Chemtrails. The reality.

[advancedboy]

I didn`t want to resort to this, but ok. Watch the movie ` What in the world are they spraying` and simply read the qualifications of those people that are speaking on matter of chemtrailing. Why not argue with them with your numbers of airplane distances?
 Here is another woman talking about this issue, maybe try  to be humble, and listen to all her video, especially when she reads out stats from  the local hospital.T he way you speak guys here makes the place desolated and lonely. In the end you are  left alone to discuss what air simulator games you fly. You are left among a bunch that have everything the same. And then crickets start chirping. Calling me twit,  certainly slowly leads to that.

[SolusLupus]

"Global warming... no such thing."

Nope, wrong.

CO2 gas is recognized as a global warming gas.  Billions of tons of it are pumped out every day.  Venus is a pressure cooker with all of its own CO2 gas.  This is basic astronomical knowledge, but naturally it's gotten politicized to hell and back.

T he way you speak guys here makes the place desolated and lonely.

  You'll find a good many more people on the JREF Forum and the Bad Astronomy/Universe Today forums.  The Apollohoax forum are a much smaller lot, I'm afraid.  You'll also find that a good deal of us are on the BAUT as well.

In the end you are  left alone to discuss what air simulator games you fly.

Heaven forbid, people talk about their interests over an internet forum.  You certainly don't see THOSE in well-populated forums, not in the least!  Wait.

[Jason Thompson]

Why not argue with them with your numbers of airplane distances?

You brought the discussion here. You made a statement regarding the distances between aircraft. You consistently failed to respond to the request to back up your statement, and now you want to shift the argument onto someone else? What a coward you are. If you can't support your statements don't make them. If you fail to meet the standard of proof required for your own statements, don't cry foul because the rest of us call you out on it and expose you for the intellectual coward and liar you are.

[advancedboy]

 `Intellectual coward,` nice one, . Hahhaha. I can`t calculate the exact distances, because I don`t have skills to do so. But you are pressing this, as if these are the only skills that matter.  I superimposed the pictures, and showed you the approximate visual estimation. Now you press that  it must be  definitely the temperature variations, that caused the trails to linger. Where have I heard it before, temperature inversions and swamp gass, hmm. You are naive to believe that I won`t find a more convincing video.
 There is nothing  of intelligence that is coming out of you,  which would  include patience, reservedness and ability  to exercize variables in possible evidence.  There is also nothing else that I would attribute of such, that would be created  by you, be it physically constructed or written. Nowhere else in scientific community I have seen such agression  and name calling.

Lupus, you even can`t post a picture properly?
 here is a video of 2 teachers talking it in a simple humble manner. These look like the salt of the earth and sincere people, and before attacking them being stupid and not scientists, what matters is the coincidences that go through  many videos of people reporting chemtrails. I like your attitude, at least I know where you stand.  One day it will be easier for us to see, and you won`t be able to mingle in, as if one of us.

[SolusLupus]

Intellectual coward,` nice one, . Hahhaha. I can`t calculate the exact distances, because I don`t have skills to do so. But you are pressing this, as if these are the only skills that matter.  I superimposed the pictures, and showed you the approximate visual estimation.

So you rushed to a conclusion without any expertise, and are unwilling to admit that it is not so easy to visually estimate the distance of two objects at long range based on apparent size differences?  And you're completely unwilling to admit you might be wrong?

Now you press that  it must be  definitely the temperature variations, that caused the trails to linger. Where have I heard it before, temperature inversions and swamp gass, hmm.

Will you please at least do the least amount of research it takes to find out how contrails work?

Lupus, you even can`t post a picture properly?

Pardon?  Outside of the unnecessary rudeness (which is completely hypocritical given how much you complain about others here insulting you), it shows up just fine for me, even when I'm logged out.

here is a video of 2 teachers talking it in a simple humble manner. These look like the salt of the earth and sincere people, and before attacking them being stupid and not scientists, what matters is the coincidences that go through  many videos of people reporting chemtrails.

So ignorance multiplied several times suddenly becomes knowledge?  Once millions thought the sun revolved around the Earth because of the lack of knowledge they had about the solar system, does that suddenly make them right?  I'm sure they'd be considered "salt of the earth and sincere people" too.

