Even the most eloquent collection of words does not make the facts go away.

Nobody brought up a convincing argument so far why normal persistant contrails and contrail cirrus should not be able to exist.

Does anyone dispute that supersaturation relative to ice is occuring frequently in the atmosphere?

you really are beyond stupid josh how many times do you need this simple fact explained to you before it sinks through your thick head?

“Nobody brought up a convincing argument so far why normal persistant contrails and contrail cirrus should not be able to exist.”

thats because nobody is saying they dont exist you gormless fool..  but the fact they exist - doesnt not automatically mean there is no spraying going on. i cant believe you can even breathe without some sort of help.

... a bit of scientific evidence behind persistent trails..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TLusno4nci0

I thought after my last posting following Josh’s expressions of remorse at his attitude that we might have been making some progress with him, but it is not going to happen.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/geoengineering-programs-continue-to-destroy-ozone-layer/

Meagain said:

“thats because nobody is saying they dont exist [insult]”

Well, Leonard Clampett said it and Emma implied it (why should somebody fake photographs of persistant trails if they are something normal?).

O.K., they do exist. How do you know which is a chemtrail then?

Wayne Hall,

let’s just try to separate the personal level from the issue level. That would indeed be a bit of progress.

The link to “Geoengineering Watch” leads to an article about an unusually large ozone hole at the beginning of 2011. It states:

“the science community is being threatened into complete silence”

Yet the report about that ozone hole came from scientists and was published in “Nature” - not very silent, I think.
Note that all I did was to follow the links that GE Watch provided ...

The original article that was the source of all news reports says:

“Unusually long-lasting cold conditions in the Arctic lower stratosphere led to persistent enhancement in ozone-destroying forms of chlorine and to unprecedented ozone loss”

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v478/n7370/full/nature10556.html

GE Watch linked to annother article in USA Today which itself is referring to the “Guardian” which has this explanation:

During extreme events, up to 70% of the ozone layer can be destroyed, before it recovers months later. The hole above the Arctic was always much smaller – until March this year, when a combination of powerful wind patterns and intense cold temperatures high up in the atmosphere created the right conditions for already-present, ozone-eating chlorine chemicals to damage the layer.

No, these chemicals are not a result of intentional geoengineering or chemtrails. “Chemical spraying” from cans contributed to them though, together with refrigerating devices:

The scientists say man-made chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) destroy ozone in the stratosphere, after sunlight breaks up the complex chemicals into simpler forms that react with ozone. While some of the chemicals are covered by a UN treaty that aims to stop their use, it will be decades before they are fully phased out of production.

I put that link up here for reference for the others here. Not to argue with you about it.

There are obviously people lurking here who are willing to join the discussion when signs emerge (however briefly and deceptively) that there is some hope of emancipating it from domination by the idees fixes of one person (perhaps two people) people who post(s) here.

Wayne Hall,

I posted a comment to your link. It’s up to you if you want to discuss that comment or not.

Surely you don’t intend to limit my freedom to post?

O.K., they do exist. How do you know which is a chemtrail then?

simple observation - how many times have i told you to look up!

dont you bother with links when posted? (By meagain on 2012 11 08 - 12:07:40)

fact is, persistent lingering, possibly spreading contrails, may exist, but, it is not usual, in fact , it can properly be described as a RARE event - requiring specific meteorological conditions.

when it is happening, from morning to dusk ( and possibly overnight but more difficult to observe ) day after day, regardless of suitable weather conditions, ( proven by the fact that other planes are observed as well in the same area NOT leaving trails ie; not conducive weather conditions ) and being reported all over the world, by planes that are at times not even flying on normal commercial flight paths, ( easily checked on flight tracking websites..) well then you can be sure, you are seeing something other than normal contrails.

so, if under the right conditions, you get a normal contrail that might persist a little , it might be a little hard to pick it from the ground, from something that is more nefarious in nature, but to suppose that the sheer volume of trails that are rightly causing concern to millions of people worldwide, ( including even ordinary guys with only basic levels of education, but with a functioning frontal lobe and intellectual integrity, a willingness to look at facts and evidence, ,) that this is in any way normal, would be as idiotic as believing your ears are gills and you can breathe underwater with them..  ( give it a go.. i dare ya )

now if you have any more questions, perhaps try google, theres a heap of information out there, but something tells me youre not genuine in your search for answers, and i for one, am quite sick of you offering only your unqualified opinion over and over and over again…  youre very boring you know.

Meagain said:

“persistent lingering, possibly spreading contrails, may exist, but, it is not usual, in fact , it can properly be described as a RARE event”

Do you have a source for that finding?

I did a very quick search and found this, where the atmosphere was observed for a limited time span (summer 2008):
http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/8/1689/2008/acp-8-1689-2008.pdf

Quoting from the abstract:

Thin ice clouds were particularly ubiquitous in high pressure systems. The radiosonde data showed that the upper troposphere was very often supersaturated with respect to ice.

