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.

 

William Thomas' Chemtrail Lie Exposed

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: payt69
To me it seems that the subjects of geoenginnering and chemtrails are tightly knit though. Geoengineering is just the reincarnation of 'chemtrails' after it was realized by some clever people that they needed to invoke some credibility to their scam.


That depends on if by "geoengineering" you mean an actual real-life term used to describe real ideas about global-scale engineering projects that have the potential to affect the climate or environment, or do you mean some secret conspiracy project undertaken by an evil cabal of members of TPTB aimed at victimizing the huddling masses of the world?

There are real geoengineering ideas that are more at home under the "science" umbrella on ATS, and then there are alleged geoengineering conspiracies that are more at home under the "general conspiracy" umbrella.


edit on 1/20/2016 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 20 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: payt69
To me it seems that the subjects of geoenginnering and chemtrails are tightly knit though. Geoengineering is just the reincarnation of 'chemtrails' after it was realized by some clever people that they needed to invoke some credibility to their scam.


That depends on if by "geoengineering" you mean an actual real-life term used to describe real ideas about global-scale engineering projects that have the potential to affect the climate or environment, or do you mean some secret conspiracy project undertaken by an evil cabal of members of TPTB aimed at victimizing the huddling masses of the world?

There are real geoengineering ideas that are more at home under the "science" umbrella on ATS, and then there are alleged geoengineering conspiracies that are more at home under the "general conspiracy" umbrella.



Good point. I was talking about what chemtrail believers now believe to be geoengineering as they 'look up' and see the obvious 'evidence' ( I mean 100% undebunkable proof!) over our heads.. (being the white lines in the sky known as contrails).



posted on Jan, 20 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DJW001


Because you say so? You are being lied to. I just pointed one such lie out to you.

You mean jet exhaust doesn't block the suns light and pollute the Earth?

Glad thats settled.


And how would jet exhaust block the Suns light, when jet exhaust is not visible? Do you imagine that all those planes under 30,000ft are GLIDING?



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 04:30 AM
link   
So i guess one guy trying to profit debunks it. And i hope ats knows that the 4or 5 so called expert debunkers actually hurt the traffic to the site. Explanation of contrais does nnot debunk either. So all the smart intelligent picking apart of peoples posts. Gets the debunkers no where. What i have noticed is the same 4-5people have made this category go dead on ats and influence very few others with their possible explanation but preach as fact.. Have an axperiment for you. Wake early watch the sky on a clear day watch the trails follow the sun from horizon to horizon they will fan out chain together to form a haze,(any open sky will usually be filled with more trails) this haze then will form clouds. When the sun is starting to set you will get red, orange purple clouds and the next day it will rain. I have used this to predict the rain and have not been wrong yet. Testing the dispersion of nanotechnology is the only way. The few that have tested get discredited usually based on there character or other things. So the data must be a lie. Its sad how filtred the internet is when you search for proof. And when links to actual data are posted to sites it gets removed frm searches and page extensions change some info is also label in theory when it wasn't previously. So go ahead and attack my post pick it apart so the few can see what is really going on at ats.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:19 AM
link   
a reply to: 2giveup

I guess you've never heard of the saying Red sky at night, sailor’s delight. Red sky in morning, sailor’s warning?

Shakespeare coined a similar term, must have been plenty of chemtrails about in his time, huh?

My point here is that a red sky in the morning or evening has been a way to forecast weather for hundreds of years.



edit on 23/1/16 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: 2giveup

Would you be up for a little experiment? Spend that same day looking at the sky, but before you do, check the weather forecast. See if you can develop a trend. The trails are a result of the incoming weather, not the cause of it.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: 2giveup
So i guess one guy trying to profit debunks it.


Not just that. All the nonsense that chemtrail believers bring in as 'evidence' for chemtrails debunks it. It just so happens that William Thomas was at the foundation of the whole chemtrail farce, so in debunking him, the whole foundation is gone.


And i hope ats knows that the 4or 5 so called expert debunkers actually hurt the traffic to the site. Explanation of contrais does nnot debunk either. So all the smart intelligent picking apart of peoples posts. Gets the debunkers no where. What i have noticed is the same 4-5people have made this category go dead on ats and influence very few others with their possible explanation but preach as fact..


ATS seems to be doing fine. There are debunkers in the UFO section too, but I don't see any signs of it fizzing out any time soon. That's because the subject of UFO's has more going for it. There's actually more credible evidence for UFO's than there is for chemtrails. The reason why the chemtrails section is kindof slow these days is because all the claims are so easy to debunk. That leaves very little to debate.

This category is indeed going dead here. And it should, because there's absolutely nothing to it.



Have an axperiment for you. Wake early watch the sky on a clear day watch the trails follow the sun from horizon to horizon they will fan out chain together to form a haze,(any open sky will usually be filled with more trails) this haze then will form clouds. When the sun is starting to set you will get red, orange purple clouds and the next day it will rain. I have used this to predict the rain and have not been wrong yet.


Well that's a well recognized meteorological pattern. I have seen it many times here.But the mistake you make is that you think the contrails are causing the rain, when it's really the other way around. The incoming weather causes contrails to persist, as the air contains more moist.



Testing the dispersion of nanotechnology is the only way.


Say what? see it's this kind of gibberish that doesn't hold up under scrutiny, and that's why the subject of chemtrails is dying a slow death on ATS. There's a fully functional explanation that explains persisting contrails perfectly. No need for all this exoctic nonsense to explain something that is completely natural.


The few that have tested get discredited usually based on there character or other things.


Ok so show me the test reports. I don't think they actually exist in the first place, but prove me wrong if they do. Then agian we may have different criteria of what makes a valid scientific study.


So the data must be a lie.


What data? There is no credible data that proves 'chemtrails'.


Its sad how filtred the internet is when you search for proof.


If you want to see filtering in action, try and post a critical post at Dane Wigington or Michael Murphy's sites, or on any other chemtrail hub. No dissention allowed there. On the other hand, chemmies are allowed to post on here and contrailscience and metabunk etc.


And when links to actual data are posted to sites it gets removed frm searches and page extensions change some info is also label in theory when it wasn't previously. So go ahead and attack my post pick it apart so the few can see what is really going on at ats.


Strange.. whenever I try and search something related to contrails, I get all these crazy hits to chemtrail related nonsense. It really muddies the waters. Just try and find something on 'persisting contrail' for example, and see what happens.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: 2giveup

A weather front doesn't just spontaneously appear in the area where you just saw contrails. Those fronts move across the continents, and can be tracked for several days before reaching where you are.

So three or four days before you even see persistent contrails in, say, the northeast United States, there could have been a weather front that was tracking its way from the west coast. As was mentioned above, the type of air that directly precedes certain weather fronts is the same type of air that is conducive to contrail persistence, so when you see the persistent contrails, that might (not always) be a sign that the front is getting closer and may only be a day away.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Solar Reflective Aerosol Particles is not real? :O




posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: missedinformation
a reply to: DJW001

Solar Reflective Aerosol Particles is not real? :O



They are real; they just don't have anything to do with chemtrails, which are a scam, as demonstrated in the OP.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: 2giveup




And i hope ats knows that the 4or 5 so called expert debunkers actually hurt the traffic to the site.


Denying Ignorance isn't for every one.

As for experts...everything posted is easily found online, so that doesn't make them experts...just good at researching the topic.



Explanation of contrais does nnot debunk either.


And yet it does...until you can prove otherwise by showing they aren't just contrails...something that chemtrail believers have yet to do.



So all the smart intelligent picking apart of peoples posts. Gets the debunkers no where.


Because we go for the information presented...not the person presenting it.

And I believe your wrong as there have been those who used to believe until they actually researched what the debunkers said...and amazingly enough they saw for themselves the truth about chemtrails, so it seems they have gone somewhere.



Have an axperiment for you. Wake early watch the sky on a clear day watch the trails follow the sun from horizon to horizon they will fan out chain together to form a haze,(any open sky will usually be filled with more trails) this haze then will form clouds. When the sun is starting to set you will get red, orange purple clouds and the next day it will rain.


Here you go a few things for you to read...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.mssl.ucl.ac.uk...

And this one is my favorite...from a resident meteorological expert.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



I have used this to predict the rain and have not been wrong yet.


Well done.



Testing the dispersion of nanotechnology is the only way.


Care to explain?



The few that have tested get discredited usually based on there character or other things.


Tested what?

Chemtrails?

Nanotechnology?

Your character tells a whole lot about a person.



So the data must be a lie.


What data?

Chemtrail?

Nanotechnology?



Its sad how filtred the internet is when you search for proof.


You can turn your filter off, but who exactly would be filtering the truth about something that has yet been proven to exist?



And when links to actual data are posted to sites it gets removed frm searches and page extensions change some info is also label in theory when it wasn't previously.


Care to provide an example or any proof to back your claim?



So go ahead and attack my post pick it apart so the few can see what is really going on at ats.


What that we Deny Ignorance, have a forum where pretty much anything can be discussed, or the fact those who don't like different views other than theirs make posts such as this crying about it?

You see most of those who debunk chemtrails have done their research over the years, and have seen there is absolutely no evidence to back the claim chemtrails exist. In fact here is what one of the biggest pushers of the chemtrail community who admits there is no evidence they exist.



But feel free to provide any and all evidence that backs the claim they exist...you may have something we haven't seen yet.

I also want to ask you something...

Has anyone who says chemtrails exist ever gone up and tested one while it was still in the air...and if one has who was it?

If you can answer that you will have my full attention, and could change a few minds of the debunkers, but until then there is zero evidence for their existence.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: missedinformation




Solar Reflective Aerosol Particles is not real? :O


Yes they are...

earthobservatory.nasa.gov...

acmg.seas.harvard.edu...



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

cool thanks




posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: missedinformation
a reply to: DJW001

Solar Reflective Aerosol Particles is not real? :O



What makes you think so?



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: payt69

what makes you think there are no spraying going on?




posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: missedinformation
a reply to: payt69

what makes you think there are no spraying going on?



What makes you think there is?



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

is it a game for you?

answer my question




posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: missedinformation
a reply to: payt69

what makes you think there are no spraying going on?



You know it's pretty damn hard to prove a nothing. And so it's down to the person who says there's something to provide the proof.



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: missedinformation
a reply to: DJW001

is it a game for you?

answer my question



Of course there is cloud seeding going on in drought areas, but that is not "spraying." There are also crop dusters dropping insecticides on crops. That is done at extremely low altitude. Tankers drop chemical extinguishers on forest and grass fires. Those are not chemtrails. What sort of spraying do you think is being done?



posted on Jan, 24 2016 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

hehe the type of spraying you are denying








 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join