

A plane of any sort doesn't burn enough fuel to put that much water vapor or condensation into the air. Even if it did (though it can't) it would disappear quickly.


“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy

wudidiz  posted on  2010-03-17   12:18:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#583. To: wudidiz (#582)

A plane of any sort doesn't burn enough fuel to put that much water vapor or condensation into the air. Even if it did (though it can't) it would disappear quickly.

Incorrect. You haven't introduced the various physical parameters of altitude, air speed, temperature and other important technical details into your reasoning.

"Yes they have been experimenting on us for decades. The Chemtrails are just one aspect." -- Original_Intent, circa 2010-03-14 21:00:46 ET

buckeroo  posted on  2010-03-17   12:23:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#584. To: wudidiz (#579)

See where this is going?

Yes, I do.

By that token even ordinary jet aircraft burning ordinary jet fuel could not produce ordinary contrails without falling from the sky because they would soon run out of fuel.

Wonder what keeps them up there??

randge  posted on  2010-03-17   12:23:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (585 - 715) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]