EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Thu Nov 27, 2014 9:32 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 3:41 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
Fosgate wrote:
Arguing in absolutes doesn't generally bode well either.



You always say that .... :lolno:




Now the question is, how many caught the humor.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 4:50 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2003 9:27 am
Posts: 5778
Location: USA
:angel: :twisted:

_________________
TANG SOO!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 5:39 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
After reading the scores on the science and technology quiz, I am wondering whether I should not just explain the humor because most may miss it.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 7:13 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2301
Location: Central Colorado
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Not only that, but the additional weight which would have to be added to each plane involved would make it almost impossible to have anything but a single purpose flight. Even if there were additives to the fuel making it the spraying product, the range would be significantly reduced between a chem and non-chem flight with the same weight of fuel. The combustion of the additive would be problematic as well. The math just does not support such a hyopothesis.


You are assuming the apparatus is large and the tanks involved extremely heavy. The pictures of the spray apparatus I saw at the holmestead were relatively small. There could very well be different sizes. Ones for a particular area on a particular flight path, and a specialized one for long mission patterns. Since they have been experimenting for a long time, they should have learned a lot about various formulas to use for various effects. The recent snowstorms were from iodide spraying over the jet stream as it made a good path, finally, to get more snow were it is needed. There has been weather modification since WWII, and generally done is smaller aircraft.
The formula for albedo change over an area is with the poly spinneret going and the mixture of barium sulfate, aluminum oxide and anti-mold/fungal. This mixture has been found a a wide variety of areas and water supplies. Some people had allergies from induced fungals and molds before the anti-mold/fungal chemicals were added. Others have an allergic reaction to one of the other chemicals or filament fragments.
Other things for long distance communications have also been used at high altitudes. Plus, experiments to help the ozone layer grow, seeing it has stagnated at 50%.
Ship borne iron oxide ocean fertilization has also been tried. There have been numerous other suggestions that have not been used, like the volcanic types emissions, space orbital reflector(s), and still others being experimented with such as nano carbon CO2 absorbing artificial "trees", and ocean cooling spray ships.
A lot has or is being done, except the one that really needs to be done-----a 90% reduction in emissions within a decade by switching to GenIV power, more solar and wind, and more wave and tidal, with all electric or hybrid machinery mandated and a transition to a steady state ecological economy. All to prevent thermageddon and extinction of our and the majority of other species in 500 years or so.
Along with free contraception, education on ecology and overpopulation, women's power and rights, only to mitigate the mid century crash. There will still be plenty of cannibalism.

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 7:30 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Not only that, but the additional weight which would have to be added to each plane involved would make it almost impossible to have anything but a single purpose flight. Even if there were additives to the fuel making it the spraying product, the range would be significantly reduced between a chem and non-chem flight with the same weight of fuel. The combustion of the additive would be problematic as well. The math just does not support such a hyopothesis.


You are assuming the apparatus is large and the tanks involved extremely heavy. The pictures of the spray apparatus I saw at the holmestead were relatively small. There could very well be different sizes.


It is the weight of the material which would preclude the chemtrail formation. It is basic physics. To have a similar formation of chemicals to a contrail that is persistent in the atmosphere there would have to be a similar amount of liquid as in a contrail. Spraying a small amount of anything will not create a large trail similar to a large amount of fuel being burned.

Quote:
Ones for a particular area on a particular flight path, and a specialized one for long mission patterns. Since they have been experimenting for a long time, they should have learned a lot about various formulas to use for various effects. The recent snowstorms were from iodide spraying over the jet stream as it made a good path, finally, to get more snow were it is needed.


What amount of iodide would that have been?



Quote:
There has been weather modification since WWII, and generally done is smaller aircraft.The formula for albedo change over an area is with the poly spinneret going and the mixture of barium sulfate, aluminum oxide and anti-mold/fungal. This mixture has been found a a wide variety of areas and water supplies.


Try to imagine just how much would have to be sprayed in order for a measurable amount to be found in the water supply. Thousands of pounds would be required to not be dispersed too much from an altitude of ~30,000 feet.

Quote:
Some people had allergies from induced fungals and molds before the anti-mold/fungal chemicals were added. Others have an allergic reaction to one of the other chemicals or filament fragments.


