Amharc na spéire! Skywatch IRL.


Lovely video my aunt had a wooden house on the grounds of Yale similar to some of the wooden houses in your video her house was 160 years old with its original wood intact .
our climate would have rotted it for sure .
you learn a lot from your videos and would you say the neighbourhood was medium middle class or well off or ordinary .
it looks like a nice place to live .
 
Yes. I will video them the next time it is bad
 
The houses in the forst 2 minutes would be from about 1800. I live in the better side of Dedham, on the Westwood line, East Dedham on the Boston line is not as nice. The video today is in Westwood. Real nice. Those houses are in the millions
 
No. On a day with trails, some planes can be seen not making trails. If it was atmospherics, they should also be making trails.

Also, just beacuse I don't notice trails on any particular day, it doesn't mean they didn't happen. On a cloudy day, you cannot tell if there are trails above that.
 
Sadly, I struggle to come on board with the idea of toxic sprays.

Has it been calculated just how much fluid has to used to produce the effect, i.e. what is the application rate? Once we have that figure we can consider the practicalty of hoisting it all into the air and jettonsing it over land and sea.
 
The sprays are not necessarily always toxic.

Dane Wigginton over at geoengineering watch.com has very detailed info on this issue.

The fact that - on the same day, with the same weather - some planes leave long trails and other planes leave none is what makes me question the official narrative.

Plus, they often boast about their ability to create rain or snow. They don't hide what they are doing.
 
The sprays are not necessarily always toxic.

Dane Wigginton over at geoengineering watch.com has very detailed info on this issue.

The fact that - on the same day, with the same weather - some planes leave long trails and other planes leave none is what makes me question the official narrative.

Plus, they often boast about their ability to create rain or snow. They don't hide what they are doing.
Clouds form at different heights, planes fly at different heights, so we can only expect vapour trails (a form of cloud) to form, or not, at different heights.
 
Clouds form at different heights, planes fly at different heights, so we can only expect vapour trails (a form of cloud) to form, or not, at different heights.
Modern jet engines have been designed to minimise condensation trails. It is very rare they will produce them. Geoengineeringwatch. com has detailed info on this.

You can confirm this yourself by looking at all the planes that don't leave any trails.
 
Modern jet engines have been designed to minimise condensation trails. It is very rare they will produce them. Geoengineeringwatch. com has detailed info on this.

You can confirm this yourself by looking at all the planes that don't leave any trails.
It is not the engines that cause them, it is the drop in pressure as the air passes over the wing.

Wings produce lift by dividing the air flow, the top of the wing is curved meaning that the air has to travel further than that passing underneat, this causes the wing to be sucked upwards, a secondary effect is the condensation of any moisture in the air in the region of low pressure, giving us the trails.

It will depend on the relative humidity of the air, at lower altitudes it will be less meaning that lower flying planes are less likely to produce them.
 
Last edited:
geoengineering.png
 
It will depend on the relative humidity of the air, at lower altitudes it will be less meaning that lower flying planes are less likely to produce them.
Simiul.

There is less relative humidity in the air at lower altitudes?

I saw two planes in close convoy the other day. One producing full trail, the other a much weaker and intermittent trail. Does relative air humdity explain that difference?
 
Simiul.

There is less relative humidity in the air at lower altitudes?

I saw two planes in close convoy the other day. One producing full trail, the other a much weaker and intermittent trail. Does relative air humdity explain that difference?
They would be flying at different heights, commercial flights are kept well apart by air traffic control.

The atmosphere is not homogenous, it mixes and swirls which is why we get turbulence, but it also means that conditions are not the same throughout its depth
 
Last edited:
They would be flying at different heights, commercial flights are kept well apart by air traffic control.
Who said they were commercial? They were flying convoy. Do commercial flights do that? They were very close and going the same way.

Is there really that much difference in air humidity in two planes flying that close?

Two very long trails this afternoon, close, paralell. One trail was much stronger than the other. Air humidity again?

Is air humidity higher the higher up you go?

Have you any suggestion on how to distinguish between a trail caused by air humidity levels and a trail caused by something else, like the weather modification the Guardian reported on?
 
