Calling all conspiracy theorists - do you believe in this one?

[Katman]

You dont need to measure the turning radius but be aware it would be more than your view of the sky if it was a high flying comercial jet.
I only ask this as you claim to have been able to see the contrails of the plane undertaking this maneouvre.

Are you seriously suggesting that a commercial jet flying at 40,000 feet in a perfectly clear sky couldn't carry out a 180 degree turn in the area visible to the eye from the ground?

[sugilite:Me]

I am not trolling you i are trying to sort out what you can actually substaniate you have seen, from what you believe you may have seen.
Conspiracy theorists tend to link information together to suit their beliefs.
You need to explain exactly where it is you seen these occurences. Date, location, year.
I assumed you were talking about the West Coast of America from your location. there are Westports in numerious locations arround the world.
I asked you the turning radius because you said you seen it turn arround.
You dont need to measure the turning radius but be aware it would be more than your view of the sky if it was a high flying comercial jet.
I only ask this as you claim to have been able to see the contrails of the plane undertaking this maneouvre.

I did explain West Coast of New Zealand in another post. I explained very clearly and simply what I saw, you just have not read it properly or chosen to disregard what I said deliberately as some sort of juvenile game.

Substantiate what I have seen? I do not need to explain dates and times, especially to someone who clearly has serious comprehension issues. And moreover, what is the point? You going to go around the airports and ask the pilots for their past flight plans and fuel samples?

You are just trying to complicate things unnecessarily, even stating things I never said like the plane flying at 40,000 foot and travel speed. Do you feel the need to make things up that I never said in order to make me look like a loony - so your post makes you look like you are some sort of factual genius? Is that what you really need to do to make what is basically a pointless point?

You are clearly being a prick, for being a pricks sake.

[Katman]

You are just trying to complicate things unnecessarily, even stating things I never said like the plane flying at 40,000 foot

I'm assuming that he's using that height reference since that's roughly where the stratosphere starts.

You are clearly being a prick, for being a pricks sake.

I think you're on to something there.

[sugilite:Me]

More of Occams razor: If someone comes home late at night staggering and smelling of Alcohol - what's the likely explanation:

Alien Abduction.
They went on a Bender.

Is a vast international conspiracy, that has operated with complete secrecy for far longer than any similar sized conspiracies have been able to operate for a possibility? It's a possibility in the Mathematical sense, but when compared to other much more likely explanations....

Mostly irrelevant in relation to anything I said.

Okay fair enough - I think your below comments give enough clarity to what you mean. I wasn't sure which resource per se you would gain from some form of aerial spraying practice.

Who knows and will ever know if they are spraying chemicals. I would imagine a manufactured virus and let jetliners do the rest would have to be easier than chem trails. The only point of chem trails I could possibly think of would be to have a "A" substance, and a later "B" substance trigger later, if they wanted to target specific demographics with different effects. I really wouldn't care to think to much on it.

The issue I have here is, that North American Village you refer to - Prior to the introduction of Firearms, did they never engage in Tribal Warfare? Considering most Native American tribes have various rules around combat, including a system equivalent to Medals (from memory - one gets to wear certain totems for various acts in battle - such as ferocity or being able to touch an enemy combatant without harming them) - Do you think that if that sole survivng Mother - that her tribe had gotten the weapons first, they wouldn't have done the exact same thing?

This is not to marginalize the suffering, but to take a realistic view of History - Tribal conflict is something that all Humans do and have done, hell, even Chimpanzees do it - at least for the most part in the west, we've managed to civilize it down to friendly contest on the sporting field, rather than the Murder, rape and pillage of old.

In regards to the use of the word annihilation - at the level of the Tribe - sure, Annihilation is the right word - when talking about Humanity as a whole (which is more along the lines of this discussion) then no, Annihilation isn't the right word.

But back to my original point - consider the case of Gate Pa - The British Army with all the latest and greatest weaponary from Europe AND a numerical advantage got beaten back by Rawiri Puhirake and his tribe Ngāi Te Rangi. Unknown technology/Superior Technology can be and is effective - my point was that Cunning and Strategy has had more consistent and successful results.

OK, so you built up a whole story to super embellish mine. This is your standard mode of modus operandi while getting into this style of discussion on KB. You embellish things other people have said greatly, go off on a tangent in an attempt to hide the fact that you really don't have anything to offer on what was actually said. Stripped down to the basics - I said superior technology has been used on a constant basis to exterminate other human beings - end of.

