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.

 

Chemtrails, Nye County, NV, 2-8-05

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc


And I have the greatest respect for the men and women who save the lives of those trapped in buildings ablaze, but I wouldn't trust them with the life of a fish if it depended on their ability to add.



Yes you did call us stupid, you just tried to do it in a way that you thought you could back-spin it later on. Leave the spin to the politicians, your above statement in so many words was meant to make it look like Firefighters are stupid

What kind of rant are you making? Are you nuts or just kind of mentaly deficient?

[edit on 24-3-2005 by Code 3]



apc

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Hahahahaha.
Sorry, no "back spins" here. Just flat out literal meaning. Leave the assumptions behind and all you're left with is the word that comes after the one before.

By my inebriated postings I am simply returning the energies already placed into this thread, back to which they came. I could spend all day debating in support of the idea that contrails are actually military operated chemical spray operations, but the last thing I would do during such an argument is directly criticize by name those who disagree with my belief. And if I took such a position (supporting chemtrails) I could toss out more than a dozen statements that would blow the existing arguments out of the water as far as believability.. but they would still be just as false as those already presented.

You can keep attacking me and others all you wish, here and in your repeated U2U's, but it won't make you any more credible in the eyes of those you seek to convince.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 10:35 PM
link   
I dont try to convince anyone that cannot think beyond what is told to them.

I have not attacked you my friend YOU went on the offence towards me first! How can you try and spin that? Why is it that the only thing you can state is either prove it, or you attack someone?

Please try and be a little more original than some kind of computer software. You can do better than that, you can use your own brain and not just follow the rest of the cattle!

Come on now, I know you can do it!! I have faith that you are not as drone like as you seem.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Code 3

I have seen "chemtrails" that sometimes (my opinion) have mixed it improperly and created what looks like when you spill gasoline into a water puddle. A greenish rainbow that is in the water vapor of the trail. You would have to see it. It’s not just a light effect. It is very vibrant in color and looks very chemical-like.


You realise that the oil on water, puddle effect is only possible becasue the puddle of water is flat and the oil layer is only a tiny fraction of a millimeter thick.

It would not be possible to mix petroleum and water and spray it into the air to produce the same effect.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Then please explain why this effect was witnesd by me Mr. Roark? The reason it is seen is not because it is just so thin it is alos because it is petroleum.

The atomized chemical vapor is also very thin wouldnt you agree?

Why is it that you, apc, FatherLukeDuke and others always come in groups to try an debunk anyone that has a theory that is not what has been told to you? Are you guys one and the same?


apc

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Personally I feel these threads offer a great source of entertainment. Kinda like running up to a clown, stealing his little red poofball and running around yelling "I got your nose!"

Hours of joy...


That little rant of apc's reminds me of why I stopped going to this forum. I wont waste another second being here.

Goodbye


I guess you find my "rants" just as entertaining.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 11:21 PM
link   
apc, you remind me of being in grade school, hours of stupid taunts that are just very herd like. Moo!


oops had another typo!!


[edit on 24-3-2005 by Code 3]


apc

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Herd...
Ba'a'a'a'a'a'a'a
.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Hey just follow the rest of the cattle right up to the nice fellow with the mallet. He wont hurt you because you were told he wont hurt you.

Just please dont drive while you are drunk. Its sad to cut the poor folks out of the cars you hit. Being drunk is not cool, its rather sad and pathetic.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Code 3, the propper term for what you witnessed is called "iridescence"

apollo.lsc.vsc.edu...

Google it.



posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 11:35 PM
link   
Sorry Mr. Roark, but again you dont know what you are talking about!

What I witnessed was at noon and the trail was at a 2:00 o'clock position, it was not a 20 degree angle to the sun.

So please stop googling and start living with a working brain


apc

posted on Mar, 24 2005 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Just please dont drive while you are drunk. Its sad to cut the poor folks out of the cars you hit. Being drunk is not cool, its rather sad and pathetic.


Bwahaha... yeah... Im driving along right now whistling into a cellphone. Or maybe Im using that new crap where I can get 256kbit to my pocket...
Gee... so the fact that my current BAC is most likely above the legal limit for my state (yet I am still amazingly able to type well over 75wpm), means that you are a ... cowboy (dude)? That is what is being stated, correct? I, being on the "side" of what is true and testable, am a drunken bovine waiting for the slaughter? Oh my... I don't know what ever I will do!

Maybe... just maybe...

I could be President!!!



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Code 3, the propper term for what you witnessed is called "iridescence"


i call it NOT JUST WATER. like code 3, i believe my memory and my eyesight more than a brilliant disinfo campaign.

i know what i've seen and haven't seen historically, and things have changed within the last five or six years. whatever has changed in our atmosphere should not just be ignored as 'absurd'. CONtrails never used to do what they are doing now. man's effect on nature is no longer insignifigant, whether caused by deliberate spraying, or by massive energy consumption and resultant pollution.

your supersaturation, relative humidity, sundog, iridescence, holding pattern, interesting weather patterns, voodoo science majik can't work on rational educated, intelligent people(i'm not saying i'm one of those people, so you can save that maneuver
).
your logical arguments seek to isolate the data, (which IS, admittedly inconclusive), while ignoring the overview of the situation. it is a logical divide and conquer. things have changed, many people have noticed, period.
the government should do a study with in situ testing. oh wait, it's the government that would be doing it, if anyone is doing it, so they already know what they're spraying.

by the way, there was one guy who took your flight explorer advice. texas? he found eight anomolous military flights, and they all produced chemtrails, AHEM, i mean 'persistent CONtrails'. i won't bother with links. google it.


code 3, i've saw one low lying chemtrail that was very short. it had an UNBELIEVABLEY IRIDESCENT rainbow effect. it was not 'just water vapour'. no way. the trail was lower than the clouds, which were cumulus, fairly spread out, a blue sky day. it looked so bright and anomolous, any 'sceptic' at ATS would claim it was photoshopped
. i never was the plane.

[edit on 25-3-2005 by billybob]



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:24 AM
link   
Hope you don't mind BillyBob but here is a study that was done using Flight Explorer.
This is the second such long study of Chem/CONtrails I have posted links to. I'm sure it will be ignored by our "friends" like the other one but I don't care, I don't post here for their benefit...

www.chemtrailcentral.com...

AP&F...



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
"Hope you don't mind BillyBob but here is a study that was done using Flight Explorer. This is the second such long study of Chem/CONtrails I have posted links to. I'm sure it will be ignored by our "friends" like the other one but I don't care, I don't post here for their benefit... "

That's the identical study tht Mark Steadham did in November and December 2000 and published in 2001. He asked me to review it before he posted in January or February 2001; interstingly enough, I reviewed his data while on a plane (probably spraying "chem-trails"!) between Los Angeles and Tokyo.

We've already discussed that study in detail on this forum a couple of months ago.

The only thing the report shows is that there is a faint correlation (85% confidence level with Z-test almost on top of Z-crit) between persistent contrails and data unavailable from Flight Simulator. Since FS doesn't track military aircraft, this means that, if the data are correct, that military aircraft tend to leave more persistent contrails than commercial flights.

However, Military aircraft often fly at higher altitudes than commercial aircraft do (although this cannot, of course, be validated by FS) and there is an excellent positive correlation between increased altitude and persistent contrails.

So the report was inconclusive. It didn't prove that persistent contrails were anything but persistent contrails, and it didn't disprove it, either.

So what's your point? Is it a sound study? Probably.

Is it new? No.

Is it evidence? No.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Oh my! That's the first time I've seen that link, ANOK. Thank you. A lot of work was put into that research. Kudos to that guy!

I've watched these trails for a couple of years now and I'm 100% convinced there's a method to it. By that I don't mean it's entirely sinister. BUT a bit of public disclosure would be appreciated.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I am a bit concerned that the government is leaving mind control tails in my back yard. They come out of these strange slimy creatures with shells on their backs and someties they linger for HOURS. I will try and get some photos next time it happens. I know if I take photos then all my assumptions about these creatures must be true.
___
/ \ \ /
l O l V
__\ /_l l
___________



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Code 3
Sorry Mr. Roark, but again you dont know what you are talking about!

What I witnessed was at noon and the trail was at a 2:00 o'clock position, it was not a 20 degree angle to the sun.

So please stop googling and start living with a working brain


Well then, a two o'clock position is about 46 degrees from high noon. That sounds about right for a 46 degree halo

apollo.lsc.vsc.edu...

too bad you have chosen to ignore me.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 11:11 AM
link   
To all of the "Flat Earth People" (you know who you are)
,

You who proclaim "Prove it" and "The logistics wont allow such a large operaion"
on and on. You were the same types that proclaimed the earth is flat, and told the true thinker "you must prove it is round" will never get it until the technology comes around that will allow us to sail over the horizon to the other side.

You would want us burned at the stake, if we claim the world revolves around the sun.

You always say prove it. Tell me how would you prove that organized crime exists if the only organization that can prove it is the mob? Or the others that get grants from the mob, if they buck the system do not recieve these grants if they do not obey?

The only way is by being a detective of sorts. You must notice that a ship traveling away from you slowly disappears over the horizon, for there was not aircrat invented at that time to "prove it". Be smart, use deductive reasoning and eye witness acounts. Dont listen to the government (which is nothing but the mob with flags) or any group that recieves money from that mob.

Look at how the sky has changed in the past 6-7 years. Use your god given site and reasoning, to tell yourself something is drasticly different.

This morning the chem-ops have been going in earnest. The temperture is 50 degrees and the humidity is at 68 percent. The chemtrails have turned to overcast, and the clouds are different from anything that used to be a natural cloud cover. These chemtrails are very low altitude (this you an tell by the extreme detail, so dont give me any garbage about not being able to determine altitude, there is a huge differene between detail from 30K and 8-12 K) I live in a remote portion of the country excpt the closests large city which is the home of Dow Chemical. You NEVER see a military aircraft in my area.

At about 11:00 AM a KC-135 Tanker flew over my house about twice the treetop level with an engine out, seems there was a mechanical malfunction with a spray-plane and he was making a b-iline for the airport that it was able to reach.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Mr. Roark I did go to this thread before logging on so I did see your post. What I described to you before was not a halo, so why did you try and spin what I stated to fit you needs?

Remember how you had pointed out a link that was about iridescence? So which is it iridescence or a halo? What I had seen was one small patch of a chemtrail that was very oily looking with a very bright green color and was mis-shaped, not a round halo!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join