Operation Indigo Skyfold

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: network dude

Yes, I've learned about persistent contrails on this thread.

I don't know whether persistent contrails and chemtrails look exactly the same, or what, and I don't think it makes any difference if we know that spraying is going on.

I urge you to

focusing on the academic contrail - chemtrail debate and start listening to the few whistleblowers we have because they're trying to tell you something, at great danger to themselves.

I think we'd do better establishing whether anything these 'whistleblowers' have to say has any merit, first of all. And that pretty much automatically leads to the contrail/chemtrail debate, since these whistleblowers usually claim that contrails can't persist, and other nonsense like that.

originally posted by: ConnectDots


You mean "apparently showing the inside of an aircraft used to create chemtrails" is referring to proprietary information for an airline, or classified information?

That is just what geoenginering watch.org calls it - they are not providing any reasons, they are just feeding the fear.

Do you have any actual take-down notice from FB that says why an account with this photo was taken down?

a reply to: ConnectDots

I urge you to

focusing on the academic contrail - chemtrail debate and start listening to the few whistleblowers we have because they're trying to tell you something, at great danger to themselves.

I'm feelin the magic.

Magicians use distraction techniques to draw the audience's attention away from whichever hand is engaged in sleight of hand. Magicians can accomplish this by encouraging the audience to look elsewhere or by having an assistant do or say something to draw the audience's attention away.

Since ''chemtrails'' can't be what they're claimed to be, a ''whistleblower'' is not worth listening to on this subject.

And I think that the video I posted about Tavistock is important because you're living in a system where there are professionals messing with your mind.

Are you certain it's not your mind they're messing with?

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: network dude

Yes, I've learned about persistent contrails on this thread.

You mean to tell me, that you have studied this for years, and are a fan of common sense, yet you didn't know about contrails before this thread? I don't mean this in the condescending way other posts have been but, don't you think that shows a bit of a problem with your "research"?

I don't know whether persistent contrails and chemtrails look exactly the same, or what, and I don't think it makes any difference if we know that spraying is going on.

but that's just it. "we" don't know spraying is going on. All we have are third hand testimonies, wild accusations with no proof, and lots of lies purported as facts. (which you have brought some here to this thread)

I urge you to

focusing on the academic contrail - chemtrail debate and start listening to the few whistleblowers we have because they're trying to tell you something, at great danger to themselves.

This guy Dane Wiggington you like so much. Don't you think he has spread a good bit of this 'sooper secret" information around? And somehow, he is still here, and the IRS hasn't slammed him with an audit, nor has the men in black flashed him with their mind eraser. Oh, or killed him.

Please refer to that "common sense" again. Think about it.

And I think that the video I posted about Tavistock is important because you're living in a system where there are professionals messing with your mind.

And you don't think it could be your side doing the messing at all? There is no chance that since they lied about most of the evidence, that they might have found a lucrative way to make a living going on the talk circuit and donate button business?

I think you suffer deeply from confirmation bias. And I don't mean that in a throw it in your face kind of way, I mean it like a take a good hard look at your position kind of way.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Do you have tunnel vision?

a reply to: ConnectDots

Do you want to answer the question?

a reply to: ConnectDots
Not related to the post I'm replying to, but this could be big. Apparently Dane has ''Undeniable Video Footage Of Wing Tip Aerosol Spraying''. See the thread here www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: payt69
Apparently it's so secret that we can't seem to measure any kind of effect from the supposed 'chemtrails'. They simply don't show up in any kind of tangible way. So they might as well not exist.

Where is that information coming from?

As a comparison, do you think the reports about radiation from Fukushima are reliable?

Do you believe the government tells the truth about things such as unemployment figures and the reasons why we must take military action?

I know Griffith said all sorts of stuff, but that doesn't mean it's true. His own son Charles has a hard time believing all the stuff he claimed. We don't need more anecdotes, but credible evidence.

Careful.

If you are wrong, and there is an extremely secret program going on where people are killed, his own son Charles could be threatened, as well, or the story about him could simply be a fabrication.

Why use possible intimidation or a possible smear as your source?

There's Murphy who apparently is going to take a plane up there and 'sample a chemtrail'.

Isn't that along the lines of what your side has been demanding?

And then there was Matthias Hancke, who tried to do the same thing. You have to buy his dvd to find out about the results. Right.. lol.. kinda shows where the priorities lie for some of these chemtrail pushers.

Bear in mind that these volunteers are going up against the military-industrial complex. What they're doing is actually dangerous. And people do have to make a living.

[snipped off topic material]

originally posted by: ConnectDots


If you are wrong, and there is an extremely secret program going on where people are killed, ....

Yes, and IF there is an evil terrorist plot to make us all gay with rainbow unicorn farts then that will solve het population problem.

as soon as you put "IF" at he start of the proposition then you are talking possibilities and probabilities - and some things are highly likely and possible - even probable - and some things er not.

It is not realistic or reasonable to think everything has an equal probability of existing just because you can write it in a sentence, or just because someone can imagine it.

a reply to: waynos
You twisted the term "psychological operation," not "psychological." There's a difference.

originally posted by: waynos
What? No. I'm not saying that AT ALL. Did Facebook write the caption on the image that you posted? Of course they didn't. It was clearly put there by whoever made the video.

Let's refresh our memory of what you said:

Not necessarily, if the caption was added because somebody did have their account frozen or removed for previously posting the photo, that could have been the result of copyright infringement but they CLAIM it was for more sensationalist reasons. We KNOW what the photo shows, so the caption is nonsense.

Not a word about the video.

a reply to: network dude

I have not been studying this topic for years. That's why I asked so many questions on the thread.

What I have studied for years is things like the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations and the shadow government.

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
Yes, and IF there is an evil terrorist plot to make us all gay with rainbow unicorn farts then that will solve het population problem.

as soon as you put "IF" at he start of the proposition then you are talking possibilities and probabilities - and some things are highly likely and possible - even probable - and some things er not.

It is not realistic or reasonable to think everything has an equal probability of existing just because you can write it in a sentence, or just because someone can imagine it.

AC Griffith is an extremely important whistleblower. A smear is standard procedure for all whistleblowers. The point I was making was that avoiding listening to his testimony based on a smear is not wise.

In my opinion, trying to test to prove or disprove chemtrails is not the answer. I believe paying attention to whistleblowers is the only way to find out what is going on from the courageous insiders who are trying to let you know.

If you listen and don't believe them, that's one thing. But if you don't even listen, you are willfully ignorant.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

My point was that the questions seemed repetitive to me, as if my previous posts were not taken into consideration. Almost like badgering.

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations is no joking matter.

a reply to: ConnectDots

Was AC Griffith a whistleblower at all, let alone an important one?

Did anything he revealed ever get shown true in the real world??

Or was he just a crazy old guy?

is it a smear to point out inconsistencies and errors in his claims, and therefore conclude that his claims are not true - indeed in many cases that they cannot possibly be true?

As far as I know nothing Griffiths claimed has ever come about or been shown to have occurred -


A.C. Griffith and several others created the following website called "Chemtrails Over America":
web.archive.org...

The site claimed to have been produced by NSA and CIA associated people, and claimed that chemtrails were four projects:

1. Reduce solar radiation due to an ozone crisis
2. "The most secretive project" is the Radio Frequency Mission Planner(RFMP)
and the Variable Terrain Radio Parabolic Equation(VTRPE)
3. Weather control using Haarp
4. Biological detection and decontamination programs

1, 3 and 4 are all commonly claimed and there has never been a skerrick of evidence for them.

2 is a bit less common - but not hard to find information about - RMP and VTPRE are computer modeling programs and apps which help military planners determine if they wll have successful communications between given sites under particular weather and terrain conditions.

It was developed mainly by the University of Texas at Arlington's Research Laboratory:
wwwext.arlut.utexas.edu...

Here is a complete tutorial for the RFMP:
sgl.arlut.utexas.edu...

A User's Guide to VTRPE:
adsabs.harvard.edu...

Here is a person who worked on the project:
shirlenepearson.com...

Here are many papers on the subject:
scholar.google.com...

This link even contains a promotional video for the RFMP!
www.prismnet.com...

He also claims in various places to have been an NSA official - but the closest he ever got was being a radio repair technician at an eavesdropping base in the Phillipines - the 6925th Mobile Radio Squadron - he also maintains a website for that squadron within the Clark Airforcebase website - www.clarkab.org...

so why is he a whistleblower at all, let alone an important one??

(Appropos to Jay Reynolds, much of whose info is cadged in here)

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
That is just what geoenginering watch.org calls it - they are not providing any reasons, they are just feeding the fear.

You're saying it's a fake?

Do you have any actual take-down notice from FB that says why an account with this photo was taken down?

Of course not. Why would I have such a thing?

The more important issue is the other photo.

Do you believe it's a picture of busy air traffic?

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations is no joking matter.

Who was joking? My post was absolutely serious.

Given the tactics used by those you promote, I'd be very concerned about their intent.

I'm not the least bit concerned that the ''chemtrail'' 'theory' might be true. I regard anyone pushing it as either attempting to deceive or themselves deceived.