I disagree on your premise - the trend seems to be, as people get educated, as medicine advances and as Women get both legal rights and reproductive rights, the birth rates tend to plateau out. Most western countries are starting to achieve an Equilibrium (with the average being around 2.2 children - which means we are replacing what we loose) - the 3rd world is making progress here - but that is where the majority of births are happening.

Annnnd you are doing it again. the Earth has finite resources. Year 2000 World Population = 6,082,966,429. Year 2017 = 7,550,262,101. Who gives a hoot where the births are happening or not happening. Another irrelevant tangent.

Second part - The issue is that people have been making conspiracys since way back when, the Majority tend to be based on wild conjecture, distrust of authority and a number of personality traits. I agree it does provide the perfect cover - and there have been a few instances were things widely dismissed as conspiracy were later vindicated as true - but these tend to be a fraction of what is trotted out as Conspiracy.

Sure, ok However, it would not surprise me if the ones that are up to no good start a shit ton of the easily debunked ones themselves to set the stage of generalized disbelief lol

I like to argue and it beats doing actual work at work.

But is your smoke and mirrors show with the constant embellishment/corruption of other peoples quotes and so on constitute argument or weakness of character?

Maybe. It's a possibility, but any such solution runs a very large risk of back-firing on those people. to Quote Tyrion Lannister - I don't trust them, I trust their self-interest.

Guess you missed the part where upon I pointed out that with Worldwide resources dwindling quickly will shift self interest from wealth to perceived survival huh?

[TheDemonLord]

Are you seriously suggesting that a commercial jet flying at 40,000 feet in a perfectly clear sky couldn't carry out a 180 degree turn in the area visible to the eye from the ground?

^^^ Absolutely correct.

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/q...nd-180-degrees

At a cruising altitude, and at a cruising speed and assuming a reasonable bank angle - Someone has posted the formulae and with it has calculated a 15 Nautical mile wide turning angle - which is about 28 Km.

[TheDemonLord]

OK, so you built up a whole story to super embellish mine. This is your standard mode of modus operandi while getting into this style of discussion on KB. You embellish things other people have said greatly, go off on a tangent in an attempt to hide the fact that you really don't have anything to offer on what was actually said. Stripped down to the basics - I said superior technology has been used on a constant basis to exterminate other human beings - end of.

My counter was that Humans are the constant that Exterminate other Humans. Technology is neither a guarantee nor causal.

Annnnd you are doing it again. the Earth has finite resources. Year 2000 World Population = 6,082,966,429. Year 2017 = 7,550,262,101. Who gives a hoot where the births are happening or not happening. Another irrelevant tangent.

If only the ratio of Births to Deaths was relevant to the World Population...

But snide point scoring aside - this is an area that has several differing viewpoints - one is yours - that Humans will continue unabated (the Humans are a virus theory). I disagree with that premise: https://ourworldindata.org/wp-conten...-1950-2100.png The rate of growth has been decreasing since the 1960s. I think the evidence points to Humanity achieving some form of equilibrium at some point.

I should concede however, that this is a very contentious issue - with a good deal of evidence on both sides - most of the sources I've looked at estimate that humanity will level out at around 10-15 billion.

Sure, ok However, it would not surprise me if the ones that are up to no good start a shit ton of the easily debunked ones themselves to set the stage of generalized disbelief lol

Good idea, Except enough of the population has to believe the 'easily debunked' ones in order to get enough circulation amongst common people, if they are so easy to debunk - why/how do they spread? There's been a few bits of research done on the types of people that subscribe to Conspiracy theory - they have several traits in common. Based on that, I think it's a reasonable response to claim that such a type of person would create or subscribe to a Conspiracy, regardless if there was an external force directing it for their own nefarious means.

But is your smoke and mirrors show with the constant embellishment/corruption of other peoples quotes and so on constitute argument or weakness of character?

Some of it's artistic flair, some of it's reductio ad absurdum, some of it is attacking what I consider to be the foundational premises that support a viewpoint.

And some of it, is people claiming that, cause they don't like what my rebuttal means for their chosen viewpoint...

If you don't like my argument style, then all you have to do is stop playing.

Guess you missed the part where upon I pointed out that with Worldwide resources dwindling quickly will shift self interest from wealth to perceived survival huh?

I didn't, With the exception of resources sent into space (which represents such a tiny fraction, it's irrelevant) we exist in a closed loop system: The water I drink at my desk now, I'll piss out in an hour, which will go into a treatment plant, then be flushed out to sea, it evaporates up to the sky, falls down as rain, fills the reservoir then goes into my Tap.

Self-interest will drive more efficient and effective methods of reclamation and recycling - things such as the Ocean Cleanup project (which from memory will not only clean the ocean, but do so in a manner that the materials can be recycled and done so at a profit).

And since I mentioned space - I've got bets on colonization of Mars as a solution, long before Corporate Genocide.

[sugilite:Me]

Some of it's artistic flair, some of it's reductio ad absurdum, some of it is attacking what I consider to be the foundational premises that support a viewpoint.

And some of it, is people claiming that, cause they don't like what my rebuttal means for their chosen viewpoint...

If you don't like my argument style, then all you have to do is stop playing.

Whew, I must admit when I see you multi, multi, multi quotes, I feel a bit overwhelmed, but I only find this one quote above having me feel the need to reply.
I guess art appreciation, nay definition is in the eye of the beholder. So I'm running what you said above against what I have been saying and your responses. Particularly where you embellish my words, and add your own words to them distorting them along the way.
Doing the above to form a rebuttal on points I have not made is not to my mind art, or productively adding to a discussion. It is in effect commenting on your own writing. It is hard to respect that line of thinking and action.

[husaberg]

Are you seriously suggesting that a commercial jet flying at 40,000 feet in a perfectly clear sky couldn't carry out a 180 degree turn in the area visible to the eye from the ground?

On the West Coast of the South island a commercial passenger jet flying at normal speeds would certainly struggle too yes. I never said couldn't
But As the West coast of the south island is a very narrow sliver of land backed by mountains. it would certainly suggest sugerlite either lives up a mountain or has extraordinary vision.

[Graystone]

Whew, I must admit when I see you multi, multi, multi quotes, I feel a bit overwhelmed, but I only find this one quote above having me feel the need to reply.
I guess art appreciation, nay definition is in the eye of the beholder. So I'm running what you said above against what I have been saying and your responses. Particularly where you embellish my words, and add your own words to them distorting them along the way.
Doing the above to form a rebuttal on points I have not made is not to my mind art, or productively adding to a discussion. It is in effect commenting on your own writing. It is hard to respect that line of thinking and action.

There is a site, ratemypoo.com, I believe there is an apt comparison there somewhere; multiquotes being like a smattering of corn perhaps...

[husaberg]

I did not think much about chem trails until I got to the West Coast. Every fine day it seemed a few appeared. I noticed some stayed around literally all day long, getting wider and wider, until it was kilometers wide, that sure is a lot of vapor I found myself thinking. So I started watching closer, and I saw planes go by leaving the trail that I just described, yet ones going by a very short time later where the trails disappeared in seconds. I know, I know, different altitudes blah blah.
I used to get up a bit late as I often worked late at night, and there they would be. So I got up really early for a week and watched for where and when these things turned up. And what I saw was quite curious, a lone plane really early each fine morning of that week would go by leaving one of the trails that would take up to 10 hours or longer to grow ever wider. The puzzling thing, it would turn around, without landing and just head back from the direction it came - all the while leaving a trail. Naturally I have no idea what the hell the trail is, vapor or otherwise. But I sure as fuck wonder who is paying to have a plane got on a morning tiki tour clearly not delivering any freight and or passengers to a destination. An aircraft is not cheap to run - so WTF?

And then get over 20 km's wide?

Yes, it is a real mystery, as is why the plane turns around and comes back without landing - something is different about the whole scenario, not exactly standard aircraft behavior, and "contrails".

I watched the plane go by turn around and come back - it was easy to see it doing that with the trail it was leaving behind. I saw it do that the 5 mornings out of the 7 that I watched it all going on for.

Yep, I can accept that, and the thought occurred to me the planes could also be flying a lot higher than previously and as carbon head pointed out they could also be just kicking off the cloud seeding - even though the oddly rippled clouds do look different from non seeded ones.
So just my question remains about who is paying for these expensive flights for the mystery plane that is not carrying freight or passengers and just happens to be the one that seems to kick of the cloud seeding? I honestly are not expecting an answer on Kiwibiker or anywhere else for that matter - even if the mystery financial party could be found it, I'm sure the answer would hidden behind the good old "commercially sensitive" tag.

I could not tell for sure if it was the same plane, but it was within the same 15 minute time frame each morning I saw it. I did not live anywhere near an airport. It left it's trail from one horizon to dam near the other until coming around in a big circle and disappearing into the horizon from whence it came. As mentioned in another post I had a splendid view of a very large stretch of coastline, so the distances involved were very significant.

I did explain West Coast of New Zealand in another post. I explained very clearly and simply what I saw, you just have not read it properly or chosen to disregard what I said deliberately as some sort of juvenile game.

Substantiate what I have seen? I do not need to explain dates and times, especially to someone who clearly has serious comprehension issues. And moreover, what is the point? You going to go around the airports and ask the pilots for their past flight plans and fuel samples?

