Aircraft contrails spoiling the weather again.

[CPC464 10]

I'll be back on later hopefully later to address what's been said, thanks for your contributions.

But anyone, if you can look out now at the sky you'll see what I'm talking about. A large portion of the sky is covered in contrails, almost all the cloud visible at the moment, that hazy mist is all from planes.

 

Total nonsense.

 

---------- Post added 06-07-2014 at 17:43 ----------

 

This morning another good example. When I went out this morning at 7.30 the sky was clear other than the many contrails striping across the sky. Now, less than 2hs later the contrails have spread out causing near total cloud cover.

 

Not a good example.

 

The contrails did not cause the cloud cover. They are unrelated.

[Longcol 600]

Hundreds of thousands of people out in the countryside watching the Tour de France and not a "chemtrail" in the sky.

 

These NWO folks are a tad inefficient...............

[Guest]

Hundreds of thousands of people out in the countryside watching the Tour de France and not a "chemtrail" in the sky.

 

These NWO folks are a tad inefficient...............

 

You forgot about the red, white and blue ones left by the Red Arrows

[Phanerothyme 12]

Where's the video/film of persistent contrails prior to 2000? If that's the best a debunking site can come up with then it does little to convince me they existed before then.

Anyone can fake photos.

 

Question: Anyone can fake videos, so why would you trust them?

 

Answer: You won't, unless they appear to corroborate your 'thesis'.

[qwert 10]

Total nonsense.

 

---------- Post added 06-07-2014 at 17:43 ----------

 

 

Not a good example.

 

The contrails did not cause the cloud cover. They are unrelated.

 

I can't remember which day exactly this was but if I said it was, it was.

 

Hundreds of thousands of people out in the countryside watching the Tour de France and not a "chemtrail" in the sky.

 

These NWO folks are a tad inefficient...............

 

I don't know about the afternoon, i went to bed but I did go to meadowhall that morning and I noticed there was a lot of contrails.

 

Question: Anyone can fake videos, so why would you trust them?

 

Answer: You won't, unless they appear to corroborate your 'thesis'.

 

As ive said alresdy, I mean like old episodes of Miami vice or something anything like that, sporting events previous to 2000.

I don't expect you to go searching as such, but if you happen to notice any while watching TV or film from that era 80s90s.

Even the debunker sites can only come up with two or three examples, as far as I found. A James Bond film apparently, and that one in the Italian job. (Offered as evidence of chemtrails testing in 1969)

 

I'm still of the mind I didn't see a persistent contrail until circa 2000, I'm certain also it wasn't because I'd just not noticed. What that means I don't know.

 

---------- Post added 09-07-2014 at 13:52 ----------

 

Except at night when it helps stop it radiating out into space.

 

---------- Post added 06-07-2014 at 17:34 ----------

 

 

If you wanted to cool the planet, you'd want cloud cover from around sunrise and to clear around sunset. If you wanted to warm the planet you'd want it to clear around sunrise and form around sunset.

 

Given that qwert has been reporting the sky being clear in the morning with increasing cloud throughout the day that doesn't fit what you'd expect from a deliberate attempt to warm/cool the planet. It does fit with there being relatively little air traffic overnight and relatively more during the day.

 

So why do you think NASA are saying contrails are warming the planet?

 

"qwert has been reporting the sky being clear in the morning with increasing cloud throughout the day"

 

Not exactly, they can start/stop anytime in the day. Sometimes theres no sign during the day but they start showing in the evening before sunset.

Edited July 9, 2014 by qwert

[altus 540]

So why do you think NASA are saying contrails are warming the planet?

Nobody is denying they have an effect. We are questioning whether they are being deliberately used to affect the planet (rather than just a side effect of air travel) and whether the increase in them is the result of anything other than there being more planes in the sky than there used to be.

[qwert 10]

Nobody is denying they have an effect. We are questioning whether they are being deliberately used to affect the planet (rather than just a side effect of air travel) and whether the increase in them is the result of anything other than there being more planes in the sky than there used to be.

 

But if it was simply down to more planes, why didn't I see any persistent contrails until 2000 ish? There's not been that big an increase surely. NASA said they've had an impact since 1975. If contrails were making an impact then, this increase over the last ten to fourteen years woukd be making an even greater impact.

Has there been any unusual weather events in that period? Like the butterfly flapping its wings, is it not possible the contrails might be having a devastating effect on the balance of nature.

 

Answer No.

 

Thanks Jack.

What makes you so sure? Did you just weigh it up in your head and reach that conclusion, or have you looked into Geoengineering personally?

[Obelix 11]

But if it was simply down to more planes, why didn't I see any persistent contrails until 2000 ish?

 

Correlation is not causation. Just because you didn't see any doesnt mean that there were none there.

 

I've never seen a Somali pirate - but I'm happy there has been a big upswing in them.

[buck 11]

I dare say you'd see more contrails over Sheffield if it was on a direct route to places where aircraft need to get up high. I'm not sure there are. My house is directly under the route from Europe to NYC, just before they begin their descent for landing. Though its entirely cloud free a few miles on each side, over the house its almost always gray. There's nothing sinister about it. Jets are economical above 30,000 feet, that's all. The US bomber crews who flew to Germany during WW2 didn't like the contrails the B17s made high up.They told the Luftwaffe they were coming.

[algy 11]

I live in Sheffield and often wondered where the planes passing over were going, so I use Flightradar24 to see where they're heading. It's been quite an eye opener. Sheffield seems to be at an aerial crossroads. We get the long haul Heathrow to North America flights, various European airports to and from Dublin, Manchester and Leeds, internal flights from London to various Scottish airports, all at high altitude (except those descending to Manchester and Leeds, though even these are still quite high) and usually producing vapour trails.

[DYKWIA 10]

Yes our small part of the world does get a hell of a lot of air traffic flying overhead. U.S West Coast from London and most North American destinations from the major European Airports, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Paris.

 

With these light early mornings just take a look up in the sky on a clear day and you'll see flight after flight heading back to Europe from the United States.

[anywebsite 10]

Increased cloud cover reduces temperature though, by reflecting sunlight.

 

Increased cloud cover can also increase temperature by stopping heat escaping into space, especially if it's at night when there's no sunlight to reflect or winter in a cold part of the world. Weather & climate are complicated, small differences can sometimes have larger effects.

 

I'm not sure cloud is increased overall globally, maybe just slightly due to the water vapour in the exhaust gasses, but it could cause clouds to form in different places, like over places that get a lot of air traffic. Clouds could form around vapour trails & it'll be condensing the water in the air. Places with less air traffic might see fewer clouds as a result. It's possible it could change rainfall patterns & local climates. Butterfly effect, etc.

Edited July 10, 2014 by anywebsite