Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2010 - 08:19pm PT
|
I'd like to know where Klimmer is truly comin' from I'm not sure that I'd want to know.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2010 - 08:38pm PT
|
Klimmer said the 3D showed the missile rose steeply and slowly, now he's saying it was ripping downrange.
Obviously his 3D was not much help here.
And I can't wait for the guys in an optical science forum to see his 3D.
|
|
cintune
climber
the Moon and Antarctica
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2010 - 08:45pm PT
|
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 02:54am PT
|
So Tony.
"you're not answering the questions, just phulishly ridiculing them, attempting to place yourself on a plateau so far above us all that your mere scorn will suffice. great strategy, unfortunately so overused on ST that no one cringes from it any more."
I was answering the questions. Sorry, that I tried to use the fact that I know something about meteorology when I answered your questions that is about meteorology. I forgot that knowledge is not allowed in this threads.
""can change very abruptly"? are we looking at the same postings by monolith, immediately above? are you proposing that humidity varies in a wild overlay of wet and dry noodles to produce all that onning and offing? sounds like fantasyland to me."
I understand that it sounds like fantasyland to someone without knowledge about the atmosphere but why do you point that out? It is your own problem that you have no knowledge.
"so, shouldn't chemtrails mostly be appearing in cirrus skies? but one of their specialties is filling up the clear, clear blue."
Not where I live and I have not seen any picture that show your point either. It seems to be ordinary cirrus clouds in all pics I have seen.
Can you show me a pic where this happens? I am not saying that it might not happen but there is obviously a strong correlation with long lasting contrails and cirrus clouds.
"i'd like to see some 40-year-old photos of chemtrail-filled skies, laid down by 707s. not worried about that, however. as we all know in these information wars, ask, and it shall be given unto you. "
http://contrailscience.com/contrail-photos-through-history/
But really. Do you realize that the number of flights was probably much lower 40 years ago? Do you believe that is relevant at all?
|
|
Shack
Big Wall climber
Reno NV
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 03:20am PT
|
It's pretty obvious that where the contrail start and stop is where the
pilots are turning on and off the nozzles that spray the chemicals into the air to control the population. Duh. ;)
Don't need 3D to see that.
Tony Bird = Mr. Knowitall
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 03:37am PT
|
You can't get the lighting in the image from the news video from the northern 'missile' track under the blue arrow - impossible with that sun azimuth. So at the very least the photo isn't of that northern track as it's north of solar azimuth and the track in the news video was clearly south of it. That in itself sh#t cans any and all assumptions about the northern track being related to the news video image. Unless of course aliens are now manipulating the solar azimuth.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 09:19am PT
|
HJ,
You do know that the NOAA calculator calculating the azimuth of the setting Sun on 11-8-10 = 250 degrees is from L.A. downtown city center don't you?
Not Long Beach Harbor.
Misstakes like this will ruin you.
All I have to do is make a few corrections on my graphics since I now know exactly the location of the launch, it won't change the truth of the matter, one bit.
Twas a missile.
And yes, the exhaust/vapor plume was back-lite from the right side (Northish) of the plume. All the imagery, video, and stereograms easily show that. But I have said that from the get-go.
Why do you keep fighting this losing battle?
Got TG to do this holiday. I will not be able to check in as much.
MMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, Pumpkin Pie with whip-cream my favorite.
|
|
Mike Bolte
Trad climber
Planet Earth
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 10:04am PT
|
Sorry, that I tried to use the fact that I know something about meteorology when I answered your questions that is about meteorology. I forgot that knowledge is not allowed in this threads.
Ding, ding, ding! Raymond has figured out the rules for these discussions. Now he can decide if he wants to play or not.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 10:42am PT
|
You do know that the NOAA calculator calculating the azimuth of the setting Sun on 11-8-10 = 250 degrees is from L.A. downtown city center don't you?
Not Long Beach Harbor.
Misstakes like this will ruin you.
Another easily checked assertion (with a generous serving of posturing) from Klimmer that is totally wrong.
LA 250.22
LB 250.25
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 10:53am PT
|
your memphis belle thing needs a link, mono--doesn't play on ST without encapsulation. if it's a long movie, it also needs a time location. the photo i'm seeing shows the leading edge of contrail formation behind a large four-engine propeller-driven airplane, not the abrupt curtailment of contrail formation.
one factor in all this could be the slowing of the airplane--funny none of the geniuses on here have thought of that yet. remember, you heard it here first, from a fellow who's willing to consider all sides of an argument. :-D
i have to reject "contrail photos through history", an obviously concocted ad hoc effort to debunk chemtrail arguments. rules of evidence never allow casual photography, and yet we are peppered with pictures of western mountains that could have been taken any time since the invention of color photography and photoshopped as one pleases. pull out a photo, raymond, from your personal album when you hiked shasta in, say, 1968. and then i'm afraid we're going to have to vet you as a genuine climber here. you've obviously just joined this forum and dived into what can only be called a Klimmer Special, using a lighthearted pseudonym.
if we could get healyje's tongue back from the cat on this subject, we might get somewhere. meanwhile i will enjoy being klimmer's second in the little duel shaping up with cragman.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 10:56am PT
|
your memphis belle thing needs a link, mono--doesn't play on ST without encapsulation. if it's a long movie, it also needs a time location. the photo i'm seeing shows the leading edge of contrail formation behind a large four-engine propeller-driven airplane, not the abrupt curtailment of contrail formation.
Golly Gee Tony, the link was right above it.
And I said look at 42 sec.
And the screen cap is right from the moment the contrail stopped.
