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 brainstorm.

page: 16
4
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 12:55 AM
link   
Debunkers just leave it be. I Know as well as you do, that they won't give up.




posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 06:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by PisTonZOR
Debunkers just leave it be. I Know as well as you do, that they won't give up.


Exactly.

I'm just worried thaough about what happens if they ever see a rainbow? Maybe it's evidence of scalar weapons? And as for a sundog or corona .........


I guess it's abit like the old days when natural phenomena were thought to have been created by the gods? Hmm, in which case does this mean they worship the US Govt?



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 06:26 AM
link   
Since one of the original purposes of these thread was to look at ways of combatting 'chemtrails', I suppose I should post this link here:-

www.livescience.com...

See: scientists are aware of the problem and looking at ways to reduce them



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Interested, you can take a look at the links I've provided in this and other chemtrail threads. You can also try this one - www.this-must-stop.com (link)

PisTon, Essan and others are not interested in debunking. They do not follow the links we provide them. They do not respond with factual, cited counter-assertions. And they have not discounted what we are presenting here - in most part because no one on this thread has asserted a fact - WE'VE ASSERTED LINKS. How can you discount a link? Like selfless said, we are not debating. The pro-chemtrail people are sure enough that we are now just promulgating information. Period.

The pro-chemtrail people, oddly enough, have been presenting facts, have shown courtesy and fairness, and have more than carried our share of the burden. For the few who have come onto this particular thread and ignored selfless' reason for starting it, and have come looking for a debate - there was never one in the first place. Selfless was forced to respond to your insults and personal attacks. Period. There WAS not debate. That's why you kids are euphoric over your "we didn't present facts until page 15" statement. We weren't presenting facts to debunkers.

We were trying to honor selfless' wishes and submit ideas for stopping what we know to be real, and getting that information out. Period. And we've done that. And the fact that more energy has been poured into the topic on this thread is in large part thanks to all of you. You have not only undermined yourselves and your position by debating in a thread that wasn't a debate forum, but also in lack of factual information (save for Howard's newly discovered ice supersaturation, which he is still reeling over) or lowering yourselves to engage in personal attacks. Those are the last, desperate tactics of an individual when they know they are losing the argument. You're not even debating. You're name calling and disrupting a thread without valid cause, or factual assertions to back up your claims.

We've been accused of cherrypicking (I accused Howard of that for responding to less than half of one of my posts on this thread, sidestepping what he didn't want to respond to). Where have we cherrypicked? I responded to Howard's "ice supersaturation" response. Ice supersaturation is a new phenomena. It almost seemed to have popped up in September of this year (run, Howard, run! Prove me wrong - too little and too late). Ice supersaturation, as I've stated, is a weather phenomena. Yes. But having done a cursory amount of reading on it, it appears to exist higher up. But even if there were cases 10-30k feet above the ground, it does not account for almost worldwide phenomena, and esp. what was dumped over selfless in selfless' recently added photos. That was clearly chemical. Selfless should be getting ground samples when he/she sees that, so she can send it to a police or university science lab. I kid you not.

Those individuals who have come onto this thread seeking more information, keep going. Those other individuals who've come onto this thread with nothing but general refutations, who do not follow any of the links and provide solid counter-assertions to the information on those links, who engage in personal attacks, or who claim that we are not responding fairly to them because we find their insulting manner, lack of verifiable information and general waste of thread space - despite the fact that we have engaged them and responded to them as courteously and with as much information as possible - you are still welcome here.

You have further galvanized this thread, and more people into possibly just looking into the phenomena. I don't hold personal rancor toward any of you, because honestly, and no offense to the beliefs of the pro-chemtrailers, but this is a whacky proposition. It is in plain sight. And we are believing that this is something occuring around the world, and with the collusion if not direction of our own government and military.

But as your presence here shows, as we are seeing something and voicing objections and trying to get others to notice, the response has not been encouraging. In fact, the response from government, military and public health agencies, the response has been denial, stonewalling, a NASA pat response (typical condensation trails), or total silence. It's very odd. So this in itself has caused many people who have been on this planet several decades, and who know air traffic, to stop and wonder what is happening.

We've (me especially) provided links in this thread and others to air traffic controllers voicing concerns, meteorologists, ex-military, and people in all fields and strata of society, but people are very stubborn and unflinching in their belief systems, and refuse to follow these links, or to believe these things exist. But we see these things and are not accepting of the response we're getting. Anywhere. I personally, do not believe what I've been seeing is simple condensation. I'm not a scientist, but I can see it's not right. Right down to my gut. There are a lot of people who have become so entrenched in their beliefs that they cannot open to the possibility that our government could not only lie, but engage in criminal acts. Abominable criminal acts. There are individuals so entrenched in their beliefs that they, like Howard, refuse to look at facts presented to them, and respond to these facts piecemeal. It's like their further fortifying their own belief system before our eyes by ignoring damaging facts sitting right in front of their face.

If nonbelievers want to cherrypick, hide behind insults, or stick their heads in the sand, which is such an obvious way to propogate their own fabricated belief system, we encourage that. We are not here to push people; to traumatize their philosophical beliefs, or their world. We are only pointing the way. Leading the way to show as many people as we can what we see. And if you don't believe it. That's ok. At least we tried. But we are going to keep opening our minds and removing obstacles for seeing the truth for what it is. And not to deceive ourselves or others. Until we can all get a picture as clear as the blue sky that once opened above us. Amen brother! Ok, that's all I wanted to say...go chemtrailers!



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 07:10 AM
link   

forced to respond to your insults and personal attacks

What personal attacks? What insults? Well atleast ones I did?

They do not respond with factual, cited counter-assertions.

Partly true, however read me early posts:


Why would jets waste space loading them up with crappy chemicals when they need to conserve fuel. The whole idea of buying the A380 is to conserve fuel and have a more efficiant design. Why would an airline allow there jets to be filled up with garbage? Do you think the tens of thousands of employsees at Boeing could help cover up such a secret?

That's just common sence, do I really have to link you to 10 pages proving that's true?
And this is a FACT:

Oh and for the record, Contrails aren't generated by hot air. Aviation fuel such as petrol/gasoline (piston engines) or paraffin/kerosene (jet engines) consists primarily of hydrocarbons. When the fuel is burned, the carbon combines with oxygen to form carbon dioxide; the hydrogen also combines with oxygen to form water, which emerges as steam in the exhaust.

For every gallon of fuel burned, approximately one gallon of water is produced, in addition to the water already present as humidity in the air used to burn the fuel. At high altitudes this steam emerges into a cold environment, (as altitude increases, the atmospheric temperature drops) which lowers the temperature of the steam until it condenses into tiny water droplets and/or desublimates into ice; clouds.

What that has todo with Chemtrails? Obviously clouds are made of water, so are contrails (though in diferant forms). Some clouds linger, others disapear.

PisTon, Essan and others are not interested in debunking.

Correct. I am not interesting in debunking. I am interested in getting rid of false information, although I think chemtrails are fake.

And no, I am not interested in a Argument whatever it may seem like.


The pro-chemtrail people, oddly enough, have been presenting facts, have shown courtesy and fairness, and have more than carried our share of the burden.

I don't see any facts. Give me some, and if you've seen my posts, I've asked people that yet they just show me a few pictures.


We weren't presenting facts to debunkers.
I know, but the things people did present wern't facts.

I may of missed some links. Please provide them


The reason I think Chemtrails don't exist is I've taken tours of finished 777 and 737s up at Seattle, no spraying systems. The materials that are so called present in Chemtrails, are often corrosive, and I doubt anyone would want that going through turbines in the jets. The reason I really don't like the Chemtrail myth, is because I know people deep wound up in the aviation industry, and I utterly hate, what I think is false information behing spread about them and there Aircraft.


There are a lot of people who have become so entrenched in their beliefs that they cannot open to the possibility that our government could not only lie, but engage in criminal acts. Abominable criminal acts.

True, but the delivery system of Chemtrails is usually said to be Airliners. That would mean, the 55000 people at Airbus are lieing, and the 55000 people who work at Commerical aircraft divion of Boeing, must be lieing too.

Most of them employees for Airbus, would have had a very nice view of every single one of there aircraft, same with the Commerical aircraft division of Boeing. Even if the government itself was outfitting spraying equipment on these jets, don't you think one of the employees for Boeing or Airbus would of noticed? Don't you think that the tens of thousands of people who work as Rampers would of noticed? Don't the think the tens of thousands of people who work doing C checks on Airliners might of noticed a extra tank in the plane?

I have 3 real Airline operation manuals, and not one of them mentions anything about spraying. None. But people still insist that they do thinks like turn on and off chemtrails, though there is no such switch in any flying jet. My dedication is planes, and if I find out Chemtrails are real, I will post it EVERY WHERE!


If it were Military jets, it would still be a really hard coverup, although still possible. However you would need allot of jets to do that, and people would notice low bypass military jets flying above them as they are loud. I live under a major flight path, and you can tell when an old 727 (using low bypass jets) is flying above you, as you can hear a loud deep pitched roar and the house shakes.

You're right, there may be something weird in the sky though, and I was wrong to be an idiot. However trying to make evidence out of nothing isn't the way to go, you're right, raise awareness then ask the government. But once again, PLEASE do not try and make up BS evidence out of jet aircraft which lots of people do.


Sorry guys.

[edit on 12-10-2006 by PisTonZOR]



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheDeck
Interested, you can take a look at the links I've provided in this and other chemtrail threads. You can also try this one - www.this-must-stop.com (link)


A page full of contrail photos proves nothing, other than the fact that planes produce contrails. We know that.


Originally posted by OnTheDeck
PisTon, Essan and others are not interested in debunking. They do not follow the links we provide them. They do not respond with factual, cited counter-assertions.

And they have not discounted what we are presenting here - in most part because no one on this thread has asserted a fact - WE'VE ASSERTED LINKS. How can you discount a link?


So, you are saying that your links aren’t factual? Then why should be bother to check them out?




Originally posted by OnTheDeck
Like selfless said, we are not debating. The pro-chemtrail people are sure enough that we are now just promulgating information. Period.



Your hoax has been going on since 1999. The “chemmie” movement has not grown, it has shrunk.


Originally posted by OnTheDeck
The pro-chemtrail people, oddly enough, have been presenting facts,


No, you are presenting opinions. It is your opinion that a picture of a contrail is actually a “Chemtrail.” You have not provided any facts to support that conclusion.

I have provided you with science to support the fact that contrails are a natural result of fuel combustion at high altitudes.




Originally posted by OnTheDeck
(save for Howard's newly discovered ice supersaturation, which he is still reeling over)


Dude, it is hardly “newly discovered.” I have been pointing this out in these threads for a couple of years now. It may be a new concept for you, however.


Originally posted by OnTheDeck
I accused Howard of that for responding to less than half of one of my posts on this thread, sidestepping what he didn't want to respond to


You are damned right, I do. I am not your errand boy to chase after every stupid spam link you post. Life’s too short for that nonsense.

If you want to present a point, rephrase it in your own words and use the link as a source.




[edit on 12-10-2006 by HowardRoark]



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   
I give up on quoting.



Yeah why should you? because it would stop some pointless arguing on this thread.

You just spend an entire, new post to bitch about my attitude.
Good job with the 'pointless arguining.'




Iblis, are you hiding behind the teacher's skirt? Stop quoting SO's response, he didn't really say all that much except that all subjects are open for debate. Fact is this isn't a debate, it is several concerned citizens trying to make sense of possible phenomena without scientific documentation to present for making a case. At the same time several members are making a joke out of the fact that the thread is considered "brainstorming" instead of fact sharing.

You mentioned that Selfless ruined his own thread. Well all in all I think the thread has been quite effective. It has shown several of you to have an agenda, therefore IMO your credibiltiy is ziltch, not only in this thread, but when you post in the future, and at the same time, nearly 300 replies later there have been many links provided where those of us who choose to can pursue the subject. Actually you "debaters" have kept life breathing in this thread by motivating some of us to work harder to find others on the web who are interested in this subject.

Thanks for all your time, as you have increased my desire to learn more


Learn more? .. About a useless phenomenom? 'That's like congratulating me for 'making you have the desire to learn about leprachauns.' I get the sarcasm, but it's so.. so entirely misplaced.

Also, how am I hiding? You bitched and whined for several pages for him to come here, whereupon he says it is right for this thread to be one of Debate. And still, pages later you say we do not have the right to do so.

You're selectively taking whatever words suit you and posting them, even when the rest has been laid out for all thread-goers to see.



[edit on 12-10-2006 by Iblis]

[edit on 12-10-2006 by Iblis]



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

You are damned right, I do. I am not your errand boy to chase after every stupid spam link you post. Life’s too short for that nonsense.

If you want to present a point, rephrase it in your own words and use the link as a source.



Well Howard if life is too short to look up what you cal spam links, then why do you spend so much time on here using spin and schoolyard type bully tactics on this and the 911 threads? Stop contradicting yourself.

I dont see why you people cant comprehend the fact that, I know the difference between the contrails I have seen from the 60's until 1999. Most days are just normal jet traffic days. I have seen contrails hanging for about an hour. Its not the time they keep from evaporating. Its not even the pictures (I know I am a freelance profesional photographer in my spare time, you cannot capture what the human eye persieves, you can only capture how the camera see's) it take being there when chemtrails are overhead.

I see contrails everyday. Chemtrail, where I live only happen in the fall, winter and spring and then do not happen everyday. When it does it is as reconisible and different than any contrail. After you know what to look for (I point them out to my wife and she always knows the difference between contrails and chemtrails) you see when it...

Darn I cant finish now I have to go.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheDeck

PisTon, Essan and others are not interested in debunking.


So, when someone says a car is a giraffe and we say no it isn't it's a car - and refer you to a website written by a car expert saying that it's a car, what is it if not debunking?



They do not follow the links we provide them. They do not respond with factual, cited counter-assertions.


How many times have I posted this link?

www.royal-met-soc.org.uk...


We've (me especially) provided links in this thread and others to air traffic controllers voicing concerns, meteorologists....


Hang on! I've posted links to meteorologists which explain what these alleged 'chemtrails' are. I've heard of no meteorologist say anything to the contrary.

And please don't mention disgraced ex-TV Weather Presenter Scott Stevens ..... Although I admit his website does generate a huge amount of amusement for genuine meteorologists (I've posted links to it a few times on my own foum
)



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by PisTonZOR
Debunkers just leave it be. I Know as well as you do, that they won't give up.



Give up? MAN it's not about winning a debate.........

Our health is at stake here...... i don't care about a stupid debate.

You actually believe that i want chemtrails to be real?!!?!!? do you take me for a maniac?

Man i don't want it to be real but i can't denny what i see i mean just look at the pictures i took, there was no clouds in the sky. the last pic you see is the result of the chemtrails released from the planes but i bet you didn't even look at the pics did you?

You can think whatever you want but i won't stay here and do nothing about what i think is not healthy for the population. It was never about arguing, get this throught your heads.



Edited: Please note that at this point im so tired of people trying to argue with me that from now on im not even reading the posts that will cause arguments.

[edit on 12-10-2006 by selfless]



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   
[edit on 12-10-2006 by Iblis]



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Ok, debating and arguing aside. I've found an article detailing findings that airline mechanic, who wishes to remain anonymous, made on one of his jobs.

Because the source wishes to remain anonymous it's difficult to gauge the veracity of this story. Read it yourself, along with another associated professional's response. The individual responding provides his name and email address, and there are follow up postings by others in the same field who also wish to only provide a first name, stating personal safety as their reason for using caution.

One of these responders indicates a program called "Project Cloverleaf", that he says, "...has been in operation for a few years. The earliest date anyone remembers being briefed on it is 1998. I was briefed on it in 1999..." Read on. Fascinating stuff and definitely adds a possible "why" to all of the secrecy surrounding this project.

I will continue to add information as I get it...

I wanted to say to Essan, Howard, Piston, etc., that despite the back and forth, I know you guys are sincere. And one of you brought up the point that this subject is casting aspersions at sincere individuals in the ariline field. That may be happening, and it would be an unfortunate result, truly. I would not be pursuing this had I not felt equally sincere that what is happening is dangerous, and has the potential to cause not only physical harm, but death through various means to an innocent civilian population.

We're on the same side. Anyone who comes here is sincere. If you are not, then that's between you and your maker. This is definitely not a movement to turn anyone against the other, or to create enemies. And it's certainly not irrationally holding to an idea out of principle. We really believe there's something going on. And anything other than condensation coming out of the craft over our head is a health risk...



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 12:11 PM
link   
hi there here is a pic of today in the uk 12th oct 2006.
it was the WORST DAY EVER for trails......as can be seen in this image:




snoopyuk



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Wow snoop is there a pic from the ground of this activity?



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   
YES there will be pics of today from the ground and a video on u tube as well

just need to sort out the video, and resize the pics.

will keep you posted

snoopyuk



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Chemtrails are the continuing feeble attempts by the world's shadow government to destroy the quickly multiplying alien lifeforms known as 'RODS' by fumigating the lower stratosphere during the spawning season when the rod larvae are still in the early pupil stages. They must be stopped before they completely consume their only known food source, our fragile ozone layer.




posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 02:34 PM
link   
First, super70, pupil should be spelled "pupal". I weep for the rods.

I wanted to add that I work near Dulles International Airport in Dulles, VA. I came to work today and noticed clear blue skies spotted with big, puffy, white clouds. The feeling was almost elation seeing that blue sky again.

The reason for this is that, despite thousands of flights arriving at, and departing from Dulles Intl Airport, today was clear and clean. I only saw a couple of flights at approx. 35-40k feet and they were leaving short condensation trails (it's a cool 67 degrees on the ground, so it must be chilly up high).

Yet on other, warmer days, I more frequently see lower flights, crossing over the city in a direction that crosses the regular commercial airline flight paths, and leave what I would call chemtrails (long, thick cloud streams that drip and spread out into hazy, rainbow-colored clouds). And yet today, one of the infrequent, blessed clear days, none of the commercial jets flying into and out of Dulles by the thousands leave these trails. Only these jets that cross these flight paths, and cruise past the airport neither descending, nor ascending, but keeping a low flight path, spray these icky trails.

Dulles flight traffic has been clearly visible, every day, leaving little if any condensation trails, and flying the same...exact...flight paths every day of the year. Without change. Yet these other flights appear almost every day, usually every other day, and spray heavy lines, and they run a completely different flight path. This leads me to believe these are military craft laying these streams...

To my point. I've found some software called "Flight Explorer" that tracks, real time, all commercial and military flight paths not only in the U.S. but other countries as well (check out the link). Beyond that, I've also found a
website called www.thirtythousandfeet.com that offers the same software, as well as several others that track worldwide flight paths.

For the intrepid investigator, it might behoove you to track these flight paths, see which planes are leaving these trails, and maybe get soil samples under these paths, or downwind of these paths...where there's a will there's a way...



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Flight explorer studies have been done before

www.chemtrailcentral.com...

goodsky.homestead.com...

But you are certainly welcome to do your own.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Thanks for the links. I found another link myself where an individual suggests that Flight Explorer might omit some or all military flights. This is not a good or bad thing. If one looks overhead and sees a plane on a certain track leaving a chemtrail they'll either be indicated in Flight Explorer as "military", or will be "unidentified", in which case it's "military".

One can then make a visual comparison between commercial craft in the air at that time vs. the "military" or "unidentified" craft (and before Howard responds about differing altitudes, one will just have to use the senses and instruments at their disposal).

I wanted to point out, also, on the first link Howard provided, there is a graph (actually a number of graphs) created by the individual who engaged in a study with the use of Flight Explorer and aircraft flights paths. The individual performing the study noted that the craft laying these chemtrails were identified in Flight Explorer as "unidentified". He proceeded to create a graph (toward the bottom of that page) that clearly shows that the "unidentified" craft were sharing the skies with identified, commercial aircraft, but were the only aircraft leaving persistent trails. This is an excellent observation and warrants more investigation with these types of studies.

As an aside, I don't want to single him out, but I sense that Howard (maybe others) feels compelled to respond/refute every single post we make, despite the fact that not every post asserts a fact that we ask to be refuted, or posts that even beg refutation. Neither does all of Howard's (or other anti-chemtrailer) responses provide meaningful, constructive, and positive refutations or additions, but instead tend more toward general, sometimes speculative refutations, or are just confrontational, arbitrary responses. You might be good individuals, but that's not coming off in the manner in which your responses are worded, or the arbitrary nature with which they are posted.

Still, Howard and others are not malicious, just stirring up things more than anything else. And everyone has provided information here, instead of turning this thread into a name-calling session. I hope to keep adding relevant information...



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnTheDeck
(or other anti-chemtrailer)




Just want to say that i am a anti-chemtrailer in the sense that i don't want them to spray us with it.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join