It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: RainbowPhoenix
A study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health is suggesting that geoengineering has already begun, and the substance being used is a toxic by-product of coal burning call coal-fly ash.
Some of us already accepted this to be true but now the naysayers don't really have a leg to stand on. I think this one "conspiracy" that can be moved to the truth column.
originally posted by: DustbowlDebutante
I was always under the impression that when speaking about "chemtrails", we are talking about an unknown substance being sprayed into the air of an unwitting populace, with sinister or nefarious purposes, most likely the intent of altering human behavior and/or health.
What they are talking about in this article doesn't really fit into this definition of "chemtrail" for me. They are telling you exactly what substance they are considering and for what purpose. And when the purpose is for weather modification, well, this has been going on for decades...seriously, since before I was born. I don't think it's too sinister or nefarious when they are telling you all the "why's" and "how's"...
My mom has always told me about all the cloud seeding they did where she was growing up in the early 1960's. This is quite literally nothing new.
I'm not saying I don't think our gov would ever spray us with some bad stuff, I'm just saying that I don't think this is it.
Another example is the array of technologies—often referred to collectively as geoengineering—that potentially could help reverse the warming effects of global climate change. One that has gained my personal attention is stratospheric aerosol injection, or SAI, a method of seeding the stratosphere with particles that can help reflect the sun’s heat, in much the same way that volcanic eruptions do.
An SAI program could limit global temperature increases, reducing some risks associated with higher temperatures and providing the world economy additional time to transition from fossil fuels. The process is also relatively inexpensive—the National Research Council estimates that a fully deployed SAI program would cost about $10 billion yearly.
As promising as it may be, moving forward on SAI would raise a number of challenges for our government and for the international community. On the technical side, greenhouse gas emission reductions would still have to accompany SAI to address other climate change effects, such as ocean acidification, because SAI alone would not remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
I have a question. I am not a scientist, so this may sound stupid, but I have to ask. What if we pumped ozone into the atmosphere? I worked for a scientist that invented the ozone machine. I worked for him back in the 80's. He had invented a way for planes to put ozone into the atmosphere, and the government seized that work and classified it, and he was no longer allowed to pursue that area of work. I use ozone to this day in my home to kill molds and bacteria. Would ozone in the home have any effect on these gasses if they were to enter the home, ozone is O3, until it destabilizes to 02. How would sulfide react to 03?
Yes, ozone helps! It reacts away hydrogen sulfide: O3 + H2S --> H2O + O2 + S.
I have three ozone generators going constantly. I don't wanna be seen as promoting any particular product, and I own no stock in ozone generators (or anything else), but ozone generators are a good idea. That should help eliminate any H2S that infiltrates your home. If your clothes or cardboard boxes or books have absorbed any, it should help there too. Interesting about the planes generating ozone being classified. That's a big problem, how to create ozone in the upper atmosphere. It's so incredibly reactive that it's basically impossible to transport, so it has to be created where you need it. I suspect that's partly what chemtrails and HAARP are for: to generate electrical arcs in the stratosphere, which would create ozone there. If planes could create it too, all the better!
I don't really know about chemtrails, but I do see the giant checkerboards in the sky, and I did mention a proposed reason for that. You ever look at the screen in your microwave? Grid pattern, to slow/stop radiation leakage. So yeah, I do think 'they' are trying some stuff, to buy us a bit of time if nothing else. Doesn't matter to the hypothesis though. If they're not trying any protective measures then we'll just die a little faster. And I don't think they can SPRAY ozone. But I didn't know about any classified ozone-generating planes before either, so who knows. I hope they ARE trying stuff to protect us, being one of those don't-wanna-die-sooner-than-necessary type of people. Heh.
originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Rezlooper
High bypass turbofans, which produce more contrails than low and medium bypass turbofans hit the big time in the 1990s with the introduction of the new model 747s, and 777s, and other new aircraft. Which is why people say that is when chemtrails began.
originally posted by: Rezlooper
If so, then i guess it's still a good thing in the global warming fight.
In the absense of natural clouds given the correct atmospheric conditions jet aircraft in high frequency can almost completely cover the atmosphere, visible atmosphere, with clouds.