Of course, they are giving numbers later in the paper:

About 60% of all radiosonde profiles measured in August and September 2003 showed supersaturation in the upper troposphere (8–13 km).

At least during the observation period of that paper, conditions favourable for persistant contrails were not rare.

Regarding the video you linked, it obviously shows a busy flight path.
The ATC separates planes going in opposite directions at least by 1000 feet. As stated earlier (I had linked a Skew-T diagram), the vertical variation of humidity conditions may easily allow planes at different level to produce contrails with varying life spans.

The wide-spread contrail is most likely quite old. It can be assumed that the contrail created by the plane entering from left might have persisted and spread as well.

Correction: the paper about supersaturation I linked in the last post was about the summer 2003, not 2008.

By the way, this was one of the hottest summers ever in Europe where the observations were made.

Do you have a source for that finding?

yeah, common sense and NASA

tinyurl (dot) com/bntk6d7

I did a very quick search and found this,

so? you want a medal because you can operate a keyboard? if youre that clever you couldve found that NASA link yourself..  anyway, now find something that shows conditions conducive to persistent contrails that cover the whole sky over my house for days on end.. and i might listen to you..  otherwise, stop trying to tell me what im looking at,  especially when youre not even looking at it - idiot.

Regarding the video you linked, it obviously shows a busy flight path.

obviously? i see the same thing above my house, and i dont live under a busy flight path…

The wide-spread contrail is most likely quite old.

most likely?  again, ive witnessed such things spreading quite quickly   - right above my house.. as ive said before, all you need do is open your eyes.

unless you are trying to suggest there is absolutely no spraying of any kind going on anywhere in the world, how do you tell the difference numpty?

dont answer that, i dont care for any more of your unqualified stupid opinion, and id have a much more logical discussion with a snail than you.

it is hardly controversial, and beyond argument that there are spraying programs occurring today, as they have in the past.

tinyurl (dot) com/bgpc6of

anyone truly seeking facts and information on this matter, with the ability to use an internet search engine, would be able to find countless more examples of such evidence.

tinyurl (dot) com/d6w7hr7

given the growing inundation on the internet of pictures and videos and comments from concerned people all over the world, how can people like fenton and josh say that NONE of this is anything to be concerned about

how does josh/fenton presume to convince anyone with their unqualified opinion, speaking on behalf of no official authority whatsoever, that what concerns people all over the world, is a perfectly normal phenomenon -

josh avoids the question he posed himself..

Q: “How do you tell the difference?”

A: he doesnt, he just sticks his head a little further up, and tells the world they are imagining things.

They are determined to continue doing this until the old generations who remember what the sky once looked like have passed away and new generations have come onto the scene, generations educated in “contrail science” as part of their school curriculum (supplementing corporate media “education”) and taught to distinguish “the different categories of aircraft condensation trails.”

A fascinating and informative subject for schoolchildren, no?

http://www.losai.eu/a-bergamo-le-scie-chimiche-si-studiano-a-scuola/#.UJZLfWdhEit

In the US the approach has been, and perhaps will be, different: geoengineering is “normal”.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/science/chemtrail_sunscreen_taught_in_us_schools.htm

In Europe the line could be taken that none of this is “deliberate” spraying, just regrettable inadvertent by-products of modern aviation) some of which may even indeed have their uses for mitigating climate change, which unfortunately cannot be dealt with in any other way owing to lack of political will in the population and the influence of the bad climate change sceptics.

Meanwhile the climate change sceptics will slowly morph into advocates of geoengineering, and nobody will remember that they once denied the existence of the problem that solar radiation management is alleged to address. (But perhaps they, or some of them, will even continue as climate change sceptics. The “pluralism” of the liberal democratic political system, with its systematic cultivation of “freedom of speech” means that public acceptance can be secured for internally contradictory policies: governance in the simultaneous service of warring lobbies.) 

There is a simple underlying principle in this pluralism: you can believe and say whatever you like, as long as it is untrue. The simplicity of this principle is what makes it possible for people of limited capacity like Josh to implement it with impressive consistency.

And after all the pre-Christian world functioned on this basis for thousands of years. 

So here we are again, meagain, “feeding the troll”, making friend Josh the centre of the debate and the centre of the universe.  Aren’t we clever?

No. English is my first language. I wish I could write with the same fluency in Greek. And bear in mind that English is not Josh’s first language. My prejudices tend to be pro-German. Josh, who is German,he says, makes it hard for me to believe the nice things that I want to believe about Germans, such as for example that the world may (MAY) have been a less bad place now if the Germans had won The First World War. This is a useless idea of course, but are our useful ideas really any more useful?

Meagain,

you said your source for the fact that persistent contrail conditions are unusual and rare are “common sense and NASA”, with this link attached:
http://www-pm.larc.nasa.gov/sass/pub/journals/Duda_Minnis.JAMC.II.09.pdf

Where does this paper say that persistent contrail conditions are rare? Is there a quote?

Common sense can’t tell you the frequency of supersaturation conditions in the upper troposphere.

