See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: CONTRAIL vs CHEMTRAIL 101
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Apr 11, 2008
Author: truthseeker1922
Post Date: 2010-03-18 15:43:02 by wudidiz
Ping List: *Black Ops - Psyops* Subscribe to *Black Ops - Psyops*
Keywords: None
Views: 1459
Comments: 101
. Subscribe to *Black Ops - Psyops*
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 16.
#2. To: wudidiz (#0)
Here we go again. What was the relative humidity, temperature and pressure at the two different altitudes presented in this idiotic video?
It's obvious that the chemtrail is at a MUCH lower altitude than the contrail formed by the high altitude aircraft. I'd approximate the chemtrail to be between 7000 and 12,000 feet, whereas the aircraft leaving the contrail would be at around 35,000 feet. Being that there is no way in hell the temperature between 7000 to 12,000 feet would be anywhere close to the -35 C to -45 C temperature range, I'd say it'd be impossible for that chemtrail to actually be a contrail.
You're guessing. What some here are saying is that you cannot guess and hope to come to a correct conclusion. You have no way of knowing the altitude of anything, or of any conditions out there. We don't have to prove they don't exist. You have to prove that they do. Pics or vids without specific information are not proof.
Use a bit of logic. Compare the width of the contrail left by the high altitude aircraft (commercial aircraft cruise at ~ 35,000 feet) with that which is apparently a chemtrail. The contrail left by the high altitude jet is about a wingspan in width. If you look at the width of the larger chemtrail, it's about 5 times the width. So if it's 5 times the size, then it'd be 1/5 of the higher aircraft's altitude, which would be 35,000 feet / 5 = 7,000 feet in altitude. See, it's not rocket science PSUSA, and it does NOT involve simply taking a guess either.... PS: I estimated the altitude to be from 7000 to 12,000 feet, since the chemtrail may have expanded thus be wider than a normal contrail as left by the high altitude aircraft. I allowed for expansion to be up to about 1 3/4 the width.
Ping to post 4 and 6
Thank you for the time and effort to do the math, FL. I'm wondering if the Appleman chart has any relevance at all though since the 'Persistent Contrails', as the Ministry of Truth would have us call them, are not really contrails anyway.
Thank you for the time and effort to do the math, FL. Not a big deal, it was pretty simple once I actually thought about it a bit. I'm wondering if the Appleman chart has any relevance at all though since the 'Persistent Contrails', as the Ministry of Truth would have us call them, are not really contrails anyway. What PSUSA and groundresonance posted was their "scientific evidence" indicating what tempertures were necessary for contrail formation, from a "Maybe contrail" to a "Always contrail". There's no way in hell the temperatures at less than 32,000 feet would be anywhere close to that required for "Maybe contrail" formation, where that chemtrail in the image can't be more than 12,000 feet or so, given its relative width compared to the actual contrail formed by the high altitude aircraft seen in the image.
There are no replies to Comment # 16. End Trace Mode for Comment # 16.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#4. To: PSUSA (#2)
#5. To: FormerLurker, all (#4)
#6. To: PSUSA (#5)
(Edited)
You're guessing. What some here are saying is that you cannot guess and hope to come to a correct conclusion. You have no way of knowing the altitude of anything, or of any conditions out there.
#7. To: wudidiz, Original_Intent, groundresonance, All (#6)
#12. To: FormerLurker (#7)
#16. To: wudidiz, PSUSA, groundresonance, All (#12)
Replies to Comment # 16.