Chemtrails Vs Contrails... There's a MASSIVE Difference!!! Check these out...

page: 12
10
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



Nanoparticals the newest "tiny" big thing on the horizon.

Thing about nanoparticals is in most cases they are protected by their size in that they don't have to be listed as "in something" because they are so small they fall under the "radar" (no pun intended).

Yep, you could have billions of these itsy bitsy "things" and with a large accumulated volume yet as individual entities they do not have to be disclosed.

At least that is my understanding.

People don't you think we are looking at sky based manipulation rather than being sprayed? It's actually common sense, but by keeping the words flowing of how "we chemtrailers" think we are being poisened purposely from the trails" we miss the boat.




posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by interestedalways
 


interested, which weighs more? ---A ton of feathers, or a ton of bricks?

If you supply sufficient amounts of nanoparticals to have them create the substantial effects you allege, then they will have to have some some substantial weight. And THAT would change the density of the aviation fuel, in passenger jets.

Really...if anything is being 'sprayed', then it's a secret Military Op....being done in plain sight...? Huh??? 'Secret', but in plain sight?



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by _Del_
Seriously, chaff does not equal chemicals or contrails. I'm not sure where the connection is being made here...


There was no connection really it was a 'feud' on semantics...

You say 'chaff' I say 'chemtrails'

Military does not admit 'chemtrails' but admits 'chaff'

Not like they would do otherwise... so we play word games



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker.....talk about flip-flop!!!!!


Talk about a total lack of understanding
:shk:


Originally posted by weedwhacker
but, what is this 'MAGIC' additive of which you speak??


Silly Wacker... if I had THAT answer I would call CNN



...people lap it up.


Yes they do don't they? I mean Mike Singh is now conspiracy Master and subject expert... so perhaps we have the right approach to 'get the word out' yes?



this 'additive' could miraculously withstand temperatures of over 800 degrees Celsius....


My dear weedwacker... as usual, in your extreme effort to obfuscate the issues, you miss the point... WHY would the 'majic additive' need to withstand "temperatures of over 800 degrees Celsius" IF the INTENT of the additive would be to be burned along with the fuel and leave the RESIDUE in the air?

I fail to understand your 'logic' here...

You know, back in Canada there was a gasoline company that got charged with illegal waste dumping... you know what they did? They mixed toxic but flammable substances in with the fuel they dispensed at the pumps



They got paid to dump the waste...
They got paid for the gas you put in your tank...

YOU got some really hi octane stuff cheap...

Everybody happy... never mind the toxins in the air


Well I'll be hornswaggled... seems they do it here in the good ole USA too...

PCBs AND TOXIC WASTE IN YOUR GASOLINE
www.projectcensored.org...


because they are in the fuel!!!!!!. BALONEY!!!!!


The only BALONEY around here is what's on my sandwich and your pathetic attempt to cover of the possibility that these toxins get into Avgas



If the fuel is adulterated, in any way, it shows in the engine readings.


Ah so all the engines on all the planes you may have flown ALL sound the same everyday? Never a flicker, a cough, a sputter? If you want us to believe that...




Others call it 'flaming'......you can decide for yourselves....


No it's called presenting MY case, backed by evidence I believe supports my case... 'flaming' is when you attack someone personally in a thread... and that NEVER happens here at ATS... you really ought to work on getting your facts straight




THIS is 'flaming' WW ----->




[edit on 30-4-2008 by zorgon]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
Thing about nanoparticals is in most cases they are protected by their size in that they don't have to be listed as "in something" because they are so small they fall under the "radar" (no pun intended).


Dam!!! Now that is a nasty thought... so they could slip them into our food and not have to put it on the label? Egads... now there is another thread coming up... ties in with a lot of stuff we have been looking into at Pegasus



At least that is my understanding.


Have any leads on that? I am going to U2U something interesting about those particles that we are not ready to discuss openly yet...



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
I have some links, actually, but my computer keeps jumping from tab to tab, even jumping back to a thread I closed out of. Seems to have a mind of it's own.

It was doing that when I was posting in the syncronicity thread, it would jump me to this thread while I was typing!

Not speaking conspiracy here but computers must just have minds of their own at times!



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

interested, which weighs more? ---A ton of feathers, or a ton of bricks?


