How would my above statement render me a moron?
I have already closed this subject. Combustion water leaving the exhausts of a modern civil transport aircraft can precipitate TEN THOUSAND times its weight of ice out of a supersaturated stratospheric layer. Thus the 180-ton fuel load of a transcontinental jumbo may be transformed into 1,800,000 tons of stratospheric ice.
I don't believe this has sunk in yet. Such a LONG, LONG time to appreciate this amount of ice suggests
Spewing water from planes into the atmosphere causes weather changes and, if it is being done for this purpose, it would be referred to as weather modification.
It ISN'T done for this purpose, and at 3.5% ITS EFFECT ON GLOBAL WEATHER is statistically insignificant
. It's in the thread.
If it is not for weather modification, kindly inform the forum what the other reason would be for spewing 99.9% water from the back of planes and what comprises the other one percent?
The other NOUGHT POINT NOUGHT ONE PERCENT? (You got it wrong! But actually I had rounded UP the amount.) The correct figure (when the biggest trails are deposited) will be 99.9994% PURE WATER. (That's probably better than your local tap water!)
The residual proportion (0.0006%) will be oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, only partially-burnt hydrocarbons, and soot. It's in the thread.
Obviously, weather is modified in other ways. We are aware of these natural causes.
I doubt it. There is NO SUCH THING AS WEATHER MODIFICATION. CLOUD SEEDING ISN'T WEATHER MODIFICATION.
however, spewing water from the back of planes, unless for some other reason than weather modification is not a natural cause.
Are you natural? I am. I have been an aircraft and gas turbine designer, quite naturally. Is kerosine natural? Yes. Are contrails natural (being made by naturally-existing machines made by naturally-existing people)? Of course they ******* are. They are certainly NOT supernatural. Man is natural. Man is a natural organizer of Nature. Science is the measure of Nature - which includes Man.
To hark back to "the good old days" is a severe mistake
which brings one of the worst vices
- irresponsibility - in its wake. Man needs to travel right now in order to improvise his way out of the situation he finds himself in. Situation management is a human skill. The more social movement and interaction (both required) the better, don't you think?
And, even if it were for some other reason, the effect would still involve modification of the weather.
It will take another forty years for aviation, expanding as it was a few years back, to significantly affect the weather. (I have already given you the science on this). At present the weather is NOT SIGNIFICANTLY MODIFIED. Mathematically, scientifically, SENSIBLY. Due to the future constriction in fossil fuel supplies* there is good reason to suppose that ALL aviation will level off (by 2030) to an amount which has NO significant
effect on the Earth's atmosphere. Especially compared with power stations, industry, farting animals. rotting tundra, and active volcanoes (which total 11,500). *Which is a pity, for kerosine is almost a perfect fuel - though something non-poisonous and almost non-flammable would be better.
Incorrect word usage on my part. Obviously, the military and goverment can spray whatever chemicals they want from jets, but, in this instance, IMO, they DO NOT in lieu of CANNOT.
I'm right, but it is not due to default.
Of course it is, if you have read and understood what I have already written in this thread
. WHICH YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVEN'T.
I have not added a new batch of consequences with any ignorant misinformation as I have not written any IGNORANT misinformation. However, kindly inform me as to what a "new bath of consequences" would be.
Of course you have. You are saying aviation is harmful when it isn't. The social consequences of millions of "chicken littles" (by "Chemtrails
" - non-existent
"are nothing more than weather modification
" - non-existent
- you declare yourself to be one) are potentially HUGE. No good consequences here.
Your comment above is wrong and there isn't any need to refer to people on this forum as morons.
You have had long enough time to read and understand the science behind this. If you keep on making antiscientific and antisocial statements about aviation, what else are you? If you don't understand what I'm talking about, ask me. Don't keep on making the same false assertion.
We could say the same about you, but we don't.
Well, you couldn't, could you?
You haven't elaborately prepared a scientific argument for me to misunderstand and prattle rubbish about.
It's the other way round, n'est-ce pas?
Non-scientists so misunderstand science as to believe it is arguable
. It isn't.
You either understand it, or you are TOTALLY WRONG.
People that persist in making false assertions after having been confronted with the truth (for AGES) ARE morons. We can all be one, and we can all STOP being one.