That is an assumption without any evidence.

Quote:
Other things for long distance communications have also been used at high altitudes. Plus, experiments to help the ozone layer grow, seeing it has stagnated at 50%.


None of which indicate the real existence of chemical trails.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:26 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
Wayne Stollings wrote:
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
False!
http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/shieldproject.html
This is not a blog, and you will find chemicals used and experimented with, apparatus photos, along with aircraft including civilian it is used in(a LOT more than KC135s!). You'll have to follow a lot of links, it is all there. The pictures, including the one below and on site are part of the proof. Like they say a picture is worth a thousand words. :-k


Sure looks like what is called a blog source to me. So, it is your belief that the conspiracy is so large that civillian planes are used more than the military planes and all of the civillian workers never question the process or talk to outsiders about it? That is impressive.

From your source.

Why not spray more from individual jetliners? That is one of the problems. Jetliners do not carry much material (100 to 500 gallons) because the material has to be spread out thinly.

For background estimates, the variants of the KC-135/707 generally use more than 10,000 lbs/hour in fuel, which is ~1200 gallons of the least dense (0.8 kg/L) fuel. This provides enough water vapor to form a condensation trail that we see when contrails form. This is natural condensation of aerosols as opposed to the 100 to 500 gallons being sprayed as an aerosol. The spray is going to consume a greater weight of liquid since the addition of metals would increase the density proportionally. At 1200 gallons per hour fuel consumption that is 20 gallons a minute, which if we assume is similar to the slower application of the mystery spray that is more dense, giving us a 5 minute application with 100 gallons and a maximum of 25 minutes of application. Neither of which would seem to give the coverage attributed to this mechanism, especially given the chemtrails are supposedly bigger in diameter than contrails.

Now, if we look at the application rate of ultra-low volume sprayers, we see 4 oz/min minimum which does make the spraying possible. With 128 oz per gallon a 100 gallon tank could spray 32 minutes per gallon minimum. The problem then becomes the volume being insufficient to appear larger than the vapor trail to which it is being compaired.

The math does not work any way you try to do it. Too many people would have to be involved to keep it quiet, too much material is required for commercial aircraft to create a chemtrail of any size, and there are too few planes which could be dedicated to such a program.



It seems the math was overlooked before so I will quote myself .... again.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:55 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_water_content

Cirrus cloud - 0.03 g/m^3

H20 1 ml = ~1 g

Thus H20 content = 0.03 ml/m^3

1 gal = 3785.4 ml

converted to cloud = 126180 m^3/gal

1 mile = ~1609 m

If the contrail were 2 meter in diameter, each gallon will give ~25 miles of cirrus like cloud with one engine, 12.5 miles with two engines, and 6.25 miles with 4 engines. Thus 100 gallons for a 4 engine plane could lay a small contrail pattern for 625 miles. As the contrail increases in diameter the length drops significantly.

If the contrail were 4 meter in diameter each gallon would give only 1/4 that of the 2 meter diameter. A 4 meter diameter contrail at 30,000 feet viewed from the ground would be miniscule.

http://www.af.mil/shared/media/document ... 13-001.pdf

Persistent contrails can last for hours while growing to several
kilometers in width and 200 to 400 meters in height.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:37 am 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2301
Location: Central Colorado
For the various reactions and deaths, go to the Devvy Kidd article and the doctor's link on the bottom.

SURE THE MATH DOESN'T WORK UNDER MANY HUMIDITY/TEMPERATURE/ALTITUDE COMBINATIONS, SO THEY CAN NOT SPRAY IN A USABLE WAY EVERYWHERE, EVERYDAY.

