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.

 

Chemtrail Science?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 06:39 AM
link   
Or should that be psuedoscience.

There is a sucker born every minute and two to take him.



In the chemtrail clouds over Roseville, Willard's SE-5 detected measurable levels of a variety of pathogens that have been associated with the manifestation of physiological complications such as cancer (medulliary, melanotic, scirrhous, thymus, carcinoma), mucosal infections, upper respiratory complaints, rheumatic fever, strep throat, staph infection, tuberculosis, hepatitis C, candida and cirrhotic and fungal liver disease. There have been epidemic numbers of these types of sicknesses reported throughout the nation in recent years. Those most affected are the elderly and small children.

www.proliberty.com...



What is an SE-5, you ask? It is a Radionic machine



Radionic devices do not accord with the theories of biology or physics. They can be described as magical in operation.


en.wikipedia.org...://www.se-5.com/se5.htm






posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:14 AM
link   
and the point of this thread is

CHEMTRAILS are real


heres a debate if chemtrails are real
www.abovetopsecret.com...
from the debate forum
guess who won



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by CYRAX
and the point of this thread is (?)


There is no legitimate science supporting the existence of chemtrails.



Originally posted by CYRAX
CHEMTRAILS are real


If that were true, then certainly you would be able to come up with some sort of legitimate scientific evidence to support that claim.

Where is the science that supports chemtrails?

I’ve already posted links to a preponderance of scientific data, research and information that clearly documents the formation of contrails and the factors that affect their persistence.

Where is your data that proves chemtrails are real?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Chemtrails must be true because 2 years ago there was a formal debate on ATS and the Chemtrail believer won. What more proof do you want?


I once won a debate that haggis are real, but rare, mammals native to the Scottish Highlands...



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
Chemtrails must be true because 2 years ago there was a formal debate on ATS and the Chemtrail believer won. What more proof do you want?


I once won a debate that haggis are real, but rare, mammals native to the Scottish Highlands...
I won that debate with a link to a bill from the library of congress listing chemtrails as an exotic weapon.. now could you please stop insulting my integrity?



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Did you include the link to the revised bill where Kucinich took the refrence to chemtrails out?

Did you include the quote from Kucinich where he states “Look, I’m not into that” when asked about chemtrails?

Intellectual honesty would require that you at least admit that these things exist.

I want physical proof, scientific evidence, not a link to a wackjob politico’s goofy bill.

Random dumb laws



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:27 AM
link   
You started a thread of your own that's fantastic, this is what you people should have done from the start insted of ruining my thread.

I thank you for making this thread, i will leave it alone now for the sake of not ruining your thread. I hope you guys take example of this.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   
No one has, or can "ruin" this thread. That is the beauty of ATS.

Thread drift happens.

But, since you showed up, why don't you want to discuss the science behind contrail formation?

Everytime I bring it up, you do your darnedest to change the subject.





[edit on 10-10-2006 by HowardRoark]



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 09:17 PM
link   
In the other thread, Selfless mentioned Cliff Carnicom.

I would like to take a moment in this thread to look at the so-called science according to Cliff.


Here is one of his earlier "articles."

www.carnicom.com...

Note the total lack of quality control. The failure to conduct any sort of method blanks and of course, the speculative nature of his "analysis."

When he first came out with this, it was pointed out that he could have had the samples analyzed for total barium content for less than $50 at any decent commercial laboratory. (this is a common type of analysis used by many industries for waste profiling, process control, etc.

So, Cliff decided to conduct his own flame ionization analysis.



www.carnicom.com...

Again, there is no description of the quality control methods used, the calibration of his method, or anything.

He still could have had his samples analyzed at a qualified lab for a very reasonable price.

Of course that is all a moot point anyway since barium is a fairly common background component in soils.


Background levels for soil range from 100-3000 ppm barium. Occurs naturally in almost all (99.4%) surface waters examined, in concentration of 2 to 340 ug/l, with an average of 43 ug/l.

www.epa.gov...

Furthermore, barium is released in copper smelting operations. Guess what a major industry in New Mexico (Cliff's home) is? You guessed it, Copper.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by CYRAX
and the point of this thread is

CHEMTRAILS are real


heres a debate if chemtrails are real
www.abovetopsecret.com...
from the debate forum
guess who won

Hey Cyrax, want me to have a debate with you? You would get owned.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by selfless
You started a thread of your own that's fantastic, this is what you people should have done from the start insted of ruining my thread.

I thank you for making this thread, i will leave it alone now for the sake of not ruining your thread. I hope you guys take example of this.

Sorry for ruining your thread. However, since you want to raise chemtrail awareness, why not discuss science behind Chemtrails here?

Come on, proove it to me using facts. They don't have to have backed up, but be careful not to produce fake so called 'scientifical' evidence.

Heres some evidence against Chemtrails:

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.

This water turns into ice droplets soon after it exists the engines and turns into 'contrails'. Although uncommon, the steam emerging from the engines can sometimes condence and form cloud like contrails.

Varying length Contrails are present from different atmospheric conditions, even a few thousand feet and mean the diferance between a lingering Contrail, and a disappearing one.

Also, Chemtrails are usually described as Airforce Tankers, even though pictures such as this:

Show a normal airliner, that particular image was a United Airline 777.

[edit on 11-10-2006 by PisTonZOR]



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   
I copied this from the other thread, since I don’t want to be accused of “debating” again.




Originally posted by OnTheDeck
Links abound on this and other threads to information and documents proving government "chemtrail" and other spraying projects,


no. there are no documents that “prove” chemtrails are real.



information and specimen research regarding chemtrail fallout,


Highly flawed, poorly conceive, badly executed “research” by Cliff Carnicom in the kitchen of his doublewide does not count.


dedicated organizations,


Persistent kooks.


credible witnesses,


to what? Persistent contrails? Heck I’ll admit that those exist, if it makes you happy.



national and local news media reports,


“Internet” news is only worth the paper it’s printed on.



and a still growing, years' long and far-reaching investigative body has been weeded through the ATS threads that deal with this subject.


Think again. This hoax has come and gone.


Yet despite moderator opinion,


What a moderator of a conspiracy site believes in conspiracies?



prevailing logic,


What logic? Logic has never been present in any chemtrail theory.


and tangible proof


WHAT TANGIBLE PROOF?





I understand that we're all skeptics, and that belief systems determine to what degree. Truly. People who see and know something is wrong, and people who choose not to believe are seeing things according to their own belief systems with regard to aircraft and contrail/chemtrail photos


Ah ha, another person putting forth the notion that chemtrail theories are part of a “belief system” as opposed to a scientific process.

Faith over science again.

Maybe we should move this thread over to the religious forum?




There is enough convincing photographic evidence and it's time to move on.


Yes, evidence that contrails exist. Accept it contrails are real.



We are not scientists. We're just civilians. And our purpose here has not been to scientifically prove the existence of a phenomena which has already been validated


No it has not. That is your problem. You claim this, but your links and your data do not support you on this.


Our hope is to point to the sky and evidence and urge people to follow it and make up their own minds.


On what, whether contrails exist? Of course they do.

You have yet to show that contrails are anything else.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 04:19 PM
link   
You are kidding, right?

You are actually pulling quotes out of context from another thread to create an argument for yourself. Is that allowed?

Have fun amusing yourself, Howard. You must have a big dog in this fight, because there is no way you can know positively that there aren't Chemtrails. You may have some facts that take from some theories, but unless you are omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient you only believe, you don't know.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Here's a "reseacher" who claims to know the entire conspiracy skinny on the chemtrail phenomenon.

She's quite detailed.

I wonder if she's single?

Read her report here.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Howard
I only have one question... and its way loaded... so dont point it anywhere it can hurt you...
Ok?
Do you agree that methods of rain generation are already being done over several large areas in the USA?

please say no... oh please.....
Or please say yes... either way... I win...

the very well documented forms of weather manipulation and rain cloud formation are what?
I beleive the terminology is Chemtrails...

Dont you ever watch discovery channel?
Hell, they have great videos of the guys loading the planes with the chemicals, and even show it being sprayed out, in huge tracts from lit flares...

Is this really some conspiracy? nope... its called rain making.. and we have been doing it in various ways for decades...

Is it a method of killing people? nope... is it meant as some nefarious plan to control our minds... nope...
But do Chemtrails exist...
If we are to believe a huge preponderance of the evidence, it does...

BUT!
Howard doesn't count weather manipulation as Chemtrails...
Why, I dont know... but it seems rather single minded to keep stearing lingo and semantics to say that they aren't.

So what is a chemtrail?
depends on who you ask...
Congress defines a Chemtrail as an exotic weapon
Conspiracy communities define it various ways...
The gist seems to be,
that a chemtrail is something like a contrail, but made of chemicals that spread out, and thicken, rather than disperse... and the chemicals are possibly harmful

that would satisfy the description of cloud forming rain making chemtrails... would it not?
and if you need proof of those... go down to your local small airport the next time you have a continious drought, and go for a fly along...
nothing like hands on experience to convince a hard core doubter.
in fact, we here in the US are actually falling behind the world chemtrail advances...
Thailands rain making department
In russia, you can order your own Chemtrail equipment over the internet (although these mostly involve burning airborne flares to disperse the agents- so you need a plane)
Order your personal Chemtrail maker today!
This article here, seems to finally document all the latest government admissions to testing of aerosol spraying in the atmosphere, With several government sources sited...
Chemtrails finally explained, and divided...
Sorry Howard... seems that they have dropped the curtain on this coverup, and allowed the public to finally see what little there is...

so for those just catching up.
Weather modification chemtrails- ABSOLUTLEY PROVEN
solar moderation Chemtrails-IN TESTING
disease causing, population control Chemtrails- BELIEVERS ARE IGNORANT
Does that about cover this finally?

Chemtrails are not the problem... it is the claimed reason for the Chemtrails that is a debate... and now seems to be solved (again)



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   
PISTONZOR
i know you still go to school

so dont mention my name again
i dont play with lil kids because they might get hurt

you come to threads thinking your speacial your not stay at school where you belong

"Kids use that at schools for mobile ring tones. Quiet easily message people on the phone without a noise.

You randomly start it then everyone in the class looks around saying 'WHATS THE FREAKEN NOISE!?!!'. Then the teacher is like, what noise? Pretty funny."

how old are you 10



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by behindthescenes
Here's a "reseacher" who claims to know the entire conspiracy skinny on the chemtrail phenomenon.

She's quite detailed.

I wonder if she's single?

Read her report here.


Oh, please, anyone who cites Cliff Carnicom as a source has no scientific credibility whatsoever.

That is the same site that I cited to start this thread.




posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
Howard
I only have one question... and its way loaded... so dont point it anywhere it can hurt you...
Ok?
Do you agree that methods of rain generation are already being done over several large areas in the USA?


Are you claiming that chemtrails are deliberate attempts at cloud seeding?

If so, I have to tell you that evaluation of various cloud seeding experiments has shown that it is not all that effective

rams.atmos.colostate.edu...


Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
please say no... oh please.....
Or please say yes... either way... I win...


What if I say "Neep!" who wins then?




Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
the very well documented forms of weather manipulation and rain cloud formation are what?
I beleive the terminology is Chemtrails...


So what are the details of this project?

Do you have any evidence to support your claim?

I won't deny that there is some evidence that commercial aviation and the resultant CONTRAILS are having an affect on the climate. That, however is an unintended consequence of aviation activities.

Please provide some evidence that the formation of persistent contrails is deliberate.



Originally posted by LazarusTheLong

Congress defines a Chemtrail as an exotic weapon


Nope. They never did such a thing.

Kucinich tried to introduce a bill with that definition in it. Congress laughed at him so he took it out of the bill.

At any rate, just because Kucinich included it in a bill he later revised to remove the term, does not mean that congress defined chemtrails as anything.

The revised bill without the term "chemtrail" died in committee, therefore it was never passed and your statement that "Congress defines a Chemtrail as an exotic weapon" is a blatant missrepresentation of the facts.



Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
Weather modification chemtrails- ABSOLUTLEY PROVEN


Only in your strange little world. If you want to change the definition of a chemtrail to include cloud seeding, then go ahead, but then you still have to explain how persistent contrails fit into this theory, which you have not done.




Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
solar moderation Chemtrails-IN TESTING


Proof?


Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
disease causing, population control Chemtrails- BELIEVERS ARE IGNORANT


Huh? are you saying that chemtrail believers that think that chemtrails are used to spread "disease causing, population control" agents are ignorant, then I wholeheartedly agree with you.



[edit on 12-10-2006 by HowardRoark]

[edit on 12-10-2006 by HowardRoark]

[edit on 12-10-2006 by HowardRoark]



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 11:50 PM
link   
From the other thread:


Originally posted by OnTheDeck
Howard, you can take one look at selfless' pics and tell why selfless is concerned. That is not some neat weather phenomena. Those pictures are very concerning. If those were simply condensated air they should have dissipated.



"condensated air?" (I know what you are saying, but your terminology is strange.)

You claim that ice crystals should have dissipated.

How do you know that? Do you know what the relative humidity with respect to ice was at the altitude thatthose contrails formed at?

That is what determines whether the contrails will dissipate or not. This is basic science. Why do you consistently ignore that?





Originally posted by OnTheDeck
I can't imagine how someone can look up to the sky, see that oily, hazy, rainbow-colored mist and think that is a natural phenomena.


iridescent clouds are a well documented natural cloud phenomena

www.sundog.clara.co.uk...

cimss.ssec.wisc.edu...

www.creations-photos.com...

They are quite beautiful, and if you keep an eye out, you will notice them, especially in the colder months.



Originally posted by OnTheDeck
It's clear that true condensation appears whitish, exists for a couple of seconds or moments until it warms, then vanishes.


You really don't have a clue do you?

"exists for a couple of seconds or moments until it warms."

Are you serious? You had better think real carefully about that.

Are you saying that the exhaust gasses that come out of the jet engine are colder than the ambient air?

Do you have any idea what the average ambient air temperature is at 35,000 feet (a common flight altitude)?

There is something called a standard atmosphere chart. looking up 35,000 feet, you will find that average temperature is -68 F.

Even at 25,000 feet, the ambient temperature is -30 F.

The factor that determines the rate at which the ice crystals form and/or sublimate is defined as the relative humidity (with respect to ice).

(I don't know if this site will help you or not, but it is worth reading)



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 12:38 AM
link   
This is the kind of science that you people need to be studing.

www.sciencemag.org...


In situ measurements of the relative humidity with respect to ice (RHi) and of nitric acid (HNO3) were made in both natural and contrail cirrus clouds in the upper troposphere. At temperatures lower than 202 kelvin, RHi values show a sharp increase to average values of over 130% in both cloud types. These enhanced RHi values are attributed to the presence of a new class of HNO3-containing ice particles ([Delta]-ice). We propose that surface HNO3 molecules prevent the ice/vapor system from reaching equilibrium by a mechanism similar to that of freezing point depression by antifreeze proteins. [Delta]-ice represents a new link between global climate and natural and anthropogenic nitrogen oxide emissions. Including [Delta]-ice in climate models will alter simulated cirrus properties and the distribution of upper tropospheric water vapor.




new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join