Quit "looking up" and start "looking facts up".

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: totallackey

originally posted by: Avoiceinthewilderness

I believe in observation.

When you wake up and see checker board skies and the trails spread making it to the ground, makes you wonder. Don't live by an airport so why so busy? Watched 3 planes at same altitude at the same time with the middle one's trails disappearing shortly after the plane while the others lingered and spread getting larger coming towards the ground. Red and white planes seem to be the best at it.

So anybody can say anything but the facts remain which are variables from the norm. I never seen a contrail spread and make it to the ground when I was a kid and I loved looking at planes in the sky. New fuel? It should be cleaner not dirtier. For what ever the reasons if cemtrails are true, life on this planet is short and only 100 years ago the average lifespan was 46 years old for men and for women 48. Now it's over 70 for men and 80 for women. We could go back to when they did nothing and had no tech but nature shortened life not man.

I wouldn't get too worried until we see the trend of dying older change to dying younger.

Just a thought.

And I believe I would like to see you prove the contrail made it to the ground...Furthermore, once you are done proving this, go get me that pot of gold at the end of every rainbow...we will be rich...I just want one piece out of each pot...you can keep the rest...or you can be a selfish sob and keep all of it yourself...

I've only seen the tic-tac-toe formations in the sky (not by commercial jets too low or cropdusters too high) just the dusting of the topiaries and livestock that needed to be sprayed off (you have to experience it to believe it).

What altitude where the planes flying at?

Best calculation? 12,000 feet. I am nowhere near a major airport and watching a decent pattern by commercial airlines. These planes are smaller and very maneuverable (no noise).

Why would you consider 'spraying' at an alleged 12,000' to be for the purpose of

the dusting of the topiaries and livestock that needed to be sprayed off

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: totallackey

originally posted by: Avoiceinthewilderness

I believe in observation.

When you wake up and see checker board skies and the trails spread making it to the ground, makes you wonder. Don't live by an airport so why so busy? Watched 3 planes at same altitude at the same time with the middle one's trails disappearing shortly after the plane while the others lingered and spread getting larger coming towards the ground. Red and white planes seem to be the best at it.

So anybody can say anything but the facts remain which are variables from the norm. I never seen a contrail spread and make it to the ground when I was a kid and I loved looking at planes in the sky. New fuel? It should be cleaner not dirtier. For what ever the reasons if cemtrails are true, life on this planet is short and only 100 years ago the average lifespan was 46 years old for men and for women 48. Now it's over 70 for men and 80 for women. We could go back to when they did nothing and had no tech but nature shortened life not man.

I wouldn't get too worried until we see the trend of dying older change to dying younger.

Just a thought.

And I believe I would like to see you prove the contrail made it to the ground...Furthermore, once you are done proving this, go get me that pot of gold at the end of every rainbow...we will be rich...I just want one piece out of each pot...you can keep the rest...or you can be a selfish sob and keep all of it yourself...

I've only seen the tic-tac-toe formations in the sky (not by commercial jets too low or cropdusters too high) just the dusting of the topiaries and livestock that needed to be sprayed off (you have to experience it to believe it).

What altitude where the planes flying at?

Best calculation? 12,000 feet. I am nowhere near a major airport and watching a decent pattern by commercial airlines. These planes are smaller and very maneuverable (no noise).

As I said, if you can ever get that on film and can disclose a location that is stable (not the wandering tin shack you claim

) then you will be able to claim your place in history as the guy who proved chemtrails were more than just a paranoid delusion. I hold out hope for this and Bigfoot's appearance.

I'm not sure I understand; is this thread called 'Quit Looking UP' on the Forum "NOT EVER AT ALL ABOUT BIOENGINERING; PLACATED/EXPLAINED by others in wisdom (than the forum creators) as an aside: SIMPLE JET ENGINE EXHAUST ARE (CONTRAILS NOT CHEMTRAILS). I must be on the wrong forum; or your argument Is with this forums creators (and should have placed your thread someplace else). Nice try attempting to expand the argument to include 'Bigfoot' its hard enough here to find a living "Jackalope" or its dead prodigy.

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: totallackey

originally posted by: Avoiceinthewilderness

I believe in observation.

When you wake up and see checker board skies and the trails spread making it to the ground, makes you wonder. Don't live by an airport so why so busy? Watched 3 planes at same altitude at the same time with the middle one's trails disappearing shortly after the plane while the others lingered and spread getting larger coming towards the ground. Red and white planes seem to be the best at it.

So anybody can say anything but the facts remain which are variables from the norm. I never seen a contrail spread and make it to the ground when I was a kid and I loved looking at planes in the sky. New fuel? It should be cleaner not dirtier. For what ever the reasons if cemtrails are true, life on this planet is short and only 100 years ago the average lifespan was 46 years old for men and for women 48. Now it's over 70 for men and 80 for women. We could go back to when they did nothing and had no tech but nature shortened life not man.

I wouldn't get too worried until we see the trend of dying older change to dying younger.

Just a thought.

And I believe I would like to see you prove the contrail made it to the ground...Furthermore, once you are done proving this, go get me that pot of gold at the end of every rainbow...we will be rich...I just want one piece out of each pot...you can keep the rest...or you can be a selfish sob and keep all of it yourself...

I've only seen the tic-tac-toe formations in the sky (not by commercial jets too low or cropdusters too high) just the dusting of the topiaries and livestock that needed to be sprayed off (you have to experience it to believe it).

What altitude where the planes flying at?

Best calculation? 12,000 feet. I am nowhere near a major airport and watching a decent pattern by commercial airlines. These planes are smaller and very maneuverable (no noise).

Why would you consider 'spraying' at an alleged 12,000' to be for the purpose of

the dusting of the topiaries and livestock that needed to be sprayed off

I don't know; my purpose for posting was to see if anyone else had any ideas as to its purpose other than poisoning something; water tables, killing the prairie grass.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: mrthumpy

What altitude where the planes flying at?

You're kidding right?

With so many details in the story, knowing the approximate altitude should be easy. He knew they were lower than commercial planes and higher than crop dusters, so perhaps we can all learn about this special chemtrailing program going on only in southern Arizona. I have never seen anything like this in my lifetime, so I am intrigued.

Well that went as well as could be expected. I'm left wondering what an indecent pattern would look like though...

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
a reply to: AutumnWitch657

They do not breath or use oxygen.

This might interest you

What a lot of people don't realize is that when there's little or no light, plants do the same thing we do. The break down the sugar to release CO2, water, and energy. This requires oxygen.

... However, plants only perform photosynthesis in the green parts, like leaves and stems, but all plant cells need oxygen to respire. Cells in the leaves get plenty of oxygen from photosynthesis, but cells in the roots often need to get oxygen from the environment to stay alive. Even though roots are buried, they can absorb oxygen from the small air spaces in soil. This is why it's possible to 'drown' plants by watering them too much.

scienceline.ucsb.edu...

I stand corrected. Thanks.

Classy move.

Thanks.I'm eager to learn stuff. All the time. It's one reason I joined this site.

Killing prairie grass we learned back in the thirties will kill the prairies and cause a new dust bowl. It took a decade of living in the dirt to repair the damage done the last time the grasses were killed off so we know they can't be doing that. If you really think that they are trying g to kill off the prairie grasses please explain why they would do that?. e reply to: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
a reply to: applesthateatpeople

As I have stated numerous times:

I do not believe in chemtrails!

Everybody get that?

Are people supposed to keep a file on you and your particular views? You posted like a believer. The response was perfectly reasonable.

Maybe you'd like to take a moment to explain what you meant by the following

So, what you're saying is...

Trust the internet, not your instincts!

LMAO

I'll get right on that.

LOL

That certainly looks like a defense of "chemtrail" belief.

I said nothing about chemtrails in my post, but my post "certainly looks like a defense of chemtrail belief"?

Okay... lol

Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions.

So if I don't believe in chemtrails, that means I should NEVER argue with a chemtrail denier?

Everything has to be so black and white.

I have a problem with people who get their knowledge exclusively from ghe written word, and none from experience.

He said "stop looking up and start looking things up"

Why not do both?

Taking someone's word for anything without firsthand knowledge is the very essence of ignorance.

You can say "ice crystals" until you are blue in the face, but in the end, it's just words. NOT PROOF!

DUH!!!

I have no respect for anyone who trusts a website above their own instincts.

And if you do... don't be surprised that no one will listen.

I seen a problem with all the criss-crossing persistent contrails long before I ever heard of "chemtrails".

My instincts tell me there is something wrong with it. You tell me...

"OMG, it's just ice crystals"

Someone else says...

"It's chemtrails"

Good and evil, black and white. And all of that came from the internet.

My instincts tell me it's more like a kind of carelessness that carries harmful effects ghe we do not fully understand yet.

You can think me stupid, just know...

From my perspective, you look like a wiki-pilot know it all with no firsthand experience.

You give me no reason to believe you.

Keep thinking in black and white, though. It is what is expected of you.

No color at all.

a reply to: network dude

So you admit...

You are telling the people to trust the internet?

More than instinct?

In all fairness, how do you know the earth is not flat?

You've seen it from space?

And because I asked you, it means I think the earth IS flat, right?

Because if you question something "official" it makes you a moron, right?

See how easy it is to make assumptions?

Black and white.

a reply to: applesthateatpeople

I have no respect for anyone who trusts a website above their own instincts.

So your instincts are what created the idea of chem trails in the 90s?

Or, wait for it, was it a web site that gave the idea that the lines in the sky could be chem trails?

You give me no reason to believe you.

Ah and in come beliefs,

The religious forum is elsewhere, atmospheric science and meteorology can be studied by anyone at their own free will.

originally posted by: applesthateatpeople
a reply to: network dude

So you admit...

You are telling the people to trust the internet?

More than instinct?

It's already been clarified that he was saying a person needs to research facts and do some critical thinking based on those facts before drawing a conclusion. Trust the facts rather than trusting a knee-jerk instinctive reaction.

And one good place to start doing research on facts is the internet. When used properly, the internet can be a gateway to peer reviewed research papers.

What you shouldn't trust is "just" your instincts without learning the facts, because without the facts, people can be fooled and minds can be fooled.


Plus, as InhaleExhale pointed out, the whole "chemtrail conspiracy" was born out of hucksters and snake-oil salesmen on the internet, not from "instincts". Persistent contrails have been around for decades and decades prior to the internet.

originally posted by: applesthateatpeople
Because if you question something "official" it makes you a moron, right?

Your words, not mine.

See, I didn't just look at one site and scamper away happily, I have studied this from lots of different places.
I am very confident in the science that explains contrails.

Now you, don't believe in chemtrails, yet you think there is "something wrong" with the sky. LOL.

So go through life not believing anything and assume that whatever you see, and think it is, it must be. I am sure you know more than 80 years of science. (since they did publish it on the internet.)

And I am very, very sorry to assume you were a chemtrail believer. It's clear that you know better.

a reply to: applesthateatpeople
Anytime you'd like to discuss the topic, I'm here. Until then you're just someone who says he doesn't believe in "chemtrails" but thinks people should look up and trust their "instincts" rather than research and comprehend the subject. You're not confused at all.

a reply to: waynos
As I stated the earth is about to suffocate and the amount of oxygen displacement caused by one 777 is amazing , it sucks in 2 million cubic ft per minute. Multiply that by the thousands of jets in the air and the fact that oxygen level on the earth is not 21% anymore but is low as 16% in some places ,we are in danger if we do nothing and deny the truth just to keep the industry going. notice the last sentence "another 2 % and we suficate.

a reply to: network dude
It seems I was mistaken on the statement I made that oxygen was at 30% in ww2 but My point that Oxygen is decreasing and we will suffocate if we do nothing, still stands.

a reply to: supergravity
You really need to (a) start providing links to these dubious articles, and (b) stop believing what you read on scam sites.

I Googled that and it comes from PESWiki.

PESWiki is a known scam site that shills "free energy" systems, ie perpetual motion, ie total nonsense.

Oxygen in Tokyo is not 7%. The amount of oxygen in the atmosphere is still about 21%, just as it has been for millennia. Why do you keep quoting from these scam sites? They are just trying to relieve you of your cash.

a reply to: supergravity

Yeah, but....

Why have atmospheric oxygen levels stayed relatively stable since this second jump? As discussed above, the carbon-oxygen cycle is a closed system that keeps levels of both elements fairly constant. The system contains a powerful negative feedback mechanism, based on the fact that most animals need oxygen for respiration. If atmospheric oxygen levels rose substantially today, marine zooplankton would eat and respire organic matter produced by algae in the ocean at an increased rate, so a lower fraction of organic matter would be buried, canceling the effect. Falling oxygen levels would reduce feeding and respiration by zooplankton, so more of the organic matter produced by algae would end up in sediments and oxygen would rise again. Fluctuations in either direction thus generate changes that push oxygen levels back toward a steady state.

This is from here- www.learner.org...

Where is yours from?

Who is Robert and is he selling anything?

originally posted by: supergravity
a reply to: network dude
It seems I was mistaken on the statement I made that oxygen was at 30% in ww2 but My point that Oxygen is decreasing and we will suffocate if we do nothing, still stands.

Yes, you were spectacularly wrong and no, your point doesn't stand because it's nonsense.

Let me respond for you. Because I don't believe the woo woo I am closed minded and naive, I am a sheep who is happy to follow the official line, I am not able to see and think outside the box. Hey, maybe I'm being paid too? I could do with it.

The possibility that your source is a lie and you have been suckered is far too unimaginable to contemplate, naturally.

a reply to: supergravity
That quote about "we have to make a choice between burning fuel and having breathable air" is absolute scaremongering nonsense.

I invite you to do the maths to work out how much of the oxygen in the atmosphere would be consumed if we burnt ALL the oil reserves on Earth.

A few numbers to help you:

Mass of carbon in one barrel of oil = 118kg.

Atomic mass of carbon = 12.

Molecular mass of O2 = 32.

Estimated oil reserves = 1.6 trillion barrels.

a reply to: Rob48
Rob 48 you need to read waynos's post that states atmospheric oxygen effects ocean systems just as I tried to tell you,dead zones can be an indication of lower oxygen in the atmosphere. ALL systems of the earth are connected even if SCIENTIST have not found them.The systems of the earth are very fragile and balance is the key word and we should never say never when it comes to the life of the planet .History tells us of the the flawed scientific and engineering of man , The unsinkable titanic....... sank, the experts said" the nuclear reactors in japan had so many redundant systems there could never be a meltdown".....24 hours it blew Time after time man boasts of knowledge only to find he knows nothing and are simply inventors of defective machines and thoughts. We should focus on healing the earth and not defend the destruction of it.

The intelligent curve has been found to circle around to stupid.