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.
...3) Contrails are always pure white and don’t exhibit much halo effect. Chemtrails have an oily glint to them, with pronounced rainbow-like color effects (reddish or pinkish tint) as the sun shines through. Some of the best photographic evidence of chemtrails is found at www.carnicom.com...
Originally posted by japike
I was wondering some of the theorys on chemtrails and if one of them was to block Electromagnetics?
Originally posted by Magickman
Hey, japike...
Ther are a lot of people who will tell you that chemtrails do not exist, but as you know, they can easily be seen in the air.
Originally posted by Off_The_Street
external image
Originally posted by Zaphod58
Sorry, I saw the reply identifying the plane after I posetd this. That's ok, I like the pics anyway since I took them.
Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio authored the Space Preservation Act of 2001, which sought a "permanent ban against weapons in space," specifically banning "chemtrails" as weapons. But in a subsequent version of the bill, the "chemtrails" language disappeared entirely. The missing words suggest an eyes-wide-open denial, which says as much about the cover-up as it does about the spraying that's plainly visible in the sky.
Two scientists working at Wright Patterson Air Force Base confirmed to the Ohio newspaper, Columbus Alive, that they were involved in aerial spraying experiments. One involved aluminum oxide spraying related to global warming and the other involved barium stearate and had to do with high-tech military communications.
Editor's Note: Las Vegas residents are increasingly noticing the appearance of chemical trails overhead. They appear EVERY weekend without fail, the only exception being the two weeks after September 11, 2001.
I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. --Voltaire
Originally posted by snafu7700you think maybe that was because there was virtually no air traffic over the US for the 2 weeks following 9/11?
thats pretty much where i stand on chemtrails. i think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this subject
Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio authored the Space Preservation Act of 2001, which sought a "permanent ban against weapons in space," specifically banning "chemtrails" as weapons. But in a subsequent version of the bill, the "chemtrails" language disappeared entirely. The missing words suggest an eyes-wide-open denial, which says as much about the cover-up as it does about the spraying that's plainly visible in the sky.
In a front-page story entitled "Conspiracy theorists look up," the Akron Beacon Journal noted that Kucinich's bill "had been rewrittenand the references to chemtrails and the other types of weapons were quietly eliminated." The Beacon Journal article, linking chemtrails to conspiracies, resulted from massive local pressure. Michel Massullo of Akron provided that newspaper with rolls of photos of plane trails and a sworn affidavit attesting to extensive aerial activity over that city.
Originally posted by ANOK
Originally posted by snafu7700you think maybe that was because there was virtually no air traffic over the US for the 2 weeks following 9/11?
Well I think that was the point of the statement, no? I don't think they were asking why.
Well good for you. Not my problem. I didn't post the link to that article for you or any body else that chooses to stay asleep and uninformed. I posted it for those that are truly interested and might want to read it. Is that OK?
So how do you explain what Las Vegas citizens are noticing? Swamp gas?
I guess they're all just a bunch of "nut bars" and only "smart" people like you have the inside knowledge on all that the government does?
Where there's smoke there is usualy fire.
Originally posted by snafu7700
well, the point of my statement, (and i'm disappointed that i actually have to explain it to you) was that those pictures show perfectly normal contrails, and that of course they were not present for the two weeks following 9/11, because there was no traffic in the air to produce any contrails.
man, i really dont understand why you get so defensive when someone disagrees with you on this. especially when they do it as nicely as i have done. if you dont want criticism of what is obviously crap evidence, then take it to the skunk works where we are not allowed to make any negative comments about your theories.
again, from the pictures i have seen, most likely an increase in normal air traffic through that area. just my opinion on that one though, as i have no numbers to back it up.
that comment kind of reminds me of a scene from 'the wizard of oz'
"pay no attention to the man behind the screen"
Originally posted by Zaphod58
I thought about replying to some of the things said in the article, but then I realized that anything I said I'd get jumped all over for it, so it's just not worth it.