Not sure what that has to do with the subject... but may I suggest some intersesting reading on the NEW theory of gravity and how it effects your question?


"Gravitational Force of the Sun" by Pari Spolter



If you supply sufficient amounts of nanoparticals to have them create the substantial effects you allege


Perhaps you could give us your credentials that makes you an expert on nanoparticals? I have Rik Riley and Dr Resnick on my team
and BFFT is getting there






Really...if anything is being 'sprayed', then it's a secret Military Op....being done in plain sight...? Huh??? 'Secret', but in plain sight?


Yes Herr Wacker... we use the term "Hidden in Plain Sight" Just like the Secret DoD Only Shuttle Missions... people saw them launch, the launches were on TV, but the mission, payload, orbits etc were and in many cases STILL are classified...

One specific detail that is classified is the RETURN WEIGHT... trust me this IS relevant to nanoparticles



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Z, you picked me apart, again...as usual.

So, since you said 'AvGas', am I to assume you now assert that every piston airplane in General Aviation has an additive? Well, that makes better sense, since they fly much lower than jets.

But if, as you wish to claim, something is in the Jet-A....then, to what purpose? YOU are the go-to guy on this subject...is it part of HAARP? Or simple weather modification? Either way, no one has, as of yet, addressed my point some pages ago, about the size of the surface area of the planet, and how a few meter's wide 'trail' could possibly have anything but a minimal effect. AGAIN, stuff released at 30,000 feet will not fall straight down...the atmosphere is very diverse, and chaotic....just look at your daily weather forecasts! (Well, not yours....LAS is pretty easy....the only easier job for a weather forecaster would be in Hawai'i).

AND, you have yet to respond to my question about who, what, when, where and how (the five Ws) are additives being introduced into the fuel supply? Why no wistleblowers? Are they killed immediately? No Witness Protection Program for them? Eh?

WW

[add]....and why, oh why bring up the Shuttle into this thread? Is it 'spraying' too?


BTW, is all of the Venus info on Wiki faked? (Hey, you went off topic, I figured I have your attention for a few minutes). I mean, a Solar day on Venus lasts for 116.7 Earth days.....hardly the bucolic paradise some seem to think it might be......

[edit on 4/30/0808 by weedwhacker]

[edit on 4/30/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 01:00 PM
link   

For the scientists who work with nanotech this must be frustrating indeed. A definition of nano is definitely in order. Nano is 10 to the power of -9. How small is that? A nanometer is one billionth of a meter. Small, indeed – in fact, so small it’s difficult to compare it to anything, only adding frustration to the roll of scientists trying to explain nanotechnology in laymen’s terms.



At this scale, a material's properties change—things like electrical conductivity and mechanical strength are not the same as they are at micro size. With the recently developed atomic force microscope, nanoscientists have begun to manipulate matter on an atomic level to take advantage of these exciting new properties



source www.physorg.com...

But this is in fact subject for another thread, but I felt it belongs to some degree, maybe more than any of us want to know.

Edit to add this:


Meanwhile, there is no requirement anywhere in
the world for labeling of nano-scale ingredients
to allow the public to make an informed choice
about using nanoproducts.


www.physorg.com...

source


[edit on 30-4-2008 by interestedalways]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
There was no connection really it was a 'feud' on semantics...

You say 'chaff' I say 'chemtrails'

Military does not admit 'chemtrails' but admits 'chaff'

Not like they would do otherwise... so we play word games


Except I am very familiar with "chaff" It in no way can account for persistent contrails or the weather man (and TV viewers) would see constant "rain" in lines across the screen on the evening forecast.

It is also chemically inert. I've handled it. It's a glass silicate with aluminum coating. It's made in "strings" or "strips" (though it's really fiberous). Old stuff was just aluminum foil strips. It's too big to inhale and will decompose in water. You could eat it without major side effects. You also have to notify the FAA hours before employing it.

There is no evidence it's being used in mass quantities in chemical trails. And there would be evidence.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
I have some links, actually, but my computer keeps jumping from tab to tab, even jumping back to a thread I closed out of. Seems to have a mind of it's own.

It was doing that when I was posting in the syncronicity thread, it would jump me to this thread while I was typing!

Not speaking conspiracy here but computers must just have minds of their own at times!


ACK! While in the Synchronicity thread?! That's too much! I hate computers (but have an odd affection for my laptop)..



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by _Del_
Seriously, chaff does not equal chemicals or contrails. I'm not sure where the connection is being made here...


There was no connection really it was a 'feud' on semantics...

You say 'chaff' I say 'chemtrails'

Military does not admit 'chemtrails' but admits 'chaff'

Not like they would do otherwise... so we play word games


No word games. Just evidence.

Chaff - by definition - appears on radar ..... Therefore chemtrails (as per popular conception - ie persistent contrails observed from the ground) cannot be chaff



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


WW, as mentioned already by Interestedalways, the properties at this scale have created the need for terms like "metamaterials". The properties are completely different. The surfaces are within the bandwidth of much of the energy spectrum, making them able to interact below certain interactions (such as RF). Further, this more confined surface area allows for some interesting play with subquantum waveforms. It has given rise to a group of disciplines such as plasmonics, photonics, etc. Being able to interact and utilize the characterstics of such science can do all sorts of things, honestly.

You don't have to have large amounts of this material to affect change. You just have to have the right material, with the right properties. Something that is self assembling, yet highly reflective/refractive. Perhaps it helps propagate a specific energy spectrum. I see no reason that there might not be some level of Shumann control going on, honestly. But that is for another day, methinks. Aluminum is more conductive than copper...

The point that Zorgon brings up about the "metabolized" chemistry that is the end result being the desired product is very interesting, indeed. I was thinking something somewhat similar, but the metabolization process would be to expose the final product as you burned off protective outer shells.

Perhaps silicone nanotubes, for example.

Silicon melts at about 1411 F. A jet engine can be much higher than 800 (closer to 1200-1500, depending). So you put silicon in to protect well within the range mentioned. We have already heard stories of silicon nanotubes being used as a material used to protect such nano's, as they relate to Morgellon's. Correct?

So you have the material that can provide adequate delivery. This delivery mechanism is brittle and breaks easily, as well. So much of it would break away, actually.

Regardless, this is not needed. If you are vaporizing aluminum, it will likely condense into crystalline forms while at that altitude. What you then need is a delivery system that will allow the aluminum to be "metabolized" from another material, as an exhaust. Something that can be alloyed with aluminum but remain flammable somehow. I wonder...somewhere around here i have something....oh yeah....WHOA NELLY!!! You mean you can make aluminum BURN???

Flammable Aluminum Powder



Hazards Identification
Emergency Overview
--------------------------
WARNING! FLAMMABLE SOLID. DUST MAY FORM FLAMMABLE OR EXPLOSIVE MIXTURE WITH AIR, ESPECIALLY WHEN DAMP. HARMFUL IF INHALED. CAUSES IRRITATION TO EYES AND RESPIRATORY TRACT. MAY AFFECT LUNGS. MAY CAUSE SKIN IRRITATION.

SAF-T-DATA(tm) Ratings (Provided here for your convenience)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Health Rating: 2 - Moderate (Life)
Flammability Rating: 3 - Severe (Flammable)
Reactivity Rating: 3 - Severe (Water Reactive)
Contact Rating: 2 - Moderate
Lab Protective Equip: GOGGLES & SHIELD; LAB COAT & APRON; VENT HOOD; PROPER GLOVES; CLASS D EXTINGUISHER
Storage Color Code: Red Stripe (Store Separately)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Potential Health Effects
----------------------------------

Inhalation:
Causes irritation to the respiratory tract. Symptoms may include coughing, shortness of breath.
Ingestion:
Not considered toxic although aluminum chloride may form slowly in the digestive tract with nausea, vomiting, other gastrointestinal effects in extreme cases.
Skin Contact:
May cause irritation with redness and pain.
Eye Contact:
Causes irritation, redness, and pain.
Chronic Exposure:
Pulmonary fibrosis from chronic inhalation has been reported. Chronic exposure has also produced numbness in fingers and (in one case) brain effects.
Aggravation of Pre-existing Conditions:
Persons with pre-existing skin disorders or eye problems or impaired respiratory function may be more susceptible to the effects of the substance


I wonder what types of illnesses were described in the Kasza vs. Browner (96-15535) case?


Zorgon, don't forget the other doctor.
He is forehead deep in Poherian right now...but still formidable when it comes to his wealth of nano knowledge and resource.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Good job, bfft....I am serious as a heart attack when I say "is this actually happening right now?" or is it still theoretical?

You mentioned Morgellon's.....and people, right here on ATS claim that it is simply an allergic reaction, by a few people, to various pollen-producing plnats down here on the Earth's surface.

I posted, the other day, on one of these alleged 'chemtrail' threads, how I sat last Friday, eating Nachos, and watched airplanes fly over....the contrails formed, you could see they were turning over the same waypoint *guessing the BAL VOR.....* And, after a few thousand feet behind, they dissipated. Today, in comparison (Wednesday) not many contrails at all....some cumulus, and altocumulus....not much in the way of cirrus....

Thing is....imagining something is one thing. Saying that IT IS ACTUALLY happening, that's very different.

IF....IF there is a 'spraying' occuring, then it should happen at night, n'est pas?

Otherwise, it's so obvious.....everyone can see it,no?

In any event, your incredibly well-documented descriptions aside.....I ask you the same queston I posed to Zorgon. the five Ws: Who, What, Where, When and How? This all pertains to these alleged 'chemicals' that are allegedly being introduced into the fuel supply. What? No whistleblowers yet????

WW



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Otherwise, it's so obvious.....everyone can see it,no?


So everyone can see it if they are outside looking up on the day that it happens in their area... Like I said I have been in Vegas for 10 years and I only saw them doing it ONCE... the grid work was completed in less than 1/2 an hour on a clear day and they stayed the rest of the day and the sky completely clouded over... you would have to have watched it to believe it

Well here is a good video that is well researched... it should answer many of your questions


Google Video Link



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Here is one for Herr Weedwacker... are you allowed to flush over land?







But here is another German clip... ZDF Chemtrails Reportage...

And THIS one I guarantee they are not saying CHAFF


When I have time I will do a full transcript... but in the meantime a picture is worth a thousand words...



Airliners for Global distribution





Global temperature rising 1/2 degree C... this makes the PTB nervous...

Airplanes for example need to spread Sulphur (Schwefel) into the upper atmosphere

The sulphur powder is mixed with Kerosene which when burned in the engines generate sulphur dioxide...

The sulphur dioxide particles scatter the sunlight and reduce the ray that hit the earth

Along the worldwild airline routes, the gas is distributed globally and reduce global warming or actually stop it...

But sulphur dioxide is poisonous

so the PTB hope that the as the altitude is so high and the life span of the gas to short that it shouldn't sink to Earth...

But a guarantee for this, they cannot give us


There is no 'error' in translation


[edit on 1-5-2008 by zorgon]



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Egad! Holy mackerel! Incroyable! That's no ordinary [ahem] 'leakage' coming out from those aircrafts. It looks like those flyboys decided to take their dump on the rest of us below. That's so wrong!




posted on May, 1 2008 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Here is one for Herr Weedwacker... are you allowed to flush over land?


[edit on 1-5-2008 by zorgon]


Haha -- that's the fire fighting version of the 747 outfitted by Evergreen. If you think that video is crazy you should see a live demo!! Egads!



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 01:47 AM
link   
One thing you do need for chemtrails is good pilots...

so seeing as I am in a real funky mood right now I just HAD to drag up these training videos...

So yeah okay its a little off topic... but its been a hard day,,,

JOHN LEAR PRACTICE VIDEO...


WEED WACKER PRACTICE VIDEO


JOHN LEAR getting the hang of it...


WEED WACKER getting the hang of it... well sort of



JOHN LEAR... mastered


WEED WACKER... mastered well almost

Google Video Link



Devil made me do it... either that or the rum... not sure



posted on May, 1 2008 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

But here is another German clip... ZDF Chemtrails Reportage...

And THIS one I guarantee they are not saying CHAFF


When I have time I will do a full transcript... but in the meantime a picture is worth a thousand words...


Airliners for Global distribution


Not so good an idea after all





Source

"Our research indicates that trying to artificially cool off the planet could have perilous side effects," Tilmes says. "While climate change is a major threat, more research is required before society attempts global geoengineering solutions."[/exl]

Oh well, it was an interesting idea while it lasted


One of the ironies is that we used to do this without aircraft - but then discovered acid rain so clamped down hard on sulphur emissions from factories etc.

[edit on 1-5-2008 by Essan]





top topics
 
10
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join