CIA Director mentions SAI, chemtrail people go nuts.

a reply to: trace

Got any proof?

No, ground samples AREN'T proof.
Neither is the nutjob and con artist Dane Wiggington.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: trace

Got any proof?

No, ground samples AREN'T proof.
Neither is the nutjob and con artist Dane Wiggington.

We have government docs and more .... much more. Around here, these mindless pilots fly low .... very low compared to some places. It makes for some good photography when you get lucky.

Since you are calling Wiggington a nutjob and con artist, suppose you provide some proof? The ball is in your court -- names, dates, places and events please.

BTW, I'd step lightly if I were you. You might think you are hot s* on ATS, but Wiggington has a volunteer team of lawyers working for the cause. You really want to call a public figure a nutjob and con artist without solid proof?

a reply to: trace

Mr Wiggington has offered zero evidence over the years of chemtrails being a real thing. If anyone tries to question him on his site (even politely) they get removed and banned, the same happens with his YouTube channel. All the guy cares about is making as much money from the gullible as possible.

He also lied about what work he has done AND his qualifications.

That makes him a fraud and a con artist. Even his family thinks he's nuts.

I'm still waiting for you to offer evidence of chemtrails besides your idle ramblings.

a reply to: TerryDon79

I think another good piece of evidence against Dane Wiggington is that he actually believes ground based samples is scientific proof and I'm pretty sure some people have pointed this out to him yet he never addressed it/blocked them (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). Also hasn't Wiggington been caught quite a bit pushing bad info and even out right hoaxes like those photos of the inside of a test plane with barrels (again anyone correct me if I'm wrong about this)? I hope trace will come back and show us these government documents that hopefully aren't the same ones that have been debunked over and over again.

a reply to: nancyliedersdeaddog

Oh, he's done all that. Liquid ballistics inside planes with fake labels done in photoshop, photos of planes doing emergency fuel dumps, photoshopping contrails onto other photos and presenting them as chemtrails, cherry picking sentences out of pages and pages of information and then there's the whole ignoring/banning anyone that asks or presents anything to contradict him and his precious chemtrails.

I feel sorry for the folk that believe him and donate to his site or buy his merchandise.

a reply to: trace

You really aren't trying to say geoengineering watch provides scientific based proof because you should pay attention to this...

www.metabunk.org...

youtu.be...

Nothing from this man is scientific based proof...he lies to the gullible who eat it up.

Any actual scientific based proof would end his money train.

a reply to: nancyliedersdeaddog

he claimed a fuel dump incident was " chemtrail spraying " - and deleted my explaination - and promtply deleted 2 more explainations that showed it was fuel dumping

thats not just being wrong - thats intentional lying

originally posted by: trace

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: trace

Got any proof?

No, ground samples AREN'T proof.
Neither is the nutjob and con artist Dane Wiggington.

We have government docs and more .... much more. Around here, these mindless pilots fly low .... very low compared to some places. It makes for some good photography when you get lucky.

Since you are calling Wiggington a nutjob and con artist, suppose you provide some proof? The ball is in your court -- names, dates, places and events please.

BTW, I'd step lightly if I were you. You might think you are hot s* on ATS, but Wiggington has a volunteer team of lawyers working for the cause. You really want to call a public figure a nutjob and con artist without solid proof?

now the ball is back to you sport. Love to hear your opinion on this.

originally posted by: trace
Around here, these mindless pilots fly low .... very low compared to some places. It makes for some good photography when you get lucky.

Low? Really? How are you judging height? Is it a bit like this guy in London, UK? This guy is claiming that all these airliners on the 3 September 2016 are flying low. Many of them he claims on video are as low as 16,000 feet. Every single one of them can be replayed back on Planefinder flight tracking and show how bad he is at estimating height.

This "low flying" claim is widespread among the chemtrail community. The question is why?

Have a look through his "West London close up" series and listen to him claim how low they are. It is just non-sense and show how ridiculous these "low flying" claims are?

www.look-up.org.uk...

Is it any wonder that aviation enthusiasts and aviation professional laugh at these "low flying sprayer" claims.