The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: What are the consequences of being sprayed with barium and aluminium?  (Read 14008 times)

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Please learn to read.
What I said was please use the right page.
That's this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrail
And it takes you to that image.

So it isn't disinformation at all. The problem is your inability to read.
Not patheit, not trolling.
Just you not doing your job.
And, as ever, you have no evidence.

Interstingly, if you google aviaticus cloud it takes you here
http://clouds.wikia.com/wiki/Cirrus_aviaticus?file=Contrail.jpg
where you can see the contrail from each of the 4 engines



 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Only a fool could believe this "cirrus aviaticus" propaganda without any scientific litterature about this "novel" cirrus cloud. The reality is that solar radiation management do alter atmospheric cloud composition. 
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Only a fool would ignore the evidence that they cited themselves.
Do you remember posting a picture of a plane?

You still have no evidence.
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
You're lying. I have said multiple times and posted photographic evidences of clandestine geoengineering activity in this thread and others as well. Why do you want to make this a confrontation ? Research on clandestine geoengineering activity is a scientific duty.

Please stop the lies. I know what a evidence is. I'm only attempting rational discussion about the synthetic nature of chemtrails... Not contrails. I'm not interested in your pseudo-scientific arguments about contrails and the water vapor.

There's no way we can win this battle unless we unite to dig in evidences and find a methodology to stop this non sense.

Bored chemist, I think you're extremely intelligent but unfortunately you need to understand why this battle do concern your attitude regarding chemtrails. Let me know if something changes.

   
« Last Edit: 17/09/2016 23:32:42 by tkadm30 »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
This
"Bored chemist, I think you're extremely intelligent but unfortunately you need to understand why this battle do concern your attitude regarding chemtrails." doesn't make sense.

Anyway
You have posted pictures and then claimed that they are chemtrails.
But you have never posted any evidence that they are made from anything but water have you?
So you have not shown that they are anything other than contrails.
So you have not posted evidence of chemtrails.

It's not me being confrontational. I'm just asking you to back up your claim withe  evidence.
You are refusing or failing to do so, then calling me a liar.

You have not posted any evidence of chemtrails
Come back when something changes.
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
This
"Bored chemist, I think you're extremely intelligent but unfortunately you need to understand why this battle do concern your attitude regarding chemtrails." doesn't make sense.

Let me help you understand why your attitude and logic regarding clandestine geoengineering activity is quackery. Your pseudoscientific voodoo doesn't help. Water vapor doesn't persist in the atmosphere to create cloud condensation nuclei or a high density plume. 

Quote from: Bored chemist
Anyway
You have posted pictures and then claimed that they are chemtrails.
But you have never posted any evidence that they are made from anything but water have you?
So you have not shown that they are anything other than contrails.
So you have not posted evidence of chemtrails.

It's not me being confrontational. I'm just asking you to back up your claim withe  evidence.
You are refusing or failing to do so, then calling me a liar.

You have not posted any evidence of chemtrails.

Stop lying. You're being confrontational all the time ignoring everything from scientific litterature to photographic evidences. I know what a evidence is. You don't have any regarding that theses "contrails"
are composed of strictly water vapor. Please don't tell me I don't know what water vapor is.


 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
What evidence have you offered that the trails behind aircraft are anything but water (Perhaps a little impure)?

Without that you have offered no evidence of chemtrails (as distinct from contrails)
That's why I say you have not offered any evidence of chemtrails.

Let me know when something changes.
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Since when aerosolized jet fuel can alter clouds composition? If this was the case, all jets would produces a high density plume suitable for albedo modification. Obviously this is not the case and commercial jets do not emit such cloud condensation nuclei particles. Also, water is not reflective. A contrail do not reflect sunlight.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
"Also, water is not reflective."
No
Look at clouds.

Also, you seem to have failed to understand that the combustion of jet fuel produces water- rather more than the weight of the fuel.
So you already have a massive supersaturation so you don't need to worry about nucleation.

The different  trails produced by different craft are due to different "weather" up there

So, you still have no evidence that the so called "chem trails" are anything but water.
Let me know when something changes.
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Don't forget the basics. It's called "climate engineering" for a reason. Chemtrails are persistent and visible while contrails are not persistent or visible. The persistence of chemtrails is probably due to partial oxidation of aluminium oxides. Chemtrails will persist for several minutes independently of the weather.

See: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/9116
for hints on the use of aluminium oxide nanofibers as substrate for BHA catalysts of methane.   
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1872
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
Do clouds hang around for more than minutes?

Yes?

Then why say that contrails could not persist for more than minutes? They are the same phenomenon, just caused by a different stimulus...
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Then why say that contrails could not persist for more than minutes? They are the same phenomenon, just caused by a different stimulus...