Are you really so dense in person?
Jeebus, chemtrail folks are the dumbest of the dumb, and extremely paranoid.
Here's the whole post, as you probably don't know how to go back:
Oh Tony, you have much to learn.
Here's a WW2 vid of contrails from bombers. Were we spraying back then?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfOrez6q7WM
Check out at 42 seconds. Watch the contrail sputter, then at 48 they've stopped completely.
Can we put this sudden stopping contrail crap to bed now?
^^^^^^^Look Tony, the contrails have suddenly stopped^^^^^^^^
No wonder you were so impacted by GC's pics. You see the shiny pic, get so distracted you can't think straight or read the text anymore.
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 11:52am PT
|
k, mono, my bad--was trying to activate the photo, then went googling memphis belle.
yes, agreed, those movies do show interruptions in the production of propeller-craft contrails, i'm sure at relatively low altitude and near saturated humidity. i don't think you have the expertise to explain them, however, dodging around these questions the way raymond does. it would take a combination of both aeronautical and meteorological expertise. i don't pretend to either, but i'll bet i'm a shade in front of you on meteorology.
let me push the question to you a little further, going back to the principles of dew point. your ww2 bombers are engaged in an apparently steady state which really involves considerable dynamics. we see the same thing with lenticular clouds--they look like flying saucers parked over mountains but in reality disclose a rather rapid flow of air up into and then back down out of below-the-dew-point pressure. pardon the use of the words steady state and flying saucer, i assure you it's simply for description.
so, let's look at your bombers. one of the sequences shows a very quick interruption and resumption of the contrail. we could imagine the pilot cutting the engines playfully for a half second--that might interrupt the dynamics. or even slowing down a tad. or maybe some glitch in the fuel feed to the four engines? i dunno. the other alternative would be a "pocket" in the air--slightly lower temperature, pressure, or humidity? are such things possible?
going over to the abrupt curtailment, we seem to have contrail-producing bombers right alongside non-contrail-producing ones. we also have photographs out the back of one bomber which isn't producing contrails, else they would be obliterating all the others producing contrails in the photograph.
not an expert on the history of air warfare here, but it kinda looks like a lot of intentional production, especially in the examples of apparently shutting things on and off. perhaps the military was doing this on purpose--creating cloud cover for bombing runs? was there technology for that back then?
to be fair to this thread--after all, we do have a Klimmer Special for chemtrail buffs--this question was raised because--was it you, mono?--someone suggested that we were looking at abruptly curtailed contrails from flight 808, rather than a missile headed west. the satellite photo would bear that out, a thin contrail, chemtrail, whatever, heading east, helpfully pointed out by a big blue arrow, and then ending somewhere out off santa barbara before getting to santa monica bay. still, as i've pointed out before, the newspeople would only have had to stare at the sky a minute longer to see the plane itself, obviously indicated by the trajectory.
klimmer, i have to say that the fact that this did not appear in either the santa barbara or ventura newspapers is a strike against the missile argument. locals around there are used to the vandenburg doings which i never pay attention to, and there would be a lot of local sensitivity to an unannounced launch. on the other hand, the pentagon did not have this information at its fingertips. you'd think all those military geniuses--there must be at least 1,000 experts on both aeronautics and meteorology in that building--would have known right away. pardon my being so suspicious, but i think they're even now just learning the usefulness of chemtrails in public relations.
ron's alleged russian report needs some vetting. it looks like it was inserted on a cnn page, not reported there.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 12:17pm PT
|
The flight paths have been shown several times Rox, pay attention.
Go to that government run disinfo site contrailscience if you want to see the flight superimposed on the Rick Warren pics.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 12:25pm PT
|
Jeezus what a bastion of whackjobs and kookery.
|
|
lostinshanghai
Social climber
someplace
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 06:45pm PT
|
Klimmer:
You said “I can now also very accurately triangulate to the actual launch location in the Pacific Ocean. I have great data now all around.”
Did you find Latitude 33° 14’ 13.7 N, Longitude 119° 28’ 22 W. Same situation in Dec 2009.
Sometimes one or a group [cluster] “seeks to better understand”
|
|
Port
Trad climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 09:01pm PT
|
Those are some shitastic sources you got there Ron.
|
|
Shack
Big Wall climber
Reno NV
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 10:11pm PT
|
so, let's look at your bombers. one of the sequences shows a very quick interruption and resumption of the contrail. we could imagine the pilot cutting the engines playfully for a half second--that might interrupt the dynamics. or even slowing down a tad. or maybe some glitch in the fuel feed to the four engines? i dunno. the other alternative would be a "pocket" in the air--slightly lower temperature, pressure, or humidity? are such things possible?
Yes. We call them clouds.
Yet you claim to have some expertise in meteorology? Ha.
not an expert on the history of air warfare here, but it kinda looks like a lot of intentional production, especially in the examples of apparently shutting things on and off. perhaps the military was doing this on purpose--creating cloud cover for bombing runs? was there technology for that back then?
The military was very interested in and did a lot of research on the formation of contrails.
What conditions caused them to form, why some planes made them and others didn’t etc.
Why? Contrails make planes easy to spot, which is a bad thing in a war.
March 1943 Popular Science
|
|
Tony Bird
climber
Northridge, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 10:24pm PT
|
k, shack, since you're the self-proclaimed expert now, tell us why some contrails disappear shortly afterward and others expand and expand and fill the sky--especially if they're caused by such a limited amount of extra vapor, what dribbles off an engine exhaust.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2010 - 10:34pm PT
|
Perhaps some of them are out of contrail. Like some posters here.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!