I've already pointed out your lies. Your contradictions are obvious and I have pointed them out, as well.
To astroturf the whole of my post is NOT to "point out" ANYTHING.
To astroturf the whole of your post is to point out your lies.
I have already answered your questions.
Quit the lying and answer my questions.
It is you who is the liar, as I have pointed out. I don't respond to demands; however, I've already answered your questions. Obviously, you can't read.
Obviously, your reading comprehension is lacking.
Quit the smearing too.
Your reading comprehension is lacking. That's a fact. Therefore, it is not smearing. Besides, to say that some one's reading comprehension is lacking does not qualify as a smear. It's an observation. But, calling people morons, as you have done, would be a smear.
Answer my questions:
How are you under the impression that I know very little about this topic and the earth?
You have proven this with your ramblings.
Where do I contradict myself?
For the third time, I have already pointed this out. This is why I say that your reading comprehension is lacking.
Where do I lie?
Again, for the third time, I have already pointed this out. This is why I say that your reading comprehension is lacking.
Comments inside the box.
Last edited by BlueAngel : 03-31-2010 at 10:15 PM.
Kindly explain to the forum, JazzRoc, in your opinioin, why non-passenger planes spew whatever it is they spew from the back of their planes on a clear day that begin as long white streaks, but ultimately end up fanning out into thin white, whispy clouds.
What are they spewing?
Why are they doing this?
What is the purpose?
Thanking you in advance,
Last edited by BlueAngel : 03-31-2010 at 11:44 PM.
Kindly explain to the forum, JazzRoc, in your opinioin, why non-passenger planes spew whatever it is they spew from the back of their planes on a clear day that begin as long white streaks, but ultimately end up fanning out into thin white, whispy clouds. What are they spewing? Why are they doing this? What is the purpose? Thanking you in advance, BA
You are lying, astroturfing, and skirting my questions once again.
You are a moderator here? You behavior needs moderating by someone truly responsible.
The answer to your questions is that they are just the natural results you get when you burn kerosine in the stratosphere.
This, FOR THE THIRD TIME IN THIS THREAD, is evidenced below in the following atmospheric science research papers.
Because you are hard of thinking, I'll translate it into simple terms.
For every yard of forward flight at cruise altitude a jumbo jet may produce thirty-five pounds of trail ice. It only depends on the water vapor content of the surrounding air. This ice evaporates back into the air when it has fallen to a height of 4-5 miles. Another forty years of continual expansion of air travel may take place before there is a significant effect on the weather.
That's it. Only a moron would fail to understand this.
“Contrail Formation and Persistence” contrail.html “Long lasting contrails like the ones observed usually occur in parts of the sky that have preexisting patches of cirrus clouds. Since the cirrus clouds are formed of ice crystals like the contrails, cirrus clouds in a region of the sky suggests supersaturation with respect to ice and sufficient heterogeneous nuclei for ice crystals to form. GOES-8 satellite photographs taken at approximately at the same time as the contrails were present show significant cirrus clouds around the Norman area providing the condition necessary for contrail persistence.”
S J Moss (1999). The Testing and Verification of Contrail Forecasts using Pilot Observations from Aircraft. Meteorological Applications, 6 , pp 193-200 The testing and verification of contrail forecasts using pilot observations from “Recent research has shown that old forecasting techniques may not be wholly applicable to modern aircraft that now use more efficient engines. In order to compare the performance of both the old and new forecasting techniques a validation trial was carried out over a nine-month period in which RAF pilots reported when and where contrails did and did not occur.”
A Laboratory Study of Contrails http://ams.allenpress.com/archive/15...9-15-2-149.pdf “The existence of supercooled water at temperatures significantly colder than -40C is not a generally-accepted fact, but has been suspected by theorists for some time. Fig. 5 demonstrates that such supercooling of contrail condensate, whatever its purity, is possible.”
Contrail Observations over Southern and Eastern Asia in NOAA/AVHRR Data and Comparisons to Contrail Simulations in a GCM
Contrail Observations over Southern and Eastern Asia in NOAA/AVHRR Data and Comparisons to Contrail Simulations in a GCM - International Journal of Remote Sensing “400 NOAA-14 satellite scenes from four months of the year 1998 were analysed. Both regions show sufficient air traffic to produce an observable amount of contrails. Thus we are able to measure for the first time contrail frequencies in the tropics and compare it to a nearby mid latitudinal region. The annual average of the daily mean contrail cloud coverage is 0.13% for the Thailand region and about 0.25% for the Japan region. For both regions the contrail cover is largest during spring. The daily cycle shows surprisingly high contrail coverage during night in spite of lower air traffic densities during night time.”
Proceedings of the Aircraft Research Association http://www.greenerbydesign.org.uk/re..._Challenge.pdf “Persistent contrails, which in time degenerate into cirrus cloud, only form in air which is saturated with respect to ice and the conditions for their formation and persistence are reasonably well understood. There’s no prospect of a technological fix for that. If you fly through an ice-saturated region in the atmosphere, you’ll produce a persistent contrail.”
EFFECTS OF AIRCRAFT WAKE DYNAMICS ON CONTRAIL DEVELOPMENT Atmospheric Turbulence Research at WVU CONCLUSIONS
1. Generally contrail ice in near equilibrium with ice mass proportional to contrail volume (except for the rapidly falling vortices early, and precipitation regions later).
2. Contrail volume largely determined by vortex dynamics (until ~ 4 min.) and Brunt-Vaisala oscillations (until ~ 20 min.).
3. Passive tracer, ice mass and ice number density distributions differ (strong dependence on RH ice ).
4. Heating due to adiabatic compression of falling vortex system can lead to significant ice crystal number depletion. (depending on RH ice , EI ice# , aircraft type).
5. Strong species fluctuations can have a significant impact on measured chemistry [e.g. HO2 /OH] in the aircraft wake.
BOTH these sites refer to the "Contrails to Cirrus" paper in their side menus, and BOTH have been offered you as links on this thread... they say "There's NONE so blind as those that don't wish to see"...
You stand out as useless. Why conduct an argument about a subject you neither read nor understand? Only a moron would do this.
On one hand, he's trying to be a conspiracy theorist, but on the other hand he's doing the complete opposite.
Such as stating that contrails forming into clouds is a myth.
Try looking up into the sky on a clear day when the jets are out spraying and you'll see for yourself that it ain't a myth that contrails form into clouds.
The eye does not deceive.
However, words do and the bunch of mumbo jumbo mathematical information that many of the members here supply us with so as to attempt to confuse our critical thinking and deductive reasoning capabilities.
It's called information overload and/or brain fry.
Trust your instincts and not the BS they post.
They want you to believe that they are intellectuals in the topic at hand so they copy and paste, but cannot explain anything in their own words.
Last edited by BlueAngel : 04-07-2010 at 01:14 AM.