Who said they were commercial? They were flying convoy. Do commercial flights do that? They were very close and going the same way.

Is there really that much difference in air humidity in two planes flying that close?

Two very long trails this afternoon, close, paralell. One trail was much stronger than the other. Air humidity again?

Is air humidity higher the higher up you go?

Have you any suggestion on how to distinguish between a trail caused by air humidity levels and a trail caused by something else, like the weather modification the Guardian reported on?
If the planes were flying at the normal cruising attitude for jets then they were 5 - 6 miles above you, it would be impossible to tell by the naked eye as to any difference in altitude of a few thousand feet.

Military planes will fly in formation, that is not directly in line with each other, unless refuelling.

A heavier plane will require a more nose up attitude to maintain height, causing a greater pressure drop over the wing to provide the extra lift and so on.

We can go round and round in circles on this, but until evidence is provided of various liquids being secretly loaded on board planes and images of the application system, along with details of application rates I shall remain sceptical.
 
If the planes were flying at the normal cruising attitude for jets then they were 5 - 6 miles above you, it would be impossible to tell by the naked eye as to any difference in altitude of a few thousand feet.

Military planes will fly in formation, that is not directly in line with each other, unless refuelling.

A heavier plane will require a more nose up attitude to maintain height, causing a greater pressure drop over the wing to provide the extra lift and so on.

We can go round and round in circles on this, but until evidence is provided of various liquids being secretly loaded on board planes and images of the application system, along with details of application rates I shall remain sceptical.
you are good have you flown.
 
Who said they were commercial? They were flying convoy. Do commercial flights do that? They were very close and going the same way.

Is there really that much difference in air humidity in two planes flying that close?

Two very long trails this afternoon, close, paralell. One trail was much stronger than the other. Air humidity again?

Is air humidity higher the higher up you go?

Have you any suggestion on how to distinguish between a trail caused by air humidity levels and a trail caused by something else, like the weather modification the Guardian reported on?
what is interesting is flight radar website .
when you study the images initially you think they are just tiny little wing shaped images of anything --not so they are astonishing accurate and telling when you get used to it and you can spot the difference between a military and commercial flight quickly and each jet is presented very well and when you get used to it you see which is 747 cargo and 747 passenger and which is airbus 380 and so on as the tiny variation is still visible such as 4 propellers on a fat large aircraft can ONLY MEAN A C17 MILITARY.
M as a Fish knows his stuff and the separation between aircraft is immense both in terms of distance and height .
pilots are not permitted to fly the aircraft --they are only permitted to land and take off as the scheduled take off time is the purchased airspace for that aircraft to get for example from dublin to london at a certain time at a certain elevation only .
this is filed as the flight plan and all computers in europe and the airlines and the aircraft makers computers monitor this and up to 10 computers constantly monitor that the aircraft is flying on its pre planned and pre purchased time slot in european airspace as the system would collapse if PEOPLE WERE ALLOWED TO FLY FROM A TO B as they wished .
if you look at your weather charts they state currently high pressure over ireland but low pressure will move in and sometimes we have red dust from the sahara in the mix .
there must be info from our weather service about chemtrails as the analysis of cloud is their multimillion business and each weather service is independent of each other .
there are also multimillion satellite surveillance of every foot of our planet --what do these say.
if one told the truth all would be forced to tell the truth as aircraft spewing out a chemtrail don't stick to one country as they travel.
somebody knows the truth .
 
until evidence is provided of various liquids being secretly loaded on board planes and images of the application system, along with details of application rates I shall remain sceptical.

Thanks for the info. It is good to have a disagreement without being disagreeable.

I definitely don't want to believe that they are spraying us, as I have enough to worry about already. Can you elaborate on air humidity as a cause of trails?


There are photos claiming to show planes fitted out for spraying, with tanks, nozzles. etc. But photos are so easy to fake this proves nothing. There is an interview with a pilot. Again, actors are easy to find, so this proves nothing either.

I am interested in your opinion of the site geoengineeringwatch .com


BFH, what flight radar site do you suggest? Have you ever noticed it telling lies to you? You see a plane, but the radar says it is not there.
 
you are good have you flown.
Always had an interest but never followed it up. TBH, I haven't the self discipline to be a pilot and as an airline pilot friend of mine once said, the view from the office may be good, but after a while it can become just another job.
 
Thanks for the info. It is good to have a disagreement without being disagreeable.

I definitely don't want to believe that they are spraying us, as I have enough to worry about already. Can you elaborate on air humidity as a cause of trails?


There are photos claiming to show planes fitted out for spraying, with tanks, nozzles. etc. But photos are so easy to fake this proves nothing. There is an interview with a pilot. Again, actors are easy to find, so this proves nothing either.

I am interested in your opinion of the site geoengineeringwatch .com


BFH, what flight radar site do you suggest? Have you ever noticed it telling lies to you? You see a plane, but the radar says it is not there.
Indeed, interested discussion is the best way forward, but might I come back to later as work beckons presently.
 
Thanks for the info. It is good to have a disagreement without being disagreeable.

I definitely don't want to believe that they are spraying us, as I have enough to worry about already. Can you elaborate on air humidity as a cause of trails?


There are photos claiming to show planes fitted out for spraying, with tanks, nozzles. etc. But photos are so easy to fake this proves nothing. There is an interview with a pilot. Again, actors are easy to find, so this proves nothing either.

I am interested in your opinion of the site geoengineeringwatch .com


BFH, what flight radar site do you suggest? Have you ever noticed it telling lies to you? You see a plane, but the radar says it is not there.
they are not allowed to inform you of everything -- our government gulfstream is rarely visible and an odd occasion the Pilates trainers from baldonnel are visible but not every day .
 
Two planes trailing opposite directions in a North/South line, quite close to each other. Very, very, very unusual to see any flights going North South in this area. Are they heading for Derry or for the North Pole?

Ten minutes later, two planes trailing E/W in opposite directions. That's more normal.
 
It is not a fight. It is an inquiry into truth.
Re modern engines as you mentioned above, the latest geared turbofans are absolute marvels of engineering, hats off to Rolls Royce and General Electric who have developed them.
 
It can be observed:
1. Most planes leave no trail.
2. Some leave tiny, middling or huge trails.

Possible explanations:
1. Condensation from engines.
2. Condensation from airflow around wings.
3. Condensation from the morning dews spraying us for our own or the planet's good.

It is a good faith discussion about possible explanations for observed events.
 
Two planes trailing opposite directions in a North/South line, quite close to each other. Very, very, very unusual to see any flights going North South in this area. Are they heading for Derry or for the North Pole?

Ten minutes later, two planes trailing E/W in opposite directions. That's more normal.
It's counter intuitive at first but transatlantic flights will tend to head north westerly as that is the shortest line to America due to the earth being a sphere, but let us avoid debating that contention once more.
 
Thanks for the info. It is good to have a disagreement without being disagreeable.

I definitely don't want to believe that they are spraying us, as I have enough to worry about already. Can you elaborate on air humidity as a cause of trails?


There are photos claiming to show planes fitted out for spraying, with tanks, nozzles. etc. But photos are so easy to fake this proves nothing. There is an interview with a pilot. Again, actors are easy to find, so this proves nothing either.

I am interested in your opinion of the site geoengineeringwatch .com


BFH, what flight radar site do you suggest? Have you ever noticed it telling lies to you? You see a plane, but the radar says it is not there.
Humidity is the amount of moisture that is held in the air as water vapour, the warmer the air the more water it can hold until the point is reached where the air becomes saturated and it can hold no more. We usually talk about the amount of moisture in the air as relative humidity, this is the percentage of water that is being held relative to what it can hold, hence 50% RH is where the air holds only half the water it is capable of, at that temperature.

If we take a parcel of air at 50% RH and increase the temperature then the RH will fall, converesely, if we take a parcel of air and cool it the RH increases and this is what happens above a wing. The faster flowing air experiences a drop in pressure, leading to it expanding and cooling. This cooling raises the RH of the air to above 100%, leading to condensation forming.

Therefore the higher the RH of air the more likely the moisture is to condense when subjected to further cooling, and also the longer the trails will take to disappear again.
 
Thanks for the info. It is good to have a disagreement without being disagreeable.

I definitely don't want to believe that they are spraying us, as I have enough to worry about already. Can you elaborate on air humidity as a cause of trails?


There are photos claiming to show planes fitted out for spraying, with tanks, nozzles. etc. But photos are so easy to fake this proves nothing. There is an interview with a pilot. Again, actors are easy to find, so this proves nothing either.

I am interested in your opinion of the site geoengineeringwatch .com


BFH, what flight radar site do you suggest? Have you ever noticed it telling lies to you? You see a plane, but the radar says it is not there.
The Photos of tanks and pipework that I have seen are rather obvioiusly military fuel tankers for in-flight refuelling, although it must be noted that these are only additional to the aircraft's own tanks which often serve as the main reservoir.

The only nozzles I have seen on planes are for the application of crop protection products and they tend to be big and obvious. Next time you book a flight get a window seat just aft of the wing and when it comes into land and the flaps go up to act as an air brake take a look inside the wing to see if you can see anything similar, you won't. The pipes that are there are for the hydraulics, not spraying water.

I am somewhat familiar with crop spraying at ground level and would suggest that to see a spray from six miles away then the quantities would need to be colossal and far more than a plane is capable of carrying.
 
The Photos of tanks and pipework that I have seen are rather obvioiusly military fuel tankers for in-flight refuelling,
Can you look at the photos on geoengineeringwatch.com?

"the warmer the air the more water it can hold". Presumably, the air at altitude is generally cold. The amount of air cooled by flowing over the wings is relatively small compared to the amount of air generally. Why does the trail - sometimes - last a long time? Wouldn't that extra cool air be mingled quickly? I can accept that a short trail is just condensation. But a trail that stays for hours?

"to see a spray from six miles away then the quantities would need to be colossal". The spray from crop dusters is low level, with no condensation. I think what we see from high altitude planes is condensation on the particles that are sprayed. So even small quantities can create condensation. The suggestion is that what is sprayed is very small particles, so a little will go a long way.

I'm observing from north Leitrim.
 
Can you look at the photos on geoengineeringwatch.com?

"the warmer the air the more water it can hold". Presumably, the air at altitude is generally cold. The amount of air cooled by flowing over the wings is relatively small compared to the amount of air generally. Why does the trail - sometimes - last a long time? Wouldn't that extra cool air be mingled quickly? I can accept that a short trail is just condensation. But a trail that stays for hours?

"to see a spray from six miles away then the quantities would need to be colossal". The spray from crop dusters is low level, with no condensation. I think what we see from high altitude planes is condensation on the particles that are sprayed. So even small quantities can create condensation. The suggestion is that what is sprayed is very small particles, so a little will go a long way.

I'm observing from north Leitrim.
Yes indeed, it is (from memory) minus 30 to 40C, but it still contains water vapour, in which case it would appear as ice which gradually sublimes back into the atmosphere. The atmosphere is a dynamic system even at that height and the rate at which trails fade will depend on the air movements present. Worth noting that fluid discharged at that height could end up anywhere due to air currents, so spraying us with nasties would be a very random affair.

Your point about condensation on particles suggests that we are talking about rain seeding, as I believe this is how it is done, the early chemicals being a compound containing silver (silver iodide?). I'll get round to looking at the site at some point but it could be rain seeding equipment, which is known about, that appears in the images.

We also need to bear in mind that discharging fluid or solids from planes is illegal (the military are exempt), even aeriel crop spraying in the EU unless a permit is obtained, and they are generally refused except for forestry work and fire fighting. As an aside this has caught out at least one drone company that was going to farm from the air, until it read the small print.

It can be argued that governments are above the law, but each and every pilot will want to be indemnified and these these things just can't be kept quiet. It may well be that governments are spraying us with noxious substances, but it is certainly not doing so via commercial airline fleets.
 
This is an excellent, civilised discussion on observable phenomena.

In this crazy world, that may appear to be ridiculous.

I am greatful to Fish for providing his knowledge to the debate.
 

Latest Threads

Popular Threads

Back
Top Bottom