Chemtrails: What in the world are they Spraying?

[Doctor Evo]

Going back to the contrail Wiki that Doctor Evo posted, even that article describes studies showing the effects of contrails on climate change and global warming.

You do understand that the effect can be achieved with nothing but water vapor, right?

 

[Enriquespy]

Would you like to now use your same post to apply to what the government and general public said about the effects of nuclear testing in the American desert during the 1950s? About Agent Orange in the Vietnam War in the 1960s? About fallout from Three Mile Island in the 1970s? Etc. Etc. Etc.

There where whistleblowers and rats in those cases, but none in this case.

 

[Darthphere]

Its so funny, I was checking the mail today and I look up at the clear blue sky and there was a plane there leaving a trail as it flew by. I instantly thought of this thread. I went out a few minutes later and it looked like a damn checker board out there.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Its so funny, I was checking the mail today and I look up at the clear blue sky and there was a plane there leaving a trail as it flew by. I instantly thought of this thread. I went out a few minutes later and it looked like a damn checker board out there.

Enjoy cancer!

 

[NickNitro]

Let us know if you see any 3 headed dear walking around Darth. Take some pictures if you do and post them to this thread. We need more people to believe in the conspiracy!

 

[Darthphere]

Well I don't believe in the conspiracy but just thought it was one hell of a coincidence. And I'm probably going to get cancer anyway so this just speeds up the process.

 

[Steyin]

This is the only conspiracy I support any more. If anything, chemtrails are mostly used as a way to manipulate weather patterns. Based on how much "spraying" I see, and mind you it isn't everyday, its easier to guess when its going to rain (normally 2-3 days after heavy spraying from my own experience). Same experience as sam, only see it from white unmarked planes.

The only location I have ever traveled to where I haven't seen any chemtrail is Venice.

 

[Piper Maru]

I wish they would spray bacon.

 

[CGHulk]

Bill Gates admits to chemtrails
http://www.hangthebankers.com/bill-gates-admits-to-chemtrails/

 

[Hotwire]

This is the only conspiracy I support any more. If anything, chemtrails are mostly used as a way to manipulate weather patterns. Based on how much "spraying" I see, and mind you it isn't everyday, its easier to guess when its going to rain (normally 2-3 days after heavy spraying from my own experience). Same experience as sam, only see it from white unmarked planes.

The only location I have ever traveled to where I haven't seen any chemtrail is Venice.

Did you ever think, that since contrails require specific atmospheric conditions to form that, there are just certain days when more of them form?

Go back and read some of my other posts on just how much of these chemicals you would need to adequately cover even just one square mile. I'll save you the trouble. For every square mile, you need 64,000 gallons of liquid. That much plain water weighs roughly 534,000 pounds so, a chemical laced with heavy metals would certainly weigh more. Now, Cherokeesam says that the planes being used are KC-141s. These planes have a maximum take-off weight of 342,000 pounds. That means, the planes that are supposedly doing the spraying are not strong enough to carry a payload big enough to spray a single square mile!

So, that shoots that down right there. Pun intended. So, we're going to need bigger planes. Let's use the 747. A massive plane with lots of take-off power and, it's still in production. Unlike the KC-141, of which only 285 were ever made. A 747 has an interior volume of 243,000 gallons, assuming they go up completely full. Now, the chart I found on spraying crops gave a conversion of 100 gallons per acre. That means that one 747 could spray 2430 acres. 640 acres to a square miles equals 3.8 square miles. Or, a 200 foot wide swath about 100 miles long. Oh, and that much payload would weight at least 2,029,050 pounds. That's 920 metric tons and there is no aircraft in the world that even comes close to that kind of payload capacity. Shot down again.

On top of that, I'll ask you the same questions I asked Cherokeesam. If they are really spraying these chemicals, which the theorists claim include barium and aluminum, where are they getting it? There would have to be massive mines to dig this stuff up. Also, where are they making it? I've already told sam that to make the amount of chemicals that you guys claim are being sprayed, you would have to have a production capacity 80 times larger than Coca-Cola! Just enough chemical to cover the United States would take up about 1 cubic kilometer! Where is the F*** do you store that? And I haven't even gone into go into the finance aspect of it! I mean, metallic paint costs between $50-$150 per gallon so, just using that, you're taking about a $12,141,120,000,000 and $36,423,360,000,000 to spray the whole country. Or around $3-$9 million per square mile.

Still sound like something you could effectively cover up? Hide that much chemicals, whatever fleet of super-planes you would need to haul them, the facilities to manufacture and store them, AND hide that much money?!?!? Please!! You guys are giving the government WAY too much credit!

 

[cherokeesam]

Hotwire, you are greatly overestimating the "coverage" anybody is talking about here. Nobody is remotely suggesting that there's a whole ****ing fleet of aircraft up there blanketing every square mile of the whole goddamn US of A. (Or other countries, for that matter --- chemtrails have been videoed and photographed all over the world.) All we're witnessing is periodic spraying of small patches. And it's been my personal experience that these only occur in rural and wilderness areas, and from what I've seen/read of other people's experiences, that's borne out. So it sounds to me like they deliberately avoid urban areas to minimize the amount of people who will get affected.

Whatever they're spraying for --- artificial cloud cover to increase albedo; cloud seeding to affect weather; whatever --- it seems to me that they're actually being conscientious about staying away from high population areas. It's just that those of us out in the sticks who get doused with the junk are S.O.L.

 

[CGHulk]

Over the Southern California area the other day there had to be at least 20-30 chemtrails in the sky. My father has never had any allergies his whole life. Yesterday he came down with a bad case, he was miserable all day. His eyes were all red and itchy and watering.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Bill Gates admits to chemtrails
http://www.hangthebankers.com/bill-gates-admits-to-chemtrails/

1) He didn't "admit" to anything.

2) This does nothing to support the claim that chemtrails have been and are currently being employed.

Critical thinking FTW.

 

[Alien Anal]

Hotwire really has said all there is to be said IMO

 

[Hotwire]

Hotwire, you are greatly overestimating the "coverage" anybody is talking about here. Nobody is remotely suggesting that there's a whole ****ing fleet of aircraft up there blanketing every square mile of the whole goddamn US of A. (Or other countries, for that matter --- chemtrails have been videoed and photographed all over the world.) All we're witnessing is periodic spraying of small patches. And it's been my personal experience that these only occur in rural and wilderness areas, and from what I've seen/read of other people's experiences, that's borne out. So it sounds to me like they deliberately avoid urban areas to minimize the amount of people who will get affected.

Whatever they're spraying for --- artificial cloud cover to increase albedo; cloud seeding to affect weather; whatever --- it seems to me that they're actually being conscientious about staying away from high population areas. It's just that those of us out in the sticks who get doused with the junk are S.O.L.

Okay, so they want to make artificial cloud cover. How big do you wager the clouds are? Since it was suggested that the chemtrails turn a sunny day in of a cloudy one, tat would mean they're spraying enough to cover basically all the sky you can see. I hope you realize that you can see far more square miles of airspace than my calculations account for. See, on flat ground, on a clear day, we can see for about 12 miles in any direction, including straight up. So, in order to turn everything you can see into cloudy skies, we need to figure out the surface area of the dome created by your sight distance. That's 904 square miles covered in a haze created by your chemtrails.

Dude, there is NO WAY to make this fly when you put the numbers to it.

Oh, I found a cool article on how much a cloud weighs. So, to make an artificial cloud, that should give you a good idea on how ludicrous your suggestions are.

zidbits.com/2011/01/a-cloud-weighs-more-than-you-might-think/

 

[Hotwire]

Here's another little something for you. It takes 64,000 gallons to spray 1 square mile. That much water weighs 534,000 pounds. There is NO PLANE IN EXISTENCE that can carry even close to that kind of payload. The strongest plane ever built, and there's only one, is the Antonov AN-225 which set the world record with a payload of 418,834 pounds. That's only enough liquid to spray .78 square miles. So, you see, even the strongest plane ever built, can't cover a single square mile with plain old water. That's not even taking the heavy metals into consideration, which would make the chemicals weigh more.

 

[Hotwire]

Over the Southern California area the other day there had to be at least 20-30 chemtrails in the sky. My father has never had any allergies his whole life. Yesterday he came down with a bad case, he was miserable all day. His eyes were all red and itchy and watering.

And of course there's absolutely no other possible explanation. Even the fact that people have been shown to develop allergies later in life. Nothing but chemicals sprayed from 30,000 feet up could have possibly landed in your dad's face and caused an allergic reaction.

Another thing you're not taking into consideration is wind. From a height of 30,000 feet, what ever you spray is NOT going to land anywhere near the spec of land it was sprayed over. That's why crop dusting is done between 15-20 feet off the ground. It's also one of the reasons why skydivers don't normally jump from that height. Given the spray's light weight and the multiple wind currents between it and the ground, it doesn't stand a chance of being sprayed over southern California and actually landing there. And that's ignoring the inertia it gets from the plane and the fact that at that altitude, the wind is blowing in a south easterly direction at about 60 mph.

 

[NickNitro]

let it go

 

[Hotwire]

let it go

I'll stop disproving your theory if you'll stop claiming it's fact.

 

[Midnyte_Sun]

Its not chemicals sprayed in the sky you should paranoid about, but more likely the chemical additives in food - especially processed foods, the chemicals used on your sofa, in your carpet, in your water system, and the petroleum pollutants in the very air that you breath on the ground in which you drive through or walk by a busy intersection.

 

[Hotwire]

Its not chemicals sprayed in the sky you should paranoid about, but more likely the chemical additives in food - especially processed foods, the chemicals used on your sofa, in your carpet, in your water system, and the petroleum pollutants in the very air that you breath on the ground in which you drive through or walk by a busy intersection.

Now THAT, is far more reasonable.

 

[Doctor Evo]

Hotwire, I'm going to have to take issue with your argument regarding the logistics of cloud-seeding. You're using crop-dusting as a reference for comparison, but this may be wildly inaccurate. It may be that you can create disproportionately large amounts of cloud cover relative to the number of particles put into the atmosphere.

In fact, it's likely (and logical to assume) that for crop-dusting to be effective there needs to be a relatively high concentration of particles laid on the ground. We don't know that this is the case for cloud-seeding, for one important reason: the function of each particle in the cloud-seeding process is very, very different from the function of each particle in the crop-dusting process.

In the case of crop-dusting, each particle must exist an such a concentration that it can act as an effective poison (or possibly growth-agent). For sufficient protection of each plant, there must be many, many particles per unit area, for each particle is, by itself, necessary for the desired effect.

The particles used for cloud-seeding are not themselves forming the bulk of the clouds. Even the word "cloud-seeding" implies a process of formation that goes beyond the initial particles themselves.

In fact, the reason these particles are useful is that they cause the accumulation of condensation in the atmosphere. This means that each particle can be of large effect, potentially accumulating many, MANY times its own weight in water particles. Thus, your arguments regarding particles per unit area (or, rather, weight per unit area) and the total weight of a cloud, etc., are not very effective.

 

[Hotwire]

Hotwire, I'm going to have to take issue with your argument regarding the logistics of cloud-seeding. You're using crop-dusting as a reference for comparison, but this may be wildly inaccurate. It may be that you can create disproportionately large amounts of cloud cover relative to the number of particles put into the atmosphere.

In fact, it's likely (and logical to assume) that for crop-dusting to be effective there needs to be a relatively high concentration of particles laid on the ground. We don't know that this is the case for cloud-seeding, for one important reason: the function of each particle in the cloud-seeding process is very, very different from the function of each particle in the crop-dusting process.

In the case of crop-dusting, each particle must exist an such a concentration that it can act as an effective poison (or possibly growth-agent). For sufficient protection of each plant, there must be many, many particles per unit area, for each particle is, by itself, necessary for the desired effect.

The particles used for cloud-seeding are not themselves forming the bulk of the clouds. Even the word "cloud-seeding" implies a process of formation that goes beyond the initial particles themselves.

In fact, the reason these particles are useful is that they cause the accumulation of condensation in the atmosphere. This means that each particle can be of large effect, potentially accumulating many, MANY times its own weight in water particles. Thus, your arguments regarding particles per unit area (or, rather, weight per unit area) and the total weight of a cloud, etc., are not very effective.

You're right about cloud seeding. They aren't making clouds, they're just trying to get the could to produce rain. The problem with cloud seeding is that it's not all that effective. That and, the theorists aren't claiming that chemicals are being added to clouds but rather that artificial clouds are being made from these chemicals. Almost as though someone is painting the sky. That's where the coverage aspect comes into play. With the amount of sky conspiracy theorists are claiming the chemtrails are covering, the volume of chemicals needed to produce that are just too high.

One thing I find funny about conspiracy theorists is that they tell you to question everything. Then get upset when you question their theories. I'd challenge anyone who believes in chemtrails to provide some evidence. Something other than some videos on YouTube of some images from a Google search. Evidence of the plants that make the chemicals, planes that can carry that kind of payload. Show me the money being spent of it. That sort of thing.

 

[Doctor Evo]

You're right about cloud seeding. They aren't making clouds, they're just trying to get the could to produce rain. The problem with cloud seeding is that it's not all that effective. That and, the theorists aren't claiming that chemicals are being added to clouds but rather that artificial clouds are being made from these chemicals. Almost as though someone is painting the sky. That's where the coverage aspect comes into play. With the amount of sky conspiracy theorists are claiming the chemtrails are covering, the volume of chemicals needed to produce that are just too high.

Yeah, looked into it, and apparently I misunderstood the concept.

My mistake.

 

[Hotwire]

Yeah, looked into it, and apparently I misunderstood the concept.

My mistake.

No problem.