When I sprayed crops and friends did weather modification, we has some hangar flying talks. With my spraying, I had to determine the amount of gallons and amount of which chemical in which concentration per gallon, generally in the range of a gallon per acre. Some farms took several flights.
My friends in their turbo pressurized twins had to figure the area to go so winds would carry induced rainfall to the areas contracted. They, too, often made several flights to the same area per day. It just didn't work if the humidity was too low or the winds not right.
From what I read about the mixture going into near the exhaust flow of jet engines, the amount had to do with the humidity, speed, and temperature at the altitude, and did not require a lot per mile. Much of the H2O was from the exhaust itself.
By 9-11-2011 and the no fly days it was blocking 2-3*F of AGW(depending on the area or city). In the 1990s, Pinatubo blocked 1.5*F of AGW. The original idea was Edward Teller's last writing.
I think the max the so called shield can do is around 5*F cooling in an area, and only in perfect conditions. So AGW and ocean warming added are increasing in the old hockey stick, still. They are running out of money and the world is running out of cheap oil.
I think it is time to stop most of the geoengineering efforts and go for the 90% emissions reduction ASAP. End the jet age, end coal power, end most diesel, and end slash and burn. Let the growth only economy collapse. Whether the chemtrails are real or not.
If they are real, the most important place for them is the Arctic, until the threat of passing the open ocean warming positive feedback loop and the tundra methane positive feedback loop are both back into a safer zone.
If they are not real, we can only hope that these tipping points will not be crossed as AGW morphs to reality as soots settle out, regular contrails go away like 9-11 on steroids, and warming in momentum is not enough. Plus no cheating is allowed with burning fossil fuels and slash without swift and violent stopping. :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :mrgreen:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/No-alte ... -down.html

Note---WS full of garbage in statement below.

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Last edited by Johhny Electriglide on Sun May 12, 2013 4:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 6:57 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
The bulk of the moisture being from the natural contrail belies the thought a small amount of spray will cause the contrail to remain for an extended period. Only that small amount of natural moisture coming in contact with the spray and reacting/bonding would be affected and the rest would act just as any other contrail. There just would not be the mixing required to utilize that moisture to any degree.

The math does not work for ANY altitude/moisture/temperature combinations because there is such a small amount being sprayed to supposedly cause such a large cloud to remain. The altitude/moisture/temperatures combinations do have an impact on how long the contrails remain and thus cause the ignorant connection to the assumed "chemtrail" as a result.

Your spraying information alone shows how wrong the math is. You had to calculate gallons per acre at low level applications to have a sufficient concentration on the ground. The chemtrails are limited to less than an ounce per acre applied at ~30,000 feet and the concentraion is supposedly measured on the ground at levels high enough to be differentiated from the natural background? Really? That makes any sense from your experience much less the math?

How much was applied in the cloud seeding on each pass? Less than a few pounds? That is what is supposedly what is used in producing chemtrails from commercial aircraft.

Also you are wrong about the temperature impact. The papers showed a difference between the daily high and low temperatures not the high temperature.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 7:12 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
Mount Pinatubo injected a 20-million ton (metric scale) sulfur dioxide cloud into the stratosphere at an altitude of more than 20 miles. Compared to a few hundred pounds even on every large aircraft flying and not reaching such altitudes the aircraft will have no comparison in effect.

On the temperature impact of contrails, a less complicated explanation than the paper itself:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/contrail-effect.html

Another study that took advantage of the grounding gave striking evidence of what contrails can do. David Travis of the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater and two colleagues measured the difference, over those three contrail-free days, between the highest daytime temperature and the lowest nighttime temperature across the continental U.S. They compared those data with the average range in day-night temperatures for the period 1971-2000, again across the contiguous 48 states. Travis's team discovered that from roughly midday September 11 to midday September 14, the days had become warmer and the nights cooler, with the overall range greater by about two degrees Fahrenheit.

These results suggest that contrails can suppress both daytime highs (by reflecting sunlight back to space) and nighttime lows (by trapping radiated heat). That is, they can be both cooling and warming clouds. But what is the net effect? Do they cool more than they warm, or vice versa? "Well, the assumption is a net warming," Travis says, "but there is a lot of argument still going on about how much of a warming effect they produce."

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 7:24 am 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
For the various reactions and deaths, go to the Devvy Kidd article and the doctor's link on the bottom.


They have no evidence of the actual existence of a chemtrail, no chemical analysis of what is supposedly being sprayed, no evidence of changes to the mixture since there is no analysis, no evidence of impact on anyone, or anything else outside of an unsupported assumption based on either a conspiracy theory or untreated mental condition .... both seem equally probable at this point.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:37 pm 
Offline
Member with over 1000 posts!
Member with over 1000 posts!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2301
Location: Central Colorado
They don't usually spray around here much, but my son witnessed something he has not seen here this morning.
He took his dog out around 9AM and watched as numerous overly wide and spreading contrails were made with others crossing in a random pattern. The only airway we are near is the one from COS to LAX heading WSW. Most of the trails were from ESE to WNW and crossers from the south and SW. Within one "15 minutes to a half hour" the sky went from blue to gray.
The effect on my tracking array was a 15% loss of power and on my fixed average sun angle array a 19% reduction when it was straight on a little later. It is moving towards the NE to cover the COS & DEN area.
My observation was of unusual width and very thin streamers at a near 90* angle and dropping as they got further from center.
On the measured barium and aluminum spikes in water supplies on the east coast and in Canadian soils, it was in ppm difference from before. Not a lot, but if you had 4ppm and it went to 40ppm, it would be a spike.
Like I said before, whether it is done or not, what should be done, isn't.
It is no conspiracy theory that emissions are not going down, or at the rate they should be to hopefully stop the positive feedback loops that will complete within around 3 to 11 years, and reach max in 300 to 500 years. Profit now is what counts. Ignorance of black ops is working well, while special interests are taking over from within, and corruption is strangling the land, as economic collapse from interest and devaluation gets closer. 8-[ :-$

Those of us 50 and over saw the best of times \:D/ , and those under 30 will see almost the worst of times :shock: :cry: :twisted: =P~ :!: :?: :problem: :eh: . Those in denial, with their heads in the sand, or ignorant, won't see much, except their own measly little world. :razz: 8) [-( :mrgreen: :-#

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”― Chief Seattle
“Those Who Have the Privilege to Know Have the Duty to Act”…Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:33 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20583
Location: Southeastern US
Johhny Electriglide wrote:
On the measured barium and aluminum spikes in water supplies on the east coast and in Canadian soils, it was in ppm difference from before. Not a lot, but if you had 4ppm and it went to 40ppm, it would be a spike.


If you had 4 ppm of in a base sample, you probably had a bad sample.
Too little for soil and too much for water on average

http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw/pdfs/factsheet ... barium.pdf

Barium is found in waste streams from a large number of manufacturing plants in quantities that seldom exceed the normal levels found in soil. Background levels for soil range from 100-3000 ppm barium. Occurs naturally in almost all (99.4%) surface waters examined, in concentration of 2 to 340 ug/l, with an average of 43 ug/l. The drainage basins with low mean concentration of barium (15 ug/l) occur in the western Great Lakes, & the highest mean concentration of 90 ug/l is in the southwestern drainage basins of the lower Mississippi Valley. In stream water & most groundwater, only traces of the element are present.

There are limited survey data on the occurrence of barium in drinking water. Most supplies contain less than 200 ug/l of barium. The average concentration of barium in USA drinking water is 28.6 ug/l (1977 data). The drinking water of many communities in Illinois, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, & New Mexico contains concentrations of barium that may be 10 times higher than the drinking water standard. The source of these supplies is usually well water. Currently 60 ground water supplies and 1 surface water supply exceeds 1000 ug/l.

http://rais.ornl.gov/documents/eco-ssl_aluminum.pdf

Aluminum (Al) is the most commonly occurring metallic element comprising eight percent of the earth's crust (Press and Siever, 1974). It is a major component of almost all common inorganic soil particles with the exceptions of quartz sand, chert fragments, and ferromanganiferous concretions. The typical range of aluminum in soils is from 1% to 30% (10,000 to 300,000 mg Al kg-1) (Lindsay, 1979 and Dragun, 1988) with naturally occurring concentrations variable over several orders of magnitude.

EPA recognizes that due to the ubiquitous nature of aluminum, the natural variability of aluminum soil concentrations and the availability of conservative soil screening benchmarks (Efroymson, 1997b), aluminum is often identified as a contaminant of potential concern (COPC) for ecological risk assessments. The commonly used soil screening benchmarks (Efroymson, 1997b) are based on laboratory toxicity testing using aluminum solution amendments to test soils. Comparisons of total aluminum soil concentrations to solution based screening values are deemed by EPA to be inappropriate.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group