Because the proper definition of a contrail is a wingtip vortices: Wingtip vortices don't persist in the atmosphere. Likewise, commercial jets don't emit a high density plume. It is disinformation to pretend such phenomenon is attributable to contrails. Artificial clouds are produced via cloud seeding, not contrails.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Don't forget the basics. It's called "climate engineering" for a reason. Chemtrails are persistent and visible while contrails are not persistent or visible. The persistence of chemtrails is probably due to partial oxidation of aluminium oxides. Chemtrails will persist for several minutes independently of the weather.

See: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/9116
for hints on the use of aluminium oxide nanofibers as substrate for BHA catalysts of methane.

That's just silly.
This is England. It's common for clouds to hang round all day.
They are persistent.
Why would clouds of very fine water drops condensed from jet exhaust be different?

As I said, you have not shown that the trails are anything but the water  produced by combustion.
Until you do that you have no evidence that chemtrails exist, so ascribing properties to them makes no sense.

Come back when you can show that the trails are not water.
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Chemtrails are definitely not water vapor. Here's why:

- Chemtrails exhibit "chemical clumping" behavior. 
- Chemtrails are extruded from the plane.
- In addition, as the picture clearly shows, chemtrails can be switched on and off.



Let me know if you're intelligent enough to admit that chemtrails existence is real.
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
The chemical clumping behavior of a powder is caused by the molecular Van der Walls force:

Quote
The clumping behavior of a powder arises because of the molecular Van der Waals force that causes individual grains to cling to one another. Actually, this force is present not just in powders, but in sand and gravel, too. However, in such coarse granular materials the weight and the inertia of the individual grains are much larger than the very weak Van der Waals forces, and therefore the tiny clinging between grains does not have a dominant effect on the bulk behavior of the material. Only when the grains are very small and lightweight does the Van der Waals force become predominant, causing the material to clump like a powder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powder_(substance)#Mechanical_properties
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Putting words on a picture isn't evidence.

"chemical clumping" is something quacks have invented.

Stuff that's to do with powders isn't relevant to the gases produced by a jet engine.

The breaks in the contrail are due to the plane passing through areas where the air is at different temperatures and or humidities.
It's quite straightforward physics.
In the real world, it's this sort of thing
http://www.mountain-wave-project.com/images/data/OSTIV_MWP_Wave.jpg
and there's no need for inventing chemtrails to "explain" it.


You still have absolutely no evidence that the trails are anything except water.
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Chemical clumping is not voodoo science. It is common for aerosols to clump together:

Quote
Climatologists typically use another set of labels that speak to the chemical composition. Key aerosol groups include sulfates, organic carbon, black carbon, nitrates, mineral dust, and sea salt. In practice, many of these terms are imperfect, as aerosols often clump together to form complex mixtures. Itís common, for example, for particles of black carbon from soot or smoke to mix with nitrates and sulfates, or to coat the surfaces of dust, creating hybrid particles.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/Aerosols/

As for the "breaks" in the chemtrails, you provided no reasonable evidences to support your hypothesis. The only logical reason is because the pilot can activate or disable the release of the aerosol while in flight. There's no way humidity or temperature could produces this mechanical effect.

Furthermore, if the delivery system would not be a mechanical process activated by the pilots, the aerosols would be released on the ground too... So your theory makes no sense. It is far more reasonable to assert that a chemtrail is released on-demand via a nozzle rather than from the combustion of jet engines.

Please stop the pseudo scientific voodoo now.

All you can prove is that you have very little knowledge on the chemistry of aerosols.
« Last Edit: 24/09/2016 22:42:01 by tkadm30 »
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1872
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8655
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
...
There's no way humidity or temperature could produces this mecanical effect.
...

All you can prove is that you have very little knowledge on the chemistry of aerosols.
There's no way humidity or temperature could produces this mecanical effect. "
Yes there is- it's just that you don't know enough about aerosol science to understand it.
Which makes that last bit of your post rather funny.

Also, it only makes sense to talk about particles sticking together when there are actually particles present.

So, why don't you go away and find some evidence that the trails are anything other than water?
 

Offline tkadm30

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 910
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Your denial is hopeless. The pseudo-scientific voodoo you insist to believe in is a lie. The chemical clumping of chemtrails can be observed and is a hard evidence of the aggregation of the aerosol.

Why do you keep on lying and for whom do you work for?

Why do you think people have fear of chemtrails ?

It's because they know theses are not regular contrails.

So please stop the insanity. The military have carefully prepared the cognitive infiltration about this particular topic and so far I can say the brainwashing is working well for you.

 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1872
  • Thanked: 143 times
    • View Profile
I can see that this thread is going nowhere, and looks to be circling dangerously close to ad hominem attacks...

Congrats TK, you have gotten the last word in you win!* This thread is now locked.



*(unless you count this post, in which case I win hahahaha)
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums