Phoenix Oct 28 - got hit hard with chemtrails. - Page 3 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

MattLarson · #31 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by MareTranquility

Just out of idle curiousity, Matt, have read anything about or watched the video of the surgeries to remove odd pieces of electronic(?) equipment that have been implanted in humans by (whoever)? Dr. Roger Leir has removed a number of these strange objects and had them analyzed in labs. No one has yet discerned what they are or how they work.

How about "rods"? A lifeform that seems to occupy the same space/time that we do, but lives at such a fast pace that it takes special equipment to observe or even detect them.

I learned a long time ago that there are a lot of strange things going on that are outside the purview of "common sense" but appear nonetheless to be real. Immanuel Velikovsky was drummed out of the scientific community for his weird techniques--like dowsing faults from the back of yak in the Ural Mountains. But years later seismologists discovered that his dowsing technique provided extremely accurate maps of the faults in the Ural Mountains. I don't "believe" things like Christians talk about believing the Bible, but I also don't throw things out without a fair hearing. A college education taught me, more than anything else, how little we know about the universe in which we live.

Have you read any of the books by William R. Corliss? He's been collecting stories about anomalies from all kinds of sources for decades, many of his stories come from scientific journals. Interesting stuff that you don't often hear about.

Please, one set of "paranormal" events at a time.

Matt

WarOnIgnorance · #32 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by MareTranquility

Just out of idle curiousity, Matt, have read anything about or watched the video of the surgeries to remove odd pieces of electronic(?) equipment that have been implanted in humans by (whoever)? Dr. Roger Leir has removed a number of these strange objects and had them analyzed in labs. No one has yet discerned what they are or how they work.

How about "rods"? A lifeform that seems to occupy the same space/time that we do, but lives at such a fast pace that it takes special equipment to observe or even detect them.

I learned a long time ago that there are a lot of strange things going on that are outside the purview of "common sense" but appear nonetheless to be real. Immanuel Velikovsky was drummed out of the scientific community for his weird techniques--like dowsing faults from the back of yak in the Ural Mountains. But years later seismologists discovered that his dowsing technique provided extremely accurate maps of the faults in the Ural Mountains. I don't "believe" things like Christians talk about believing the Bible, but I also don't throw things out without a fair hearing. A college education taught me, more than anything else, how little we know about the universe in which we live.

Have you read any of the books by William R. Corliss? He's been collecting stories about anomalies from all kinds of sources for decades, many of his stories come from scientific journals. Interesting stuff that you don't often hear about.

You have got to be kidding, Mare. It's a big leap from accepting there are as of yet unexplained phenonema, which no doubt is true, to giving such outlandish explanations for them.

There are a number of explanations for what you call 'rods' for example that, by applying Ockham's razor, I favour over them being a 'lifeform'. The most obvious one is atmospheric optical effects. You're probably familiar with the phenonemon of 'fata morgana'. A very real optical illusion, often observed and photographed. Before it was explained, there were numerous 'other' explanations too. Heck, some of them were worshipped.

Another possibility is that it's a side effect of the optics of digital cameras. And I could find a few more rational explanations before I would conclude these things are lifeforms. And before you call me closed minded, I own all books of Charles Fort. Quite enjoyable and intriguing and a true challenge to come up with rational explanations sometimes, but when they get scientific attention, they are invariably explained (take spontaneous human combustion for example).

Speakeasy · #33 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Let's also ignore the fact that obviously, all these chemtrails aren't being dispersed by military aircraft, unless you see them filling the skies every day. Since the majority of these 'chemtrails' will be coming from commercial airlines, that means someone is going to have to load up these commercial jets with these chemicals to disperse. And also, these chemicals can only be dispersed over areas that have commercial flights flying above them.

And let's ignore the fact that anything dispersed from tens of thousands of feet up is going to spread too much to have any sort of effect on anything on the ground.

And let's ignore the fact that there has never ever once been any sort of sample of the supposed chemical they're spraying.

And let's ignore the fact that we've seen no sort of effect on the population from these supposed 'chemtrails'.

And let's ignore the fact that every single government must be in on this plot, because contrails...err...'chemtrails' can be seen all over the world, including over the oceans (take THAT, dolphins!).

And let's ignore the fact that due to the method of disbursement, whoever was spraying the chemtrails would have no sort of way to control who was effected. With the amount of contrails over DC (flying into Reagan National), this means the president himself would be effected, too.

Let's ignore all these facts. This is step one to being a conspiracy theorist.

Speakeasy · #34 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

But I don't think anyone can deny the fact that rods are totally aliens from an alternate dimension.

WarOnIgnorance · #35 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

With the amount of contrails over DC (flying into Reagan National), this means the president himself would be effected, too.

Actually, Speak, I'm not so sure this is an argument against it.

conformfailure · #36 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Let's also ignore the fact that obviously, all these chemtrails aren't being dispersed by military aircraft, unless you see them filling the skies every day. Since the majority of these 'chemtrails' will be coming from commercial airlines, that means someone is going to have to load up these commercial jets with these chemicals to disperse. And also, these chemicals can only be dispersed over areas that have commercial flights flying above them.

You're saying that it is impossible for the military to use commercial-use aircraft to do the chemtrail thing. Why? (I don't know what chemtrails are but I know it exists because I see it). How is this somehow an argument?

I don't understand the assertion that chemicals can only be dispersed over areas that have commercial flights flying above them. What do you mean?

Quote:

And let's ignore the fact that anything dispersed from tens of thousands of feet up is going to spread too much to have any sort of effect on anything on the ground.

Water vapor doesn't spread. That's what a contrail is - water. I doesn't spread out. It immediately dissipates.

Quote:

And let's ignore the fact that there has never ever once been any sort of sample of the supposed chemical they're spraying.

Ummm... that's the core mystery. What is it? I'd like to know.

Quote:

And let's ignore the fact that we've seen no sort of effect on the population from these supposed 'chemtrails'.

We don't know what the effect is because we don't know what it is. It's there. We see it. We just can't jump that high to get a sample. Sorry. None of these arguments can be blamed on those that question. We want answers.

Quote:

And let's ignore the fact that every single government must be in on this plot, because contrails...err...'chemtrails' can be seen all over the world, including over the oceans (take THAT, dolphins!).

I don't care. I want to know what it is. What is it?

Quote:

And let's ignore the fact that due to the method of disbursement, whoever was spraying the chemtrails would have no sort of way to control who was effected. With the amount of contrails over DC (flying into Reagan National), this means the president himself would be effected, too.

It may be used for weather manipulation or something else. We don't know. This isn't our fault for not knowing. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT IS AND I KNOW IT ISN'T CONTRAILS BECAUSE IT IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

Quote:

Let's ignore all these facts. This is step one to being a conspiracy theorist.

Facts? You didn't state any facts at all.

Here it is:

I'm asking a question. I want answers.

You come back and say that I don't know what it is and therefore it doesn't exist.

WTF?!

Speakeasy · #37 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by conformfailure

I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT IS AND I KNOW IT ISN'T CONTRAILS BECAUSE IT IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

LOL, this about sums it up right here.

You don't know what it is, but you somehow know it's completely different. You've arrived at the conclusion that it's some sort of conspiracy, but you don't know what the conspiracy is. You just know they aren't contrails!

Quote:

Condensation from engine exhaust

An aircraft engine's exhaust increases the amount of moisture in the air, which can push the water content of the air past saturation point. This causes condensation to occur, and the contrail to form.

Aviation fuel such as petrol/gasoline (piston engines) or paraffin/kerosene (jet engines) consists primarily of hydrocarbons. When the fuel is burned, the carbon combines with oxygen to form carbon dioxide; the hydrogen also combines with oxygen to form water, which emerges as steam in the exhaust. For every gallon of fuel burned, approximately one gallon of water is produced, in addition to the water already present as humidity in the air used to burn the fuel. At high altitudes this steam emerges into a cold environment, (as altitude increases, the atmospheric temperature drops) which lowers the temperature of the steam until it condenses into tiny water droplets and/or desublimates into ice. These millions of tiny water droplets and/or ice crystals form the contrails. The temperature drop (and therefore, time and distance) the steam needs to condense accounts for the contrail forming some way behind the aircraft's engines. The majority of the cloud content comes from water trapped in the surrounding air. At high altitudes, supercooled water vapour requires a trigger to encourage desublimation. The exhaust particles in the aircraft's exhaust act as this trigger, causing the trapped vapor to rapidly turn to ice crystals. Contrails will only occur when the outside air temperature around the aircraft is at or below -57 degrees Celsius.

source

MattLarson · #38 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by conformfailure

Water vapor doesn't spread. That's what a contrail is - water. I doesn't spread out. It immediately dissipates.

WRONG! READ the links I provided. Your claim above is completely incorrect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by conformfailure

It may be used for weather manipulation or something else. We don't know. This isn't our fault for not knowing. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT IS AND I KNOW IT ISN'T CONTRAILS BECAUSE IT IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

Again, READ the links provided.

Matt

conformfailure · #39 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Okay.

Hey, didn't I say I knew what a contrail is?

I'm asking about chemtrails. Not contrails.

Speakeasy · #40 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by conformfailure

Okay.

Hey, didn't I say I knew what a contrail is?

I'm asking about chemtrails. Not contrails.

Yes. "Chemtrails" are contrails. They're the same thing.

MattLarson · #41 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

READ the links.

These "mystery" behaviors you attribute to "chemtrails" are in fact completely explained behaviors of water vapor contrails.

Please, READ the provided links. They explain persistence, gaps in the lines, dissipation of the lines, etc.

If you're not going to read what is provided, there is no point trying to discuss this.

Matt

conformfailure · #42 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Let me know when you guys are up to par with contrails. Google some more. Then after you've educated yourselves, I'll be back tonight to go ahead and make my points.

I don't just post things without knowing what it is or in this case - knowing what it's not. I just posted it because I thought it was very interesting and a very bad day for chemtrails and it was bothersome.

I dind't know you guys would post and take interest. But I don't want to argue stuff I already know that you guys just started googling and linking.

It's pretty upsetting that you guys never question anything and jump at those that do.

Anyways, google more so we can get past the trivial disputes.

MattLarson · #43 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

So, you've not bothered to read what was posted?

Never mind then. It appears we've arrived at another "cell phones don't work on planes" moment.

Matt

Speakeasy · #44 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

I knew this thread was going to be awesome!

Now excuse me while I go back to not questioning anything.

MattLarson · #45 (**permalink**) 10-30-2006

Have fun, Speakeasy, I'm out....

Matt

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode