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.

 

The Chemtrail Myth

page: 20
24
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maya432

if there is no chemtrail conspiracy then just what are all these people talking about??


Would you trust those people to conduct a heart transplant on your father or would you rather trust a heart surgeon of 20 years experience?

Same goes with the truth about contrails/chemtrails
Except with contrails we have more like 60 years experience.




posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 



May I say that your name didn't come out of my mouth, but in posts by two other members.

You have stood alone and consistant for all the time I have been on ATS. I used your name because it was in the original posts by the two other members. I personally don't feel you are part of the issues I mentioned earlier.

As a matter of fact I have seen you expose certain clues at times that infer something may be amiss, but that we are barking up the wrong tree.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire
The two planes I'm speaking about were roughly the same altitude because they were about the same size, both were large aircraft, one was a 747 the other I don't know, possibly a c-130 but I'm thinking it was a tanker plane, and it could have been dumping fuel, I don't know.
Emphasis added by MrPenny


Hmmm....your "training" isn't looking too successful...

C-130 Hercules, wingspan 132' 7"......length 98'.
Boeing 747, wingspan 212' 2"....length 231'.

A total difference of roughly 80' in wingspan...133' difference in length. Not to mention the dramatically different profiles these two aircraft have. And of course, one of them is prop driven. If they appeared to be the same size....they were clearly not flying at the same altitude.

[edit on 23-4-2008 by MrPenny]

[edit on 23-4-2008 by MrPenny]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by interestedalways
 


Thanks.

We may disagree on certain matter, but that's no reason to be enemies



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 

that doesn`t answer any questions.

there`s enough info in those links to choke a horse.

and some of the info does come from
meteorologist, doctors,scientists,pilots,air traffic controllers
as well as regular citizens as well.

The N.W.O is EVIL to the CORE



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny

Originally posted by LDragonFire
The two planes I'm speaking about were roughly the same altitude because they were about the same size, both were large aircraft, one was a 747 the other I don't know, possibly a c-130 but I'm thinking it was a tanker plane, and it could have been dumping fuel, I don't know.
Emphasis added by MrPenny


Hmmm....your "training" isn't looking too successful...

C-130 Hercules, wingspan 132' 7"......length 98'.
Boeing 747, wingspan 212' 2"....length 231'.

A total difference of roughly 80' in wingspan...133' difference in length. Not to mention the dramatically different profiles these two aircraft have. And of course, one of them is prop driven. If they appeared to be the same size....they were clearly not flying at the same altitude.


So we can deduce the 747 I saw was at a higher altitude than the other aircraft I observed. Still I know it was a 747 and it's contrail was evaporating rather quickly, but the other aircraft, the tanker kc-135 or c-130 both aircraft btw are around the same size, well it's chemtrail was not evaporating at all.

I saw this personally, and I'm convinced it was not a contrail it was leaving in it's wake.

Questions?

Does anyone here believe the Governments are not conducting weather modification experiments when governments have already admitted doing so?

Why is it so hard for some to believe that these are the very chemtrails we are speaking about?



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maya432

The N.W.O is EVIL to the CORE



Exactly, Which is why they don't want you to believe the meteorologists, doctors, scientists, pilots, air traffic controllers as well as regular citizens


They thrive on spreading disinformation

Who's side are you on?


(actually the NWO are cowering in their bunkers afraid they'll get killed by a contrail
But that's for another thread )



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire

Does anyone here believe the Governments are not conducting weather modification experiments when governments have already admitted doing so?


Well, I'm pretty sure most weather modification in the US is carried out by private firms. In Russian and China though it's definitely done by the govt. I'm looking forward to seeing how China does this summer during the Olympics

But what's that got to with chemtrails?



