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

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

MAGA Protest

The Floodgates Are Breaking In Germany's Welfare State

“The government wants to make sure that that does not come out. A huge part of our political system is predicated on blackmail,”

You Know What Happens Next

Cash Jordan: Half-Built Tower Abandoned… as ICE Deports Entire ‘Migrant Workforce’

Heavy rainfall causes flash flooding Tuesday night, some cars stuck in high water on Chicago's West

Biden Doctor PLEADS THE FIFTH, Refuses To Testify To Congress, Biden Pardons ARE VOID

Joe Rogan says FBI director Kash Patel played him for a fool and maga for fools with the Jeff Epstein files

Elon's AI System "Grok" Went Rogue And Has Been SHUT DOWN in an Emergency!

Earthquake Swarms at One of the MOST DANGEROUS Volcanoes in the USA

Ben Shapiro Declares Epstein Case CLOSED: ‘Facts on the Ground Have Changed’

Iran receives 40 Chinese J10-C Fighter Jets

China’s Railgun Is Now Battle-Ready, Thanks to Nuclear Power

Chinese Hypersonic Advancements! Deadly new missile could decimate entire US fleet in 20 minutes

Iran Confirms Massive Chinese HQ 9 B Missile Deal

Why Is Europe Hitting 114°F And Still Rising?

The INCREDIBLE Impacts of Methylene Blue

The LARGEST Eruptions since the Merapi Disaster in 2010 at Lewotobi Laki Laki in Indonesia

Feds ARREST 11 Leftists For AMBUSH On ICE, 2 Cops Shot, Organized Terror Cell Targeted ICE In Texas

What is quantum computing?

12 Important Questions We Should Be Asking About The Cover Up The Truth About Jeffrey Epstein

TSA quietly scraps security check that every passenger dreads

Iran Receives Emergency Airlift of Chinese Air Defence Systems as Israel Considers New Attacks

Russia reportedly used its new, inexpensive Chernika kamikaze drone in the Ukraine

Iran's President Says the US Pledged Israel Wouldn't Attack During Previous Nuclear Negotiations

Will Japan's Rice Price Shock Lead To Government Collapse And Spark A Global Bond Crisis

Beware The 'Omniwar': Catherine Austin Fitts Fears 'Weaponization Of Everything'

Roger Stone: AG Pam Bondi Must Answer For 14 Terabytes Claim Of Child Torture Videos!

'Hit Us, Please' - America's Left Issues A 'Broken Arrow' Signal To Europe

Cash Jordan Trump Deports ‘Thousands of Migrants’ to Africa… on Purpose


Science/Tech
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: 3893
Comments: 101

. Subscribe to *Black Ops - Psyops*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 71.

#53. To: wudidiz (#0)

Here is what chemtrails are really about..

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_se eding

You'll discover that airports and Air Forces routinely use it for "hail and fog suppression".

Takeoff and landings are safer with cloud seeding.

Googolplex  posted on  2010-03-20   19:11:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: Googolplex, ALL (#53)

that doesn't appear to me to be the same thing as the multiple planes doing the crisscross patterns. this thread is long and i haven't read it all, but has anyone explained the difference between one plane with a con? chem? trail behind it as opposed to 2 and sometimes 3 crisscrossing over the same area for hours?

christine  posted on  2010-03-20   22:21:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: christine (#59)

for what it's worth, from Moving Targets Forums > References > Contrails

As a 20 year fighter pilot I can attest to his offering regarding fighter pilots getting the meteorological info of where "the cons" will be before stepping out to fly.

In the USAF the brevity term for being in the cons was "Marking", as in "Conan 2, bring it down, you're marking." As we entered the MOA or Warning Area to set up for a practice long range fight we'd have one of our wingmen "light the cans" and climb up to check it (the weather liars aren't always entirely accurate). As soon as he started to "mark" in the climb, one of the other guys would call "Marking" to clue him to report his altitude as you can't see it easily from the cockpit itself (they start a few hundred feet directly behind you usually).

