An Attempt to Debunk Chemtrails For Good

[HAARP]

UNITED STATES PATENT

Patent Number: 4,686,605 Date of Patent: Aug. 11, 1987

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ALTERING A REGION IN THE EARTH'S
ATMOSPHERE, IONOSPHERE, AND/OR MAGNETOSPHERE

www.bariumblues.com...

Quote from patent:

"It has also been proposed to release large clouds of barium in
the magnetosphere so that photoionization will increase the cold
plasma density, thereby producing electron precipitation through
enhanced whistler-mode interaction."


Well, I'm done with this thread. It's pointless to present facts.

Originally posted by Matrix1111
I don't have all the facts to decide one way or the other whether this is all true or not. Neither do you. So how can you insinuate your objectivity is more objective than mine? At least that's how it looks to me. Btw, I'm a fence sitter on the topic.

And I was playing devils advocate to the things you listed

Good. Then there should be no disagreement about whether chemtrails are a possiblity.

Depends on how you define it, don't you think? Dropping a small (or even a large) quantity of an inert chemical into a cloud is different from an organised, systematic, daily super-secret worldwide operation where planes fly in definite, deliberate grid patterns 24/7 spraying "something" into the atmosphere.

Okay. How does that counter or add to the discussion?

Its all education. How can anyone actively discuss a topic about the atmosphere without understanding it?

I have no idea what the purpose of chemtrails are. That's not the point.

But it is the point. Its the very point. Because at one moment hes radar mapping the continental US, and the next hes tracking storm patterns - which is it?

The value of this link is to show that barium is an ingredient being used.

Does it show that? Or is it a claim in a vague article that contradicts itself?

The point of the news report is that weather manipulation is banned in Germany and they had evidence that this is being done by the military there.

No. They did not have evidence. Thats the point. They saw chaff clouds from fighter planes on weather radar. The people "making" the evidence are the ones who tried to link it to chemtrails.

Exactly. And does that make someone 'unobjective" for believing you? More information is needed to make that conclusion. Same goes for coming to a conclusion about chemtrails. More information is needed.

Well on that we agree.

Again, the point is that such technology exists for dispersing chemicals/liquids into the air.

It has done for a long long time. Forest fires have been waterbombed for decades. Its nothing new.

True. But the point is that testing bio-chemical dispersal systems, however they are dispersed, is something that has been done to humans. In other links offered in this thread, it has been shown that such tests have been done on populations without consent.

OK, thats a fair point.

And you don't think the dispersing system hasn't become more sophisticated in 40 years?

No. Not unless someone has figured out a way to make an aerosol droplet defy being dispersed by the wind.

Random? It's a collection of facts as presented by various posters here. You can only dismiss it by insinuating it's a "cleverly woven" hoax. I think coming to some conclusion one way or another about chemtrails shows you're not being objective. There's just not enough proof. But nor is there enough proof to dismiss the theory.

Your post presented particular aspects of the argument. My reply provided the other sides to that argument. By looking at both we're being objective, aren't we?

It makes me very suspicious that people without proof won't allow other people without proof to have their say without being ridiculed and dismissed as people not worthy of ATS' standards.

Have I said that? Has anyone said that? I think you'll find the answer is no.

I asked the debunkers to summarize their evidence that's been presented so far in this thread, just I had done for the pro-chemtrail theorists. I thought I had provided a service that helped the discussion move along and was keeping in the spirit of your request to follow the rules of conduct and common courtesy. I guess not.

Why not - because I actually did present the counter arguments? Come on. How can we have a discussion if we don't actually discuss, present argument and counter argument etc?

Originally posted by Clearskies
Are you saying we don't believe in contrails, cloud formation or the atmosphere?
That's rather condescending....

No. I'm not saying that at all. What I'm saying is that its easy to resort to claims, but reading and understanding the science may very well help to make you understand where the more skeptical viewpoints come from and may lead to you actually questioning some of the claims yourself.

Maybe it's SUPPOSED to be world-wide dispersal, without a care who it hits, as long as the elite have closed, finely-filtered ventilation systems with high-tech doctors.

Thats a good point, but then you have to subscribe to the world wide military style conspiracy that must have thousands of people involved in it, working for every major airline, where the ground crews and pilots have no idea whats going on in their aircraft, and the ATC people all know the routes for the dispersal grids.