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by OzWeatherman
 


.how many times can you be wrong and expect us to believe you. apparently you feel, as you said , you dont need to research. i'm sorry ,i thought you wanted facts. i didn't know this was just a post about your opinion. but once again

www.afcea.org...]

you'll notice this is date 2005,2 years before i saw the Portugese ships. apparently they dont classify their hulls like we do.

about half way down this pageoopsie!!!!!!!
minus another 10 credibility points


ya know i witnessed this and you supersleuths try to rip it up its just too bad i never mentioned a c5a, or that you try to make excuses for the tankers that made a clear day overcast. why do you guys post on a thread where you're allowed to have a different opinion? you should just find somwhere you can just state you're beliefs as fact.
and oz , i cant believe you work with the upper atmosphere and you don't know about the experimentation thats been going on since tesla. not to mention that the dept on the navy is the leader of these tests.

what it boils down to is i believe that haarp is the reason they're doing this. that they are spraying something in the sky at high altitudes to bounce communications off of for deeply submerged subs or long distance elf. i just think there are side effects they dont care about. this is one view, and there are many more.
but please stop acting like your opinion is final. just like i cant prove these, you can't disprove them
so can we get back to both sides presentingtheir views


[edit on 23-4-2008 by Spectre0o0]

[edit on 23-4-2008 by Spectre0o0]

[edit on 23-4-2008 by Spectre0o0]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny

Originally posted by LDragonFire
So just because you sit in the cockpit doesn't mean you know anything else about what is happening to and on your aircraft.
Do you think that for real?


Just gotta jump in here with an open mind. (albeit a small one)

LDF's statement:
"So just because you sit in the cockpit doesn't mean you know anything else about what is happening to and on your aircraft."

Initially struck me as outrageous as I am sure it did to others as well.

But think about it. Does the pilot know how many passengers had free nuts? How many ordered a beer or soda? What the attendents are doing during the entire flight? Who is joining "the mile-high-club" in the lav.? What is happening in luggage compartments / cargo bay?

I would argue........No, they are busy flying the plane.

Do passenger jets have rear view mirrors?........No

Without much of a stretch of imagination it is "possible" for numerous
things to occur on board after take off unbeknownst to pilot.

regards . . . kk


[edit on 23-4-2008 by kinda kurious]



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spectre0o0
oz , i cant believe you work with the upper atmosphere and you don't know about the experimentation thats been going on since tesla. not to mention that the dept on the navy is the leader of these tests.


Why would an Australian meteorologist know of non existent US experiments?



what it boils down to is i believe that haarp is the reason they're doing this. that they are spraying something in the sky at high altitudes to bounce communications off of for deeply submerged subs or long distance elf.


But we know they've been doing it since the 1940s - because we've been observing and studying it since the 1940s ....

When did HAARP - which has as much to do with the troposphere as my pocket calculator does - start up?

(actually, I've had a pocket calculator since the 1970s .... does that mean I'm responsible for all chemtrails?)



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Hi, everybody. I've been following this thread and I've come to the following conclusions. You are all valuable members of ATS and all of you have something to contribute and each of us can learn from each other if we keep an open mind.

However, there has been lots of bickering on this thread from both sides of the aisle; so please stop the bickering. You don't have to agree with the other poster you just have to respect their right to have an opinion.

Thanks, you are all appreciated.

gallopinghordes
forum mod



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinda kurious
But think about it. Does the pilot know how many passengers had free nuts? How many ordered a beer or soda? What the attendents are doing during the entire flight? Who is joining "the mile-high-club" in the lav.? What is happening in luggage compartments / cargo bay?

I would argue........No, they are busy flying the plane.

Do passenger jets have rear view mirrors?........No

Without much of a stretch of imagination it is "possible" for numerous
things to occur on board after take off unbeknownst to pilot.