Conversely, as he climbed out of the cons, a flight member would call "Stop mark", the reply,"340." Armed with that info, when "committing" out of the CAP, we would go min burner (to save gas) to climb up through the cons above 34,000 so that the bad guys couldn't see us as we approached them from 60-70 miles away.

This also serves to increase the range of your missiles as you get faster and higher up in the thinner air, and as well your fuel consumption is significantly less at altitude.

Typically, the cons will begin in the mid 20s and end in the mid to high 30s, but they can stretch up into the 40s if atmospheric conditions are right - I had a wingie marking at 49,000 at Nellis once (very rare) when we (Alaska F- 15Cs) were trying to set up a difficult 3 group "Hi-lo stack" problem simulating MiG-29s against heater only armed F-16 students and IPs from the USAF Weapons School back in '93 (I was out of them at 52,000).

Six of us against eight of them, but four of theirs were bomb laden strikers. The problem was very difficult - we slaughtered them and the poor student leading the mission had to re-do the ride.

They initially saw my wingie in the high cons and got overly concerned with him and thus didn't see a lower Eagle who'd done some good maneuvering with chaff. He ended up 15,000 feet right over the "battle box" of the 4 strikers down in the weeds trying to hide behind mountains as they ingressed to their target. He "popped" all four as he dove down on them in less than 30 seconds then added insult to injury by gunning one of the other Vipers only minutes later - a simulated "Ace in a day".

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-21   0:50:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: groundresonance (#66)

So are you still trying to sell the idea that the high altitude aircraft leaving the small contrail in the video was actually flying lower than the aircraft that left the huge chemtrail?

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-03-21   1:22:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: FormerLurker (#67) (Edited)

are you still trying to sell

all i'm trying to sell is a rational approach to this controversy.

if there's a mystery, we have to start somewhere, dont we?

and the first place to start is: finding out if there's really a mystery at all.

so far, everything you guys have posted has been completely lacking in facts... so nobody can tell, from what you've posted, if there's a mystery or not...

...not only that, but everything you've posted can be explained by the laws of chemistry and physics that cause contrails, so we dont have to trot out out this "chemtrail" baloney at all.

so the burden of proof lies with you ...you have to come up with evidence of an existing "chemtrail" that cant be explained by the chemical and physical science of contrails...

so far, you've failed miserably to provide proof of anything except your gullibility and bullheadedness.

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-21   1:42:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: groundresonance (#68)

So do you claim that the high altitude aircraft was flying lower or higher than the aircraft that formed the larger trail?

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-03-21   1:59:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: FormerLurker (#69)

you claim that the high altitude aircraft was flying lower or higher than the aircraft that formed the larger trail?

since you guys are unable to provide altitude data from either airplane, we dont know which plane was the "high altitude aircraft", do we?

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-21   2:12:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: groundresonance (#70)

since you guys are unable to provide altitude data from either airplane, we dont know which plane was the "high altitude aircraft", do we?

I don't think anyone here works for the FAA and has access to flight data, radar logs, or other such information pertaining to the video in question.

So we can only apply scientific technique in evaluating what we CAN see. It is apparent that the aircraft leaving the normal contrail is flying at an altitude of between 30,000 and 35,000 feet, is it not?

FormerLurker  posted on  2010-03-21   2:18:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 71.

#73. To: FormerLurker (#71) (Edited)

It is apparent that the aircraft leaving the normal contrail is flying at an altitude of between 30,000 and 35,000 feet, is it not?

we have no way of knowing.

that plane creating the small contrail may be down around 20,000', just entering air in which contrails form... not only that, but that could be a very small twin-engine jet, with a wingspan five times smaller than that of the wide contrail plane, and it might be creating only 1/10th of the water that the big contrail jet is creating.

or the small contrail plane could be at 35,000 feet, just leaving air where contrails form.

we have no way of knowing, since you guys have not provided us with data.

groundresonance  posted on  2010-03-21 02:26:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 71.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


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