In the meantime, do what Deson and Weedwhacker (and sometimes Oz.) have done and keep an open mind to what's going on.

I find it spectacularly odd that, because I have provided logical arguments against this, that I'm accused of having a closed mind. Did it ever occur to you that, after a number of years researching various aspects of the issue that I've come to a conclusion based on all the evidence presented to me from all sides?

Originally posted by Matrix1111

Well, I'm done with this thread. It's pointless to present facts.

Spit that dummy!!!

Its not pointless to present facts. It IS pointless to recite them and not think of the actual meaning of them - surely?

The HAARP patent mentions exactly what you said. However as the Ionosphere is in the region of above 290,000ft, spraying something out of a plane at 30,000 feet or less isn't going to affect it.

And the magnetosphere starts even higher than that, the same can be said.

Originally posted by Essan
reply to post by GoldenFleece

 

Ever hear of irony?

Do you really think I am (or was) a US Govt disinformation agent?

I see. By ironically claiming that you are (or were) a US Govt disinformation agent while coincidentally advancing the exact US Govt agenda, that's supposed to remove any suspicion or doubt?

Just like Ozzie Weather Dewd starting threads that vociferously object to the notion that government disinformation agents even exist.

Oooo Kayyy.

P.S. neformore, I think you care about this topic a little too much. Your magnum opi are beginning to feel like a religious crusade.




[edit on 8-8-2008 by GoldenFleece]

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by Matrix1111

Well, I'm done with this thread. It's pointless to present facts.

Spit that dummy!!!

Its not pointless to present facts. It IS pointless to recite them and not think of the actual meaning of them - surely?

The HAARP patent mentions exactly what you said. However as the Ionosphere is in the region of above 290,000ft, spraying something out of a plane at 30,000 feet or less isn't going to affect it.

And the magnetosphere starts even higher than that, the same can be said.

Didn't you just post this:

STOP

If you actually read the T&C it says this, very plainly

2) Behavior: You will not behave in an abusive, hateful and/or racist manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack anyone.

So, the name calling stops now please.

I hope thats clear.

If your only retort to people who provide information to a thread is to call them a "shill" or "disinfo agent" then your whole credibility is blown. It means that you have nothing to offer.

Likewise, speculating on peoples motives for posting just blows your whole credibility out of the water. Think about it this way

Maybe there are people who promote the chemtrail theory solely to make money off gullible people

It's exactly the same the other way round as well - but the simple fact is that not one single person posting in this thread knows anyones motives at all, and speculating about them is off topic.

Debate the post and NOT the poster

Provide actual facts to back up your claims. Provide proper, educated science if need be, but understand this;

Hot air, rhetoric and ad-hominem arguments prove nothing, and are off topic.

Some people do know what they are talking about when it comes to atmospheric sciences, flight sciences and other related subjects. ATS is about reasonable informed debate and that requires listening sometimes, as well as talking.

Finally

Courtesy is Mandatory

Thats Mandatory as in;

Mandatory
Adjective
1. obligatory; compulsory

So lets have a proper reasoned discussion, shall we?



You should practice what you preach. I can't believe you're a moderator.

[edit on 8/8/2008 by Matrix1111]

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by Essan
reply to post by GoldenFleece

 

Ever hear of irony?

Do you really think I am (or was) a US Govt disinformation agent?

I see. By ironically claiming that you are (or were) a US Govt disinformation agent while coincidentally advancing the exact US Govt agenda, that's supposed to remove any suspicion or doubt?

Just like Ozzie Weather Dewd starting threads that vociferously object to the notion that government disinformation agents even exist.

Oooo Kayyy.

P.S. neformore, I think you care about this topic a little too much. Your magnum opi are beginning to feel like a religious crusade.

[edit on 8-8-2008 by GoldenFleece]

I'm basically new here. And I'm very intuitive. So I agree with you. This ATS place is beginning to feel like a sting operation run by military-type control freaks. Between the debunkers, moderators and strict (and hypocritical) protocal rules, not much information sharing gets done.

Very spooky (as in CIA spooks).

!!!

Originally posted by Matrix1111

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by Matrix1111

Well, I'm done with this thread. It's pointless to present facts.

