Report Chemtrails.

Hey, hey now, this could be a good idea, to compile info, but if you really want some good chemtrail pictures and such, i suggest you visit here:

www.rense.com...

[edit on 10/16/2006 by The_Time_is_now]

There's nothing unusual about loading just about anything into a C-130. By your description I would presume you are describing the MAFFS, or Mobile Airborne Fire Fighting System. It's a pump that sits on the ramp of a C-130 and is connected to a bladder system full or fire retardant that is flown at very low level to put out forest fires and yes, you could just about believe that they would have to pull leaves and twigs off after a mission. But that's the norm for Herks...I've flown lower than I would ever admit here! As for "canisters", the ABCCC, or Airborne Command and Control Center is a capsule that fills the entire cargo compartment. My point in my last post is that a real C-130 crew chief would never make the blaring errors put forth in the article, therefore proving that it's a total fake.

Just denying a little ignorance here!

afermative reaction,

Im starting to wonder if you are not one of the people who releases these chemtrails.

Not to insult but it could be possible.

I was laughing at chemtrails.

well actually i was laughing about the difference between chemtrails and contrails.

I have been saying for years that the primary purpose of chemtrails is weather modification re: global warming. I was right and thanks for providing some proof of it.

But why would someone go to all that effort to cause global warming? High altitude clouds, including contrails, produce a small net increase in the overall global temperatures.

www.livescience.com...

And why would they only do it on some days in small, limited parts of the world. Those with the heaviest concentration of air traffic. And only where they can be seen?

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!


OMG, that's a funny one!

Sorry lady, I'm just a retired AF jock who happens to know what I'm talking about. Years of experience and the ability to keep my eyes and mind open. The only thing I've ever sprayed out of a C-130, aside from the occasional fuel when purging the dump manifold, is when I used the "facilities" and sprayed whatever country or state I was flying over with a little "me" juice!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

(Don't look up at that C-130...it might be an E model!!!!)

Thanks for the laugh...I'll tell my first period civics kids about it...they'll get a laugh too!!!

sorry to take you to school Rockpuck, but apparently you missed some info in your skimming...
the information you asked for has already been posted... (which is why the others that have read the article have abandoned the "skeptic" role- did you notice a lack of support?)
reliable source- how about an NBC affiliate, with government documents?
never sprayed a dangerous substance over a population, how about a chemical weapon over 239 american cities? (see my link)
never made people sick? how bout down right killed them!- again, see link
so is it any wonder that people worry?
the vigiliant ones do... the blissfully ignorant ones dont...

I dont make a contention that these chemical weapons tests are still going on, I really dont know...
but THEY DID! and for that reason alone, we should be suspicious towards any claims of continued airborne spraying programs from possible whisleblowers.


That my friends is denying ignorance... because fool us once- shame on the Gov... fool us twice, shame on ourselves...

I read your link and all I see is a story by a local news carrier based solely on the story of some guy who wants to be compensated for something he claims happened years ago. The article mentions "government records". Where are they? Where are the links to the verifiable information?

Sorry, I don't see anything that would convince me in this story or in your post. I certainly don't see anything that would convince me that this is what "chemtrails" are, not in the least.

Hard evidence. Links to the phantom gov docs. You can make all the claims you like, but this still is nothing but an unsubstantiated story told by one man without any evidence except his word.

Affirmative reaction...
I hope your efforts here are accidental, and not intentional...
"it is a violation to post knowingly false info"

and you darn well that what you posted was a BOLD FACED LIE

first- the source is NBC... you know... the MSM...
Second- the testimony regarding the chemical weapons spraying program was an investigative report done by a reputable reporter...
third- the other part of the story was about military lab rats (everyone who signs up) and had nothing to do with chemtrails
fourth, and for the record, that guy that wanted money was the same one, that the military used as a test subject without his knowledge... and the reporter saw his medical records to prove it..

So without any of your lies, your entire post crumbles...

or was it that you just didn't read the entire article I posted? and it was all just an innocent accident and misunderstanding.

or maybe you are too scared to consider the ramifications of this proof... and that it means that all chemtrailers, just might have a reason to be worried...


[edit on 17-10-2006 by LazarusTheLong]

Close but you have that backwards.

High humidity and low temperatures are the required parameters. At 35,000 feet up, the average temperature outside is around 50 degrees below zero F. the Higher you go, the colder it gets.

It is quite common to get cloudless areas in the upper atmosphere that have relative humidity levels ABOVE 100%.

Excuse me, but you should be careful when you call someone a bold faced liar, especially when it is you yourself who has told the lie...

It is KFOR that has this story on its site...a local NBC affiliate. The portion of the story that has to do with that figment of your imagination, "chemtrails", as I said, has NO basis in fact, NO credible information, and NO links to any such credible information.

The rest of the story, EXACTLY AS I STATED, is about some guy looking for compensation for something he claims the government did to him...as you pointed out, (I was doing so indirectly...thought you might be smart enough to figure that out) had NOTHING to do with so called "chemtrails".

If you wish to believe that the natural phenomenon of contrails is some dastardly plan to destroy human kind that has been perpetrated by every government for years to include both republican and democrat, you go right ahead.

You can twist what ever you believe to be the truth anyway you need to to lend credence to your fallicy, but don't EVER call me a liar again, bucko.....

Yeah, that's what I expected...absolute silence.


Good choice....

Lets all remember that we're all here for the same thing, to discuss these unusual matters. Lets try to get past the initial insults and move on to the meat of the topic.

Lazarus, I think that AR has a point, there isn't anything that demonstrates that the victim's claims are true, no? The reporter saw his records, but there isn't anything demonstrating that it was because of this no?

That is the reason I abandoned this thread...

the article talked about government testing on its citizens, in regards to a recent bioterrorism drill in Oklahoma that involved spraying a dust, that would hopefully appear on radar, and the reporter wanted to know if they were being careful...
This time...

Because he has lived in Oklahoma, and knew of these other circumstances in the past...

the guy who claimed he was hurt by government tests done on military subjects has nothing to do with chemtrails...
and was a whole other angle on the reporters story... (and therefore, is not needed of commenting on...)
So why mention it in regards to debunking Chemtrails?
IMHO- to distract from the evidence

I wasn't commenting on, NOR USING that as any part of my proof...

If you wont read (made it pretty easy to do) then i cant help anymore...
this thread has been tainted beyond all measure, and now with the help of a non reading mod that I normally respect...

there are far more Chemtrail threads where people actually read the links...

ONE LAST TIME: the info that the original reporter used was government documents- they documented spraying over 239 cities...
it was chemical weapons tests... (using a far less harmful agent- BUT STILL!)
proof... documented... and from the 60's...

the whole point of bringing it up, is that it is truly ignorant to laugh at or dismiss claims of present chemtrails due to lack of historical evidence- because suprise- we now have it!

It would be ignorant to laugh at those that might worry these shortsighted leaders would do so again...

to give perspective... even the reporter acknowledges that the military has come a long way in ethics... and we cant assume that they would still do this...

tell ya what...
I'll see if Kevin Ogle (the NBC affilate reporter) would be willing to post a few comments on his memory of this article here on ATS...

would that put this whole issue to rest? would it finally shut up the scoffers, that laugh at chemtrail CTists?
Would we still have people popping up to post a common "so you really think they would do that to their own people huh, how paranoid can you get?"

If you lived in Stillwater, you might just punch "that guy", or at least point out his error.

And again I say, WHAT government documents? Where are they? Why are they not included in the story? Why are there no links to these documents? Again and again all you do is ask us to believe you because you say it's so, or some story you point to says it's so, but there IS NO PROOF!!!!

Is it so hard to understand that your "word" that something exists just isn't good enough?

Unbelievable......

I guess you are one of those that think
"anything worth knowing is available on the internet"

Sorry to upset that notion, but the vast majority of evidence for many conspiracies exist only in hard copy...

We are left to accept, or reject the research done by other reporters...
that is where the source comes into question...
often reporters articles are used to support a presentation of evidence
sometimes that is the only reference to the evidence, thru the reporters research of HARD COPY...

i.e.: Roswell, is only supported by sketchy evidence that Stanton Friedman and others gathered thru FOIAs and access to archives...

If those archives were available on line, then great... but we are left to assume that Stanton did his homework...

I have searched many internet available government document locations, and have not found even the smallist lead on how to locate the Hard Copy documents that the reporter used.

So- in that effect, we are once again left to trust a credible and respected reporter in regards to his research validity.

I guess you dont... maybe this will help
Kevin Ogles bio

And i do apologize for calling you a liar...
I see that it is more a matter of not accepting the source.

Also, Leonard Cole (reporters primary source) is the well renowned and respected author. He has acheived acclaim, and uncontested status as a Bioterrorism expert.
Here is a bit on his creditials via a book review of his book on the anthrax attacks


[edit on 24-10-2006 by LazarusTheLong]

I don't accept ANY source that asks me to simply have "faith" that they are telling me the truth, especially when it deals with something so unbelievable. If you wish to do so, then you go right ahead. However, please don't even THINK of chastising me because I don't walk blindly into the same fire as you do, and don't give me such unsubstantiated stories as "proof positive" of your claims. I am a man of science. Science requires concrete answers, not smoke and mirrors.

As far as the bio of the journalist, sorry, but a bio doesn't mean he is telling the truth. I'm sure the several "journalists" at the New York Times that are proven to be liars and plagiarists each year have great bios as well...didn't stop them from lying their asses off, did it?

Not asking for blind faith here...
I am asking for faith in the integrity of reputable journalists, and their research...
Unless we see it with our own eyes, we are ALWAYS left to either believe the source, or not...

And i accept that you are vigiliant.... good for you

but in this day and age, I believe you have to start "believing" somewhere...
Or else, (extreme example here-) how do you know that you are even alive?
how do you know that this isn't the creation of a comatose mind?
how can you even trust your own eyes, when dreams can be as vivid?

I have watched Kevin Ogle for years (BTW- he is quite conservative) and am familiar with his reputation...
I choose to believe that he did his homework on this report...
I can understand now why you dont...
and I also accept that it is for valid reasons within your beliefs...

so in this affect, we have an impasse...
can we both agree to disagree for valid reasons within our beliefs?
and do you accept my sincere apology, so that we can part with respect, and perhaps even agree on other topics later?

- Lazarus