You are just trying to complicate things unnecessarily, even stating things I never said like the plane flying at 40,000 foot and travel speed. Do you feel the need to make things up that I never said in order to make me look like a loony - so your post makes you look like you are some sort of factual genius? Is that what you really need to do to make what is basically a pointless point?

You are clearly being a prick, for being a pricks sake.

Lets see you said your saw something you were not sure about yet you then called it a chemtrail
When i and others asked for detail you get all defensive about it.
I missed your post where you indicated West Coast South Island.
You gave some details such as you believed the vaporous trail was 20KM wide yet thus far refuse to give any indications on dates etc.
You even went as far as to say the plane/s was clearly not carrying passengers or freight. But i see no reason how you could logically establish this.
You said you could see all the way from Westport to Karamea (heaphy Track)
If you gave details it would be pretty easy to establish what planes were using that flight path as commercial planes operate in flight corridors.
From what you have said or your visibility it would appear you were living somewhere near Granity, is this correct?
I am not arguing that you believe you saw a single plane, Its just you interpretation of these events appears a little open for debate.
I would say what you seen was the scheduled early morning Queenstown to Auckland flight it flys higher than most out West early in the morning,overlapping with another flight likely a departing out of Welington. or another north island airport.
Wellington would overlap as they would be at significant different altitudes as they would still be climbing. Westport being just about the exact same latitude as Wellington fits in with what you might think was a u turn of a single craft.

The other posibility which it appears you appear to have not considered was it was a RNZAF P3 Orion patrolling and protecting the NZ economic zone which if it was summer ,was highly probable as thats peak Tuna season.they tend to loiter and do multiple passes along the coast.

[george formby]

Interesting debate on lots of things.

The population control contributions are worth a quick thought. Why would chemicals be sprayed over western countries which have population stagnation or even decrease? It's the folk with bugger all food and no telly pumping the kids out. From a business point of view, you would not try to shrink your biggest markets.

If it's to do with climate, I doubt some benefactor has taken it upon themselves to save the world without declaring it over the last couple of decades. If they have, it ain't working.

Another quick thought, the threat of chemical attack from the air has been known since WWI. I'm pretty sure that the security controls established for commercial aircraft since then consider the possibility of such a scenario. Any large scale attempt to achieve this would have rung alarm bells, shirley? Ok, maybe tens of thousands of people are being payed off to stay schtum.

Hot on the heels of the last quickie. How would said chemicals be dispensed? Boeing, Airbus and the like do not build crop dusters. Military aircraft which have been used have had to be obviously modified.
With fuel costs and economy being the biggest issue airlines face, I doubt they would be happy having strange additives in their jet fuel.

I've thunk enough. Yeah, na.

[Berries]

I blame the Chinese.

[ellipsis]

I blame the Chinese.

...number 16 with fried rice?...don't blame you man...

[Graystone]

Also, what up with this shit?

"You have been No reason was specified. for the following reason:
Never

Date the ban will be lifted: [ARG:3 UNDEFINED]"

Sounds like some sort of conspiracy to me... I should cry freedom and let slip the hogs and boar.

[mashman]

Interesting debate on lots of things.

The population control contributions are worth a quick thought. Why would chemicals be sprayed over western countries which have population stagnation or even decrease? It's the folk with bugger all food and no telly pumping the kids out. From a business point of view, you would not try to shrink your biggest markets.

If it's to do with climate, I doubt some benefactor has taken it upon themselves to save the world without declaring it over the last couple of decades. If they have, it ain't working.

Another quick thought, the threat of chemical attack from the air has been known since WWI. I'm pretty sure that the security controls established for commercial aircraft since then consider the possibility of such a scenario. Any large scale attempt to achieve this would have rung alarm bells, shirley? Ok, maybe tens of thousands of people are being payed off to stay schtum.

Hot on the heels of the last quickie. How would said chemicals be dispensed? Boeing, Airbus and the like do not build crop dusters. Military aircraft which have been used have had to be obviously modified.
With fuel costs and economy being the biggest issue airlines face, I doubt they would be happy having strange additives in their jet fuel.

I've thunk enough. Yeah, na.

It's only an issue if there isn't enough to go around. There is. In fact it is reported that 20% of the population consume 80% of that which is produced. As such you could wipe out that 80% and barely make a dent in the issues that require us to spray shit in the atmoshpere to tidy up the fuckups going on and eminating from belows overproduction. But by all means let's ignore that and pretend that we know what they're doing and why ... I missed wari banana.

On the flipside, I know a few chaps that are unhappy with the last 2 years yields of veges