Also, I'd say ignorant, not stupid.  As in, they make layman's assumptions without taking the effort to understand contrails, and are drawn into the hysteria thanks to its propagation by folks such as you.  It feeds into itself.

I like your attitude, at least I know where you stand.  One day it will be easier for us to see, and you won`t be able to mingle in, as if one of us.

We make her one of us!

[Mr Gorsky]

here is a video of 2 teachers talking it in a simple humble manner. These look like the salt of the earth and sincere people, and before attacking them being stupid and not scientists, what matters is the coincidences that go through  many videos of people reporting chemtrails.

In the dim and distant past, when I was but a schoolboy, my history teacher was a great guy. Very intelligent, knew his subject very well and could impart both the knowledge and skills required to his students in an exciting and effective manner. But there wasn't a hope in hell that I would have gone to him with questions about my Biology assignment, my German homework or that English essay I just couldn't get started on.

Teachers are fine people (I am married to one after all), and the fact that they are teachers confirms a certain level of academic accomplishment and intellectual potential. However, they are not (and nor are they required to be) experts beyond their subject area. My wife is an English Literature graduate, teaching primary school children, and she often leaves the room (physically or metaphorically) whenever my son and I get into a discussion on our areas of interest ... computing, physics, quantum theory, because it really isn't something she is interested in.

The fact that the subjects in your video are teachers means nothing beyond the fact that teachers are just as capable of being crackpots and/or falling victim to conspiracy theories as the rest of the population.

[ka9q]

`Intellectual coward,` nice one, . Hahhaha. I can`t calculate the exact distances, because I don`t have skills to do so. But you are pressing this, as if these are the only skills that matter.

You made the claim about distances, but now admit you can't calculate them. And you're offended that we challenge you on this? Do you not see the problem here?

Now you press that  it must be  definitely the temperature variations, that caused the trails to linger. Where have I heard it before, temperature inversions and swamp gass, hmm.

I don't know, where have you heard it?

The relationship between atmospheric altitude, pressure, density and temperature is extremely well documented and very widely used. For example, here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Standard_Atmosphere

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Atmosphere

[Jason Thompson]

I can`t calculate the exact distances, because I don`t have skills to do so. But you are pressing this, as if these are the only skills that matter.  I superimposed the pictures, and showed you the approximate visual estimation.

And what is that estimation based on? Nothing. I have numbers, and the well-known fact that passenger aircraft do NOT ever fly that close to each other for safety reasons on my side. I have researched and performed calculations. And you have done... what?

There is nothing  of intelligence that is coming out of you,

Typical crackpot: refusing to recognise intelligence in others. Do you find fault with the trigonometry in my equations?

here is a video of 2 teachers talking it in a simple humble manner.

Which proves what? Are they experts on atmospheric phenomena, water vapour condensation and dispersion?

[Andromeda]

 There is nothing  of intelligence that is coming out of you,  which would  include patience, reservedness and ability  to exercize variables in possible evidence.  There is also nothing else that I would attribute of such, that would be created  by you, be it physically constructed or written. Nowhere else in scientific community I have seen such agression  and name calling.

Ad hominem attacks - the last refuge of the terminally wrong.

[carpediem]

I didn`t want to resort to this, but ok. Watch the movie ` What in the world are they spraying` and simply read the qualifications of those people that are speaking on matter of chemtrailing. Why not argue with them with your numbers of airplane distances?

Because they aren't arguing that two aircraft are flying dangerously close together for no reason. You are.

[advancedboy]

  I already told you I estimated the distances, your messurment is no more accurate than my estimation, you just showed a probability of 9% difference in size. yet, if those airplanes were closer than 1km the variation would be even less. Which is completely fine with this video, as it is inconclusive  , because of its blurrness. Your exact calcualtions  and the given percentage is the same as Drakes equation, not significant  in being more accurate than a guesstimate.
 Your assertion that these people`s  info is not important, because they are not scientists is  equally matched by insignifacance of yours, sitting in the same ditch, as you do no have specific qualifications to deal with this subject more than they or me.
There is something going on here, I can`t figure it out yet. For example, i don`t comment on JFK, or other subjects that I haven`t done at least minimal research, but you are completely specialised in chemtrails. Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give  me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because  you have your scientific...approach.
Have you ever thought why I am so gullible? Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax,  9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?
You can keep peddaling that everything is nonsence, coincidence, not scientifically approrved by mainstream, etc.  That is your job to do here, and that is your pattern.

It is the same as NIST. (`Have you found any explsives`? No. Did you  look? No. Why? We didn`t expect them to be there so we didn`t.) You will probably say the same, that you didn`t research chemtrails because they don`t exist. it is meaningless because you are in a postion of only arguing . If you had common sense, you would try to research evidence offered by both parties, or at least be suspicious about why this `chemtrails` issue is so widespread.

[Abaddon]

  I already told you I estimated the distances, your messurment is no more accurate than my estimation, you just showed a probability of 9% difference in size. yet, if those airplanes were closer than 1km the variation would be even less. Which is completely fine with this video, as it is inconclusive  , because of its blurrness.

So your 200m separation guess is worthless and has no supporting evidence. At least I gave justification for my estimate.

Your exact calcualtions  and the given percentage is the same as Drakes equation, not significant  in being more accurate than a guesstimate.

And that makes your wild guess valid how, exactly?

Your assertion that these people`s  info is not important, because they are not scientists is  equally matched by insignifacance of yours, sitting in the same ditch, as you do no have specific qualifications to deal with this subject more than they or me.

How do you know how qualified anyone posting here? This board is populated by many scientists and engineers, some of whom work in the aerospace industry.

There is something going on here, I can`t figure it out yet.

Quelle surprise. What is going on here is you have bitten off more than you can chew.
You didn't expect the depth of knowledge and experience present here.

You thought you could waltz in and slay everyone here with the utterly crapulent arguments you have presented and that nobody could refute them. You were wrong.

For example, i don`t comment on JFK, or other subjects that I haven`t done at least minimal research, but you are completely specialised in chemtrails.

Many here have done the required research, including the topic at hand, chemtrails. That's what this thread is about so enough with the JFK derail.

Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give  me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because  you have your scientific...approach.

No, because of experience, expertise and previous research, many here have the answers immediately to hand. You act as though you believe nobody here ever heard of chemtrails before, or ever participated in numerous discussions of same.

Have you ever thought why I am so gullible? Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax,  9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?

I have no idea why you in particular are so gullible, why don't you explain why you think you are so gullible.
 

You can keep peddaling that everything is nonsence, coincidence, not scientifically approrved by mainstream, etc.  That is your job to do here, and that is your pattern.

No thanks. We will continue to debunk woo claims for which there is NO EVIDENCE.

[Jason Thompson]

I already told you I estimated the distances,

No, you guessed. An estimate has some basis in numerical reality.

I calculated.

your messurment is no more accurate than my estimation, you just showed a probability of 9% difference in size. yet, if those airplanes were closer than 1km the variation would be even less.

I know. But that is not the point.

You guessed they were close together because they looked similar in size. I stated that they would still look similar in size even if they were 1km apart, five times further than your 'estimate'. You said that was absurd, you didn't believe it, and challenged me to provide my calculations to prove it. I did.

Naturally, confronted with this demonstration that you were wrong in your disbelief of my original statement, you now try to twist it around, accusing me of 'tricks' because the video is zoomed, and now trying to claim that I have failed to prove something I was never trying to prove in the first place. I never said those planes were that distance apart or that they were at those altitudes. I was addressing ONLY your statement that their similar size showed them to be close together.

And you STILL don't know that they were even the same size. If the lower aircraft is smaller than the higher one then that introduces an even greater range to their possible distances and similar apparent sizes.

Your exact calcualtions  and the given percentage is the same as Drakes equation, not significant  in being more accurate than a guesstimate.

Absolute rubbish, but you keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel that your TOTAL inability to preform basic calculations  before making absurd guesses sets you on an equal footing with anyone here in the reasoning skills department.

you do no have specific qualifications to deal with this subject more than they or me.

I certainly DO have better qualifications to discuss it than you, as demonstrated repeatedly. However, you are once again missing or refusing to get my point. I can't even be bothered reiterating it.

Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give  me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because  you have your scientific...approach.

Oh, the arrogance! Do you HONESTLY believe you are the first person who has ever come along to discuss chemtrails? Do you seriously think we had never even heard of it before you came along? Are you so up your own backside that you can't conceive of anyone actually possessing relevant knowledge in a field before you bring it to their attention?

I have been discussing Apollo, chemtrails, 9/11 and JFK for YEARS at this point. You are nothing new, nothing special, and nothing even slightly original. We have heard it all before, and seen your blustering and goalpost-shifting tactics from a dozen people before you in the past year alone.

If you had common sense,

When commons sense is sufficient to discuss the science behind these things we'll give you a call.

you would try to research evidence offered by both parties,

The same arrogant attitude: you disagree therefore you have not done your research. I have researched arguments from both sides. I come to a different conclusion than you based on that research, NOT on dismissal of it out of hand. However, that does not matter when dealing with things like your guess about how far apart two distant objects in a video are.

or at least be suspicious about why this `chemtrails` issue is so widespread.

Ignorance is widespread, therefore I expect issues based on ignorance to be equally widespread. The ideas you dismiss about Area 51, sasquatch and so forth are just as widespread as chemtrails, if not more so, yet you dismiss those as quackery even as you try to place some special significance on the prevalence of people wittering on about chemtrails. Double standards, anyone?

[ka9q]

Have you ever thought why I am so gullible? Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax,  9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?

Yes, I have. Not just you, of course, but others as well.

So please, do tell us why you're so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?

[Andromeda]

  I already told you I estimated the distances, your messurment is no more accurate than my estimation, you just showed a probability of 9% difference in size.

You ASKED Jason to prove that two planes that were 1km apart would appear similar sizes.  He did so, and now you are having a tantrum because you don't like being proven wrong.

 

yet, if those airplanes were closer than 1km the variation would be even less. Which is completely fine with this video, as it is inconclusive  , because of its blurrness. Your exact calcualtions  and the given percentage is the same as Drakes equation, not significant  in being more accurate than a guesstimate.

You've changed your tune!  You asserted that from that video you were sure the planes were 200m apart!

Your assertion that these people`s  info is not important, because they are not scientists is  equally matched by insignifacance of yours, sitting in the same ditch, as you do no have specific qualifications to deal with this subject more than they or me.

You have no idea what qualifications people hold because you just don't listen.  You are fixated on our jobs.

There is something going on here, I can`t figure it out yet.

Whats going on is that you are, frankly, trolling.

For example, i don`t comment on JFK, or other subjects that I haven`t done at least minimal research

Looking at conspiracy sites and YouTube videos is not "research".

but you are completely specialised in chemtrails

Who said that?!

Whenever I have talked to people in university, they always replied, give  me a couple of days at least to go into the topic. But you are experts, simply because  you have your scientific...approach.

Or maybe because we have been hearing about chemtrails for YEARS, and been looking into it for a long time?  I first heard about them in 2001/2002ish.

Have you ever thought why I am so gullible?

Because that is where your comfort zone is.  You appear to take pride in having what you deem to be "special knowledge" and you enjoy it because the idea that you are wrong and your worldview is unrealistic distresses you.

Why I believe in chemtrails, moonhoax,  9/11 yet wouldn`t bother going into aliens, area51, sasquatch, and the usual stuff. WHy I would be at the same time interested in technology, science, yet be so gullible and believe complete bullcrap such as chemtrails?

The same reason some people believe in God but not pixies.  It's your worldview.

You can keep peddaling that everything is nonsence, coincidence, not scientifically approrved by mainstream, etc.

No, we keep showing you our EVIDENCE and asking you for yours, which you have consistently failed to provide.

That is your job to do here, and that is your pattern.

Um, no.  It's not our job, we are here because we are sure of our knowledge and can back it up with a variety of sources.

It is the same as NIST. (`Have you found any explsives`? No. Did you  look? No. Why? We didn`t expect them to be there so we didn`t.) You will probably say the same, that you didn`t research chemtrails because they don`t exist. it is meaningless because you are in a postion of only arguing . If you had common sense, you would try to research evidence offered by both parties, or at least be suspicious about why this `chemtrails` issue is so widespread.

We have researched it, and drawn our conclusions.  They are different from yours.