Most of those, perhaps not, but the cargo bay, they probably have some idea. No ones there to look, so you need something to check nothing's going wrong. And then to add the chemtrail equipment, well all the designers are in on it, you are adding dynamic loads, pumps, more weight, all things they need to consider, especially with something you want passengers to fly in safely, particularly as if it does crash you'll have chemical spill all over the place. Then you have extra guys to do the maintenance, refuel and also refill your sprayers. Which conveniently seem to come out of the engines, so lets add rolls royce, general electric and everyone else who makes jets to the list of people "in on it". Then the fire services at the airports will need to know about it as well, and if the designers get something wrong or something just goes wrong, then everyone will find out when suddenly a plane lands and everyone's poisoned.

Now factor in the losses in it from the atmosphere distributing it all over the place, and spraying it at 35,000 feet seems a really silly idea.

In fact, I'd think poisoning the water supply would be a lot easier.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 

HUH??

wow,,,interesting double speak there,,,,,,you Are good.....
and
your still not addressing any of the info in those links.

who side am I on.?
Humanity`s side.
our side loves all.

where do you stand?



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Nefermore. Your'e scalding attack is noted and will be forwarded to proper channels. Thank you for allowing me to speak my peace on the matter in a non derisive environment.



posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jpm1602
 


jpm....hungry like the wolf....

Ummm....you just called out a Mod!

jp, cover our fangs....draw back, and think about tonight's Word!

'Iraq the Vote!!!'

WW

ps...perps to Stephen Colbert......!!!



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Just to be clear, I do not know anyone on the forum, outside of seeing their posts here. I've never conspired by u2u or otherwise to join a thread with someone else to disrupt it.
Is one only to post in threads where one's opinion has not been mirrored?



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 12:34 AM
link   
I'd have to say that I believe weather modification is a necessary program that may offer a chance at surviving the upcoming turbulent climate changes.

Also if HAARP is trying to communicate with deeply submerged nuclear subs then I'm all for it, I'd rather have a direct line to military assets with dozens of nuclear weapons.



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


Anyone registered with ATS is free to come and go as he/she/it pleases in threads -- a windsurfer checking in for some fun or fellow members teaming up for some laughs. I happen to post in this particular thread because I’ve seen some activities in the skies that noone here has been able to convince me as merely naturally forming contrails.

While I will certainly subscribe to the scientific mind and experts such as meteorologist and pilots, I personally make an effort to deny ignorance and give anything unexplainable, like ‘chemtrails’, a fair share for my dose of reality. Noone needs to mirror my opinions for me to post in threads. That would be too boring.

A healthy debate will almost work itself out (with the moderators lurking somewhere in the background to quell the bickering between two sides as seen recently here). Where opinions don’t matter unfortunately, then it’s time to leave the thread and find other places worth one’s time and effort.




posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by apex

Most of those, perhaps not, but the cargo bay, they probably have some idea. No ones there to look, so you need something to check nothing's going wrong. And then to add the chemtrail equipment, well all the designers are in on it, you are adding dynamic loads, pumps, more weight, all things they need to consider, especially with something you want passengers to fly in safely, particularly as if it does crash you'll have chemical spill all over the place. Then you have extra guys to do the maintenance, refuel and also refill your sprayers. Which conveniently seem to come out of the engines, so lets add rolls royce, general electric and everyone else who makes jets to the list of people "in on it". Then the fire services at the airports will need to know about it as well, and if the designers get something wrong or something just goes wrong, then everyone will find out when suddenly a plane lands and everyone's poisoned.

Now factor in the losses in it from the atmosphere distributing it all over the place, and spraying it at 35,000 feet seems a really silly idea.

In fact, I'd think poisoning the water supply would be a lot easier.


Excellent points to consider.

But have you thought about the numerous times where international drug smuggling rings were busted. Mostly baggage handlers and ground crew were busted, but rarely (if ever ) pilots as I recall.

Is that not similar to weight issues and personnel cooperation you describe? This would certainly make it "Plausible"

BTW, Although I DO believe in Chemtrails, I DO NOT personally believe
they are propagated by Commercial Passenger Aircraft.

toodles . . . kk



[edit on 24-4-2008 by kinda kurious]



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join