Proof that Geoengineeringwatch had been lying all along.

a reply to: mrthumpy

Sequence of Events

1. You accuse Wigington of having a closed mind.
   
2. I challenge you to consider that you might have a closed mind.
   
3. You answer that your mind is not closed as evidenced by being called a shill by "chemtrailers."
   

But my question to you is: Can you open up your mind to the possibility that overall, the chemtrailers are right; we are being sprayed to accomplish some goal of the shadow government?

a reply to: ConnectDots

has it occured to you to question the veracity of mr tatums claims ?

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

If someone who doesn't believe in chemtrails tries to discuss the issue on "geoengineeringwatch", their posts are often removed.

Thats a chemtrail site, unlike ATS. But I get the 'nobody is allowed to challenge our way of thinking' mentality, from both sides. This thread I got 50 responses telling me to take it somewhere else . Thanks be to the mods.…

What a fur ball it becomes when you challenge the system.

I guess it's possible that you just don't get it. What system did you challenge? We were all trying really hard to let you know we agree with you. We all don't like pollution. Hell, a thread was even created just for you.

But if you really want some closure on this, I suggest you try pushing that opinion you seem to have on the other side. If you can get them to stop calling contrails chemtrails, we would have nothing to complain about and you could do all that super activism you seem to be all about getting rid of pollution and banning air travel.

a reply to: InhaleExhale

I think the people who are speaking out about this are people who live in areas that are most targeted for spraying and are observing outside where they live, not on websites; and are also upset about illnesses and/or drought.

Yes, there are misunderstandings and ignorance of some facts, but that doesn't mean that overall, the concern is unwarranted.

Regarding invisible chemtrails, like I said, I've just learned the term recently. When I heard it, I interpreted it as trails produced by more recent technology, but I could be wrong.

a reply to: ConnectDots

again - why is wigington deleting posts that correctly identify what is happening in the vids he links [ fuel dump ] ?????

a reply to: ConnectDots

But my question to you is: Can you open up your mind to the possibility that overall, the chemtrailers are right; we are being sprayed to accomplish some goal of the shadow government?

Here is a better question...

Can you open your mind enough to understand that chemtrailers are wrong...and we aren't being sprayed from some shadow government?

originally posted by: ConnectDots
Can you open up your mind to the possibility that overall, the chemtrailers are right; we are being sprayed to accomplish some goal of the shadow government?

Sure. As soon as someone has evidence of this "shadow government" or of chemtrails...

a reply to: network dude

I suggest you try pushing that opinion you seem to have on the other side.

You just did it again. I don't go to many websites, I barely have time for this one.

I haven't seen a chemtrail thread lately, but you already know what I think of their misinformation, too.

a reply to: network dude

I asked you about David Keith because I'm just as interested in your knowledge as I am in finding out myself.

The reason for this is that I think it's pertinent to understand who he is serving.

I'm trying to encourage people to consider that yes, there might be a shadow government, and if there is, it would be much more relevant than anything else we could choose to focus on and argue about at this time.

Does that make sense?

a reply to: ConnectDots

Regarding invisible chemtrails,

SO how does one know they are there if they are invisible?

*jumps in*

Who posted this link? Sciency PDF. Went and had a read..

This paper presents single-particle
chemical analysis of the actual material incorporated into ice crystals
in two different aircraft contrails.

And this,

First, our O. 1 pm detection limit means that particles smaller than
this were not included in this analysis...CaSOn and volatile particles not include due to large sizing
uncertainty. particles in the exhaust of an ATTAS aircraft was estimated to be 0.06
pm (Schumann et al., 1996), and in fact, the majority of contrail nuclei
have in other experiments been observed to be smaller than 0.1 pm

Then this...

Whether the source of the metal particles in this experiment was the engine itself or the fuel (with
metals perhaps leeched in during storage) is not known, but metals from contrails do act as ice nuclei (Chen et al., 1997)

And within the conclusion...

The importance of pure sulfuric acid or soot coated with it could
not be positively determined since particles smaller than 0.1 gm were
not measured in this analysis; it is expected that these particles may
play a role in nucleating some of the crystals in the contrail. However,
the larger minerals, metals, and soot observed with the CVI samples
may produce the largest ice crystals, which are the most likely to
survive to form cirrus clouds and be radiatively important

So! What is it people, are CONTRAILS just water?

Please stop saying that when this paper (that someone in this thread, sorry lost the page, posted as evidence?) clearly says, "Measurements of the composition of contrail ice revealed that particles other than soot and sulfuric acid are involved in contrail formation".

Want to know something shocking? I'm not a chemtrail believer! I have had many "discussions" with my ex on their existence and in simplistic terms, I have always sided on contrail. But then I have always found the argument to be a moot point, like "global warming/climate charge" - WHO CARES about theory, stop polluting! In a nut shell.

So, can someone else read the paper, the one that says this...

Still, these results suggest that ambient aerosol particles may be more important than previously
thought in contrail formation. Modeling efforts (Jensen etal., 1997b) also suggest this is the case.

And tell me they are not talking about the visible lines in the sky, the ones that y'all say is just water?

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: ConnectDots

Regarding invisible chemtrails,

SO how does one know they are there if they are invisible?

YouTube. Duh.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: mrthumpy

But my question to you is: Can you open up your mind to the possibility that overall, the chemtrailers are right; we are being sprayed to accomplish some goal of the shadow government?

Sure I can - imagining it is easy.

Having done so I then need to decide whether it IS happening - because if there is no good evidence that it is happening then I do not need to worry about it.

And I see no such evidence.

a reply to: ConnectDots

I'm trying to encourage people to consider that yes, there might be a shadow government,

You may want to stick to one aspect of this conspiracy before taking it all on.

I say that because it would help if you could show anything that proves a plane is actually spraying something before trying to blame it on a shadow government.

Baby steps.

It is nice to know you have an agenda...kind of refreshing.

a reply to: ConnectDots

Regarding invisible chemtrails, like I said, I've just learned the term recently. When I heard it, I interpreted it as trails produced by more recent technology, but I could be wrong.

Can you recall the source of the term?

I'm thinking it might have been someone discussing why SRM would not be visible from the ground. If so, the likely reasons IMO would be the size of the planes, the altitude of the flights, and the virtual lack of contrails to expose it.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

YouTube. Duh.

What was I thinking.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: smurfy

So what's in a working contrail then, exactly?..you tell me,

A whole # load of water ice, and a tiny, tiny little bit of particulates for the ice to form around. A bit less than 1%.
Exactly. You have been told. Now, if you want to discuss the invisible exhaust of the engine, I am sure there are all sorts of nasty things there. C02, Carbon, Dihidrogen Monoxide! Good Lord, a whole lot of Dihidrogen monoxide!

More rubbish from you and you have told me feck nothing that I didn't know already...I said what's in a contrail, not what's in an engine, what goes into an engine, and you know that I already know about the stuff that goes in, now, I'll try once more, answer me again, What's in a contrail?

a reply to: Dae

And tell me they are not talking about the visible lines in the sky, the ones that y'all say is just water?

Not just water...and I am pretty sure nobody has said that who debunk chemtrails, as that would be wrong.

Contrails are clouds formed when water vapor condenses and freezes around small particles (aerosols) that exist in aircraft exhaust. Some of that water vapor comes from the air around the plane; and, some is added by the exhaust of the aircraft.
The exhaust of an aircraft contains both gas (vapor) and solid particles. Both of these are important in the formation of contrails. Some elements of the exhaust gasses are not involved in contrail formation but do constitute air pollution. Emissions include carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons such as methane, sulfates (SOx), and soot and metal particles.

science-edu.larc.nasa.gov...

a reply to: ConnectDots

I feel like any information I offer you will be looked at with disdain, since you have already shown how you trust sites that say what you want to hear, and question anything that goes against what you think you know, or have been told. Again, anything I offer you will be from main stream science, as I trust it much more than conspiracy talk. I like conspiracies, I just don't live my life by them.

For who David Keith is:
www.keith.seas.harvard.edu...

This is a good Q&A with Keith on some aspects of SRM. Notice how he speaks of it being developmental, and not something that is ongoing.


And here is an old interview, but still very relevant.
www.ted.com...-425514

You will see lots of chemtrail sites try to spin words into making you believe that this is already taking place, but in all honesty, nobody will know until we are told it is. All I can do is trust Keith in his words that he doesn't want to do this anymore than we want it.

www.technologyreview.com...

and his rebuttal to an article that misinterpreted his words to say what I mentioned above.
www.businessinsider.com...

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: smurfy

So what's in a working contrail then, exactly?..you tell me,

A whole # load of water ice, and a tiny, tiny little bit of particulates for the ice to form around. A bit less than 1%.
Exactly. You have been told. Now, if you want to discuss the invisible exhaust of the engine, I am sure there are all sorts of nasty things there. C02, Carbon, Dihidrogen Monoxide! Good Lord, a whole lot of Dihidrogen monoxide!

More rubbish from you and you have told me feck nothing that I didn't know already...I said what's in a contrail, not what's in an engine, what goes into an engine, and you know that I already know about the stuff that goes in, now, I'll try once more, answer me again, What's in a contrail?

Seriously, a contrail is the white puffy thing you SEE when a plane flies in air that is conducive for contrail formation.
www.wrh.noaa.gov...

As the link states, it's exactly what I said. Now, if you would like to present some alternative information, please do so. Be sure to provide proper sources and I am certain everyone will look into your post. Thanks buddy.