It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

In Defense of Chemtrail Conspiracy Theorists: Part 3. Experiments in the Sky

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Bro, I was responding in the other thread, & clicked submit as they removed it! Hah

As to calling you a shill, imagine everything I say having a sarcastic tone to it & being said by my avatar. Especially sentences talking about 392 days in a year.

As to the existence of chemtrails & anyone who feels strongly one way or another, I can only say that the best approach to take in life is accept everything, believe nothing. You'll feel better knowing anything could be possible & everything might just in fact be against you after all.

I believe in chemtrails because of what I see with my own eyes, & because why the hell not, the alternative is terribly boring.
edit on 3-3-2015 by Eunuchorn because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-3-2015 by Eunuchorn because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Eunuchorn

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: Petros312




If you believe the fear over what's been happening in the sky is not warranted, consider the fear over what's to come


A lot of things could happen. With a finite amount of time to spend, you see this as a priority one, existential threat? Based on evidence I've seen, I must disagree.

If they are spraying for whatever reason, why would they do it during the day when people can easily see it?
Why not just cover the sky at night?


Oh, they do. I see moon chemtrails all the time. Maintaining the global Sky as a holographic image is a 24/hour process.


Moon chemtrails! Sky holograms!

This is why I come here everyday!

Like i said ...this conspiracy is just pure entertainment.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Bro, I was responding in the other thread, & clicked submit as they removed it! Hah

As to calling you a shill, imagine everything I say having a sarcastic tone to it & being said by my avatar. Especially sentences talking about 392 days in a year.

As to the existence of chemtrails & anyone who feels strongly one way or another, I can only say that the best approach to take in life is accept everything, believe nothing. You'll feel better knowing anything could be possible & everything might just in fact be against you after all.

I believe in chemtrails because of what I see with my own eyes, & because why the hell not, the alternative is terribly boring.


Seriously? There isn't enough wonder in the world for you? You think things are boring? We landed on a comet and are about to pass by pluto for the first time.. and that's just things to do with space.

The world is anything but boring. In fact weather by itself is incredibly interesting.

Come on dude.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Your optimism & childlike simplicity causes me physical & spiritual pain.


I'll start voting when chemtrails are admitted to by the government &/or private corporations involved.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Eunuchorn
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Your optimism & childlike simplicity causes me physical & spiritual pain.


I'll start voting when chemtrails are admitted to by the government &/or private corporations involved.


You will have a long time to wait. Since LOGISTICALLY, chemtrails are impossible. And I cannot fathom how you guys can't see this obvious fact.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
A corollary to Part 3 In Defense of Chemtrail Theorists is available, which further expounds on how certain open air testing by the US government, geoengineering and related experiments, contrails, the use of jet aircraft, and the concerns of so-called "chemtrailers" are all related.

In Defense of Chemtrail Conspiracy Theorists: Part 4. Matters of "National Security"



posted on Mar, 18 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
The problem you have is your trying to lump two different topics into one, because you seem to think because they may have similar methods they have to be the same and they are not, so once you actually understand that the better it will be for all of us.

You think your doing a service for the chemtrail conspiracy theory, but in reality all your really doing is making the water murky when it comes to difference between the two.


First, I do not have a problem. Secondly, there are differences in matters concerning chemtrail conspiracy theory vs. other open air testing and geoengineering experiments, but there are also similarities. The one important thing that chemtrailers have done is remove some of the apathy over what is happening in the sky that is adversely affecting the public's health and the environment. Consider this quote:

"The expansionist logic of airlines and airports assumes that the air around and above us has an infinitely absorptive capacity and can tolerate any pollution. We used to think that about rivers. It isn't true, in either case. Industries that pollute rivers have been forced to change, to clean up. The people who worry about pollution from planes (noise pollution, trails of fuel waste raining down) are no longer Luddite crackpots."
Source: Airline Pollution: The Sky Has Its Limits content.time.com...

In other words, there are chemtrailers who may misunderstand what is a contrail, but they know there are reasons for concern that have little to do with what is a contrail, what is a persistent contrail, and why do contrails turn into cirrus clouds. The bulk of their concern is just not addressed by repeatedly offering explanations of these phenomenon as "normal" jet aircraft activity. In fact, it's highly suspect that the evidence debunkers typically present to explain what is a contrail is more often... not the appropriate empirical evidence to support what is actually in the sky.


edit on -05:00America/Chicago31Wed, 18 Mar 2015 11:22:23 -0500201523312 by Petros312 because: link added



posted on Mar, 27 2015 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Since the start of this thread, which supports the notion that experiments have taken place in the sky without public disclosure, I have come across information in a video of Rosalind Peterson speaking at the UN in 2007 in which she claims "canisters" were being deployed by NASA and the US Air Force into the ionosphere and used for atmospheric testing. Chemicals released supposedly included aluminum, barium, and strontium. This would be another example of open air testing that most people are completely unaware of. See the video at 8:20.



She also mentions aluminum coated fiberglass used as chaff by the Air Force. This is the first I've heard of this, and I'm looking into it for more details.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Petros312

I can save you some time.

www.nasa.gov...-xU

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Petros312




First, I do not have a problem.


You do if you think linking back to your own threads constitutes proof to something in any way, shape, or form.



posted on Mar, 30 2015 @ 12:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Petros312
S
She also mentions aluminum coated fiberglass used as chaff by the Air Force. This is the first I've heard of this, and I'm looking into it for more details.


Try wikipedia, try searching ATS for "Chaff" or "Rosalind Peterson" - or ask any aircraft aficionado since WW2 about Chaff.

Your lack of knowledge just shows us you shouldn't bother talking about this in hte first place!



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   

In 2010, KTVL news in Medford Oregon, the weatherman says:

"Here in southern Oregon and northern California, we've got a bit of an unusual situation. Now, this first portion of the radar cycle, fairly bland and typical. But then you see these very distinct bands of very distinct cloud cover moving into the region. That is not rain. That is not snow. Believe it or not military aircraft flying through the region is dropping chaff --small bits of aluminum, sometimes it's made of plastic, or even sometimes metalicized paper products--but it's used as an anti-radar issue and obviously they're up there practicing. Now, they won't confirm that but I was in the marine corp for many years and I'll tell you right now that's what it is."

--that's yet more examples of open air testing done with no disclosure to the public.

I surmise this video has been "debunked" in some way, but this is s video taken in Stamps Arkansas, alleging what it looks like on the ground when the aluminum coated fiberglass "webs" and particles come down:


--This individual who posted the video will no doubt be called a "chemtrailer," and his video is called "chemtrail chaff." But note, he may be talking about aircraft "spraying" something, but he's not talking about "contrails." That's my point about how the people being labelled "chemtrail conspiracy theorists" are NOT necessarily fixated on contrails.


edit on -05:00America/Chicago30Fri, 03 Apr 2015 12:32:39 -0500201539312 by Petros312 because: fixed video link



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Petros312

using chaff in a chemtrail argument is disingenuous. It shows a severe lack of understanding of what chaff is. Now that in itself isn't a crime or even a bad thing. Lots of folks don't worry enough about chemtrails or contrails, or clouds to bother looking it up. But a person who has made 7 chemtrail threads doesn't get a pass.

You need to do your part and look into it, BEFORE you make yourself look lazy.

Chaff is a countermeasure to confuse radar and make a large target out of a small plane. the purpose is to let the plane fly and not be blasted out of the sky by enemy radar guided missiles.

More about chaff can be found here


Please, if you are going to frequent this area, and be a champion of the underdog, try to become slightly educated in the terminology.
edit on 3-4-2015 by network dude because: bad spelr



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Petros312

In 2010, KTVL news in Medford Oregon, the weatherman says:

"Here in southern Oregon and northern California, we've got a bit of an unusual situation. Now, this first portion of the radar cycle, fairly bland and typical. But then you see these very distinct bands of very distinct cloud cover moving into the region. That is not rain. That is not snow. Believe it or not military aircraft flying through the region is dropping chaff --small bits of aluminum, sometimes it's made of plastic, or even sometimes metalicized paper products--but it's used as an anti-radar issue and obviously they're up there practicing. Now, they won't confirm that but I was in the marine corp for many years and I'll tell you right now that's what it is."

--that's yet more examples of open air testing done with no disclosure to the public.

I surmise this video has been "debunked" in some way, but this is s video taken in Stamps Arkansas, alleging what it looks like on the ground when the aluminum coated fiberglass "webs" and particles come down:


--This individual who posted the video will no doubt be called a "chemtrailer," and his video is called "chemtrail chaff." But note, he may be talking about aircraft "spraying" something, but he's not talking about "contrails." That's my point about how the people being labelled "chemtrail conspiracy theorists" are NOT necessarily fixated on contrails.



No they're not necessarily fixated on contrails. They'll seize upon anything in the sky they don't understand and try and tie it in with their conspiracy theory to prove themselves right.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy


No they're not necessarily fixated on contrails. They'll seize upon anything in the sky they don't understand and try and tie it in with their conspiracy theory to prove themselves right.


Like spider webs?



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: mrthumpy


No they're not necessarily fixated on contrails. They'll seize upon anything in the sky they don't understand and try and tie it in with their conspiracy theory to prove themselves right.


Like spider webs?


Sounds like an episode of Ancient Aliens. Can never be too vague or use too many Weasel Words.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Petros312




--This individual who posted the video will no doubt be called a "chemtrailer," and his video is called "chemtrail chaff." But note, he may be talking about aircraft "spraying" something, but he's not talking about "contrails." That's my point about how the people being labelled "chemtrail conspiracy theorists" are NOT necessarily fixated on contrails.


Well where to begin...

First thing is if they were using Chaff as a chemtrail all radars in the vicinity of this spraying would light up like a christmas tree, but the fact they haven't should show you that Chaff is not what you think it is.

In fact I have already posted this video, but it seems someone needs a reminder...



And here is one that explains chaff and what it does...





--that's yet more examples of open air testing done with no disclosure to the public.


WHy do they need to tell the public, as they have strict rules as to when and where Chaff can be used...


Since chaff can obstruct radar, its use is coordinated with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).


www.globalsecurity.org...



I surmise this video has been "debunked" in some way, but this is s video taken in Stamps Arkansas, alleging what it looks like on the ground when the aluminum coated fiberglass "webs" and particles come down:


And I surmise you don't know what your talking about...


Impacts on land use and visual resources are directly related to the visibility and accumulation of
chaff debris. A field study of the visibility of chaff and incidental debris in different environmental
contexts concluded that significant aesthetic effects are unlikely. A survey of high-use areas did not
indicate that chaff or chaff debris accumulates to create visual impacts.


www.globalsecurity.org...

So it seems someone is fibbing and my guess is it's your source.

As for the aluminum coated webs...they are just that spider webs.




That's my point about how the people being labelled "chemtrail conspiracy theorists" are NOT necessarily fixated on contrails.


Until you or anyone for that matter can provide test results that came from a sprayed trail then they are contrails, and someone just looking up and saying they are chemtrails are far from actually knowing what they are seeing.

If they call persistent contrails chemtrails then they are chemtrail conspiracy theorists.
edit on 3-4-2015 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy
In reply to: Petros312
No they're not necessarily fixated on contrails. They'll seize upon anything in the sky they don't understand and try and tie it in with their conspiracy theory to prove themselves right.


You're overgeneralizing and continuing the trend to keep stigmatizing anyone who might be "uneducated" and suspected of being a "chemtrail conspiracy theorist" for their concerns about what is being sprayed in the sky with no disclosure to the public.


edit on -05:00America/Chicago30Fri, 03 Apr 2015 13:52:47 -0500201547312 by Petros312 because: quote link



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Petros312




You're overgeneralizing and continuing the trend to keep stigmatizing anyone who might be "uneducated" and suspected of being a "chemtrail conspiracy theorist" for their concerns about what is being sprayed in the sky with no disclosure to the public.


Well the motto of this site is Deny Ignorance...and if those yelling chemtrails are real need to educate themselves as to what they are seeing...hence the word uneducated.

If those people are so concerned why hasn't one of them made the effort to get a plane that is set up to test the so called chemtrails after they were sprayed?

You see the fact that nobody has done that yet just goes to show they aren't all that concerned. The only thing the top chemtrail pushers are interested in is how much money can they make off the gullible.

And because of that we have threads such as yours misrepresenting so called evidence to back their claims.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Nice distraction here on how important it is to know what is chaff, as if I didn't already know. I mentioned it above as it pertains to more evidence of open air testing that occurs in the US without disclosure or consent by the public -- remember?--the topic of the thread (hint: "Experiments in the Sky"). You guys of course are trying to say it has nothing to do with a "normal" contrail, and nobody said otherwise. However, this fact has nothing to do with such activity qualifying as "normal." In fact, the weatherman says in the above video "unusual situation." It is of concern to many people labelled "chemtrail conspiracy theorists" what is being sprayed in the sky by military jets, whether indicative of a persistent contrail or not.


originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
As for the aluminum coated webs...they are just that spider webs.


What species of spider produces the particles and webs seen falling from the sky in the second video ABOVE?


edit on -05:00America/Chicago30Fri, 03 Apr 2015 14:13:36 -0500201536312 by Petros312 because: Link to video



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join