You said: “now find something that shows conditions conducive to persistent contrails that cover the whole sky over my house for days on end”

For that I would need to know the location of that house.

Here is a message from Dane Wigington, providing an opportunity for Josh to have a break from his idee fixe of contrails/chemtrails and stand up for his other idee fixe of freedom of speech.

WUWT is a climate-sceptic blog.

W.

[snip - chemtrails is a banned topic on this blog]

        What you see above is all that is left of a one paragraph comment I tried to post on the WUWT site (the most visited site on global warming and climate change, they claim).
        What I summarized in the now deleted comment was simply that available data indicated SAG (stratospheric aerosol geoengineering) and SRM (solar radiation management) are large parts of the climate equation that are not being discussed. I further suggested that these climate modification programs should be investigated by all that are concerned with the climate. What I got was the total censorship above. 
        I hope that all can take a moment to submit a geoengineering article of their choice to the WUWT link below.  Again, this site claims to be “the worlds most viewed site on global warming and climate change” and they completely sensor any discussion of the single largest factor causing climate “change”?
        Lets educate them. Please use the link below to send WUWT a solid article of your choice on the dire subject of geoengineering.
        Lets let them know that “BANNING” any discussion of the most dire issue we face short of nuclear catastrophe is something we will not accept lying down.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org

http://wattsupwiththat.com/submit-story/

Nobody can tell any truth other than the truth as they believe it. It is their truth. Nothing I post is claimed by me to be the “truth” binding and final. We post what we understand and believe.

A little example of my view from my engineering and piloting background viewpoint.

Take a cold stubbie of beer from the refrigerator, do it in Darwin in the middle of the wet season for better results. Place it on a table and watch the moisture form on the outside of the bottle and pool around the base of the stubbie on the table surface. What is happening is that the layer of air closest to the bottle is being cooled by transfer from the colder bottle and its contents to the layer of air, causing the moisture in the high humidity air to condense directly to water droplets, instead of going through the process of first becoming cloud then becoming water droplets, because the humidity and temperature is so high. If you leave the bottle standing on the table the transfer of cold will balance out and the bottle and its contents will be the same temperature as the surrounding air and there will not be any moisture on the outside of the bottle as it is absorbed by the air.

This example is the reverse of what happens when an aircraft passes through a parcel of air with its thin stream of exhaust gasses emitted during the passage. In a clear blue winter sky there is no cloud and an aircraft passes by where it takes air with its moisture content in, heats it and turns the water to steam. The steam is exhausted and is frozen almost instantaneously by the cold ambient atmosphere. (Nothing is ever destroyed, it only ever alters state and will return to its original state over time if it has altered through a natural occurrence. Heating and cooling, whether by the sun or passage through a jet engine is a “natural” occurrence.) Hence ice crystals where there were none just by the “shock” process of rapid heating and cooling. Sans wind and/or turbulence the condensation trail (contrail) formed will dissipate within a few minutes or less as the surrounding air warms the contrail and absorbs the warmed air and so it mixes and is dispersed. Equilibrium ensues, as it always does, because all things return to a state of balance unless interfered with by an outside source. With turbulence the trail will dissipate more quickly due to mixing with the surrounding air at a faster rate. The reason there is no cloud is, considering the altitude, not enough moisture in the surrounding air. Remembering that the absence of cloud means that conditions were not conducive to cloud in the first instance, we note that it is not possible for the contrail formed to “spread” into cloud and cause more cloud because mixing with the cloudless air warms the contrail air mass. Entropy at work. The Laws of Thermodynamics tell us what is happening. C.P.Snow told us that the first Law of Thermodynamics tells us we can’t win and the second tells us we can’t even break even when we deal with entropy in a closed loop system, which the entire universe is subject to whether we know it, like it,  or not.

When you start a car on a cold winter morning the exhaust will form a “contrail” which lasts only a few seconds. This is the same as is happening at high altitude but at a much smaller scale.

The claim that internal combustion engines exhaust more water than is contained in the air that is taken in for combustion is a little difficult to understand considering the following. The fuel, Jet-A1 or Avtur, aviation kerosene, is tested for water contamination and specific gravity a number of times before it reaches the JUHI (Joint User Hydrant Installation) at major airports from where it is pumped into aircraft tanks. It is tested for water contamination by the refuellers with water detection paste which is green in colour and turns pink with the presence of water. The sample bottle is inspected for visible contamination and the paste checks for water in suspension. The captain of the aircraft, who is charged by the Civil Aviation Orders with responsibility for the aircraft its passengers and crew from the time the aircraft first moves under its own power for the purpose of taking off, until it comes to a rest at the end of that flight, will often do a water detection test himself or will delegate his first or second officer to do that for him. No chances are taken and I have done that numerous times over some 40 years. So, the aircraft takes off with no water in the fuel or tanks. The only water exhausted during flight is that which is already contained in the air mass being passed through.

Wikipedia is not a place I look for information because information is posted and edited by people with unknown, therefore dubious, qualifications.

Recommended viewing. What in the World Are They Spraying? (Full Length)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA