It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The latest "chemtrail" news

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 12:52 PM
Cliff Carnicoms latest Research Paper on chemtrails.

It can be demonstrated that the introduction of essentially any metallic or metallic salt aerosol into the lower atmosphere will have the effect of heating up that lower atmosphere. The impact is both significant and measurable. Those that seek and express concern on the so called global warming problem might wish to begin their search with an inquiry into the thermodynamics of artificially introduced metallic aerosols into the lower atmosphere. The direct injection of massive amounts of particulate matter by aircraft into the atmosphere for more than five years establishes the foundation for this inquiry. An examination of the specific heat characteristics of an altered atmosphere will provide the path for the realistic conclusions that can be made.

So, if Cliffie shifts his focus to the lower atmosphere, will he also take into account terrestrial sources of aerosols?

Any claim that the aerosol operations represent a mitigating influence on the global warming problem appears to be a complete facade that is in direct contradiction to the fundamental principles of physics and thermodynamics.

Who makes this claim?

The lack of candor and honesty by government, media and environmental protection agencies in response to public inquiry is further evidence of the fictitious fronts that have been proposed.

Generally most public agencies wont publicly admit that they think someone is a kook. (like Cliff).

It is past time to recognize that one of the primary effects of the dense aerosols that now permanently mar the lifeblood of this planet is the heating up of the very atmosphere that we breathe.
The early stage of the current argument for global heating and the aggravation of drought conditions was proposed approximately two years ago1. The benefit of the current study is that an estimate of the magnitude of the heat influence upon the atmosphere can now be made. Those that continue to claim that a benevolent, but necessarily secret enterprise to protect the planet with a blanket of purportedly heat reflective aerosols in the lower atmosphere exists will need to provide the primary evidence of that claim. That claim will need to be justified with solid physical principles and observation.

This is funny. For years, the debunkers have been asking Cliff and his followers to provide solid evidence to back up claims for the existence of chemtrails.

Hypothetical research models that are under discussion and rationalization, such as the Teller proposal, are more appropriate to the outer reaches of the planet and space. These proposals do not explain the deposition of massive amounts of hygroscopic aerosols into the lower atmosphere.
The recent media attention to the dramatic and accelerating climatic changes will hopefully be extended to the fundamental principles that are expressed within this report.
The mathematics, physical principles and thermodynamics of this argument will be made available on a separate entry.

Oh, yeah, I can hardly wait.

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 01:06 PM
I'm curious howard, why do you care anyways?

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 01:07 PM

Originally posted by HowardRoark
This is funny. For years, the debunkers have been asking Cliff and his followers to provide solid evidence to back up claims for the existence of chemtrails.

Yes, it sure is funny. You know what's even more funny? The enormous leap required to obtain such proof.

You've said it yourself, it's 'nearly impossible' to determine the altitude of a flying aircraft. Well, at least, without your trusty subscription to flight explorer.
I believe you've also suggested that any evidence of these chemicals is not reliable because there could be another source. Remember, we are dealing with a LOT of airspace.

Let's not be foolish, Howard. It is very difficult to prove that a moving aircraft is dispersing particulate into the stratosphere. Unless I have direct access to the aircraft's engine/fuel, I would never be able to provide such proof that you require.

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 01:12 PM
I'm a lot more interested in who HowardR is rather than his opinions on chemtrails. Does anyone know anything about this person, because he claims to not be an agent of any kind?

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 01:19 PM
He is an agent because he doesn't buy into a groundless theory without any proof?

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 01:23 PM
/puts on his tin foil hat

If you don't wear your foil hat then the government will use thier mind control satalite to make you docile.

Huh? Chemtrails!

/exchanges his fiol hat for a gas mask

Satalites are real, and they use EM waves.
Jets are real, and they form contrails.

Some people thought the EM waves were mind control waves.
Some people think contrails are mind control chemtrails.

Both lack any scientific evidence. Why believe one but not the other?

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Kano
He is an agent because he doesn't buy into a groundless theory without any proof?

Perhaps you didn't read Nicodemus' post on this page, third from the bottom-specifically his first paragraph.

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 01:39 PM
Frankly why would skeptics hang out around here? Kinda boring don't you think? Unless they get some perverse pleasure out of working for the man or they are paid to do so.

If one believes so much in the scientific method as a way to solve all problems then a skeptic would feel more at home in a 'science forum.'

posted on Jan, 30 2004 @ 01:50 PM
Well, again we seem to have some confusion about the old saying 'Lack of proof is not proof of lack' and its derivatives.

The saying is true, but the problem is many people misconstrue this by taking it a step further and inferring that the fact that there is no proof something isn't true must mean it is true. A perfect logic circle.

There really is no reason to suggest the contrails we have seen have anything to do with the chemtrail theory. None of the proofs or evidence I have seen brought forward to suggest they do have held up to scrutiny.

Again we know that the fact theres no proof that chemtrails exist mean that they dont exist. But it also sure as hell doesn't mean they do exist. Until there is any reason to suspect they do, Occam relegates them to the tinfoil hat bin.

NEO, you would prefer that all conspiracy theories were agreed upon as 100% true by all members of the community? That sure would get a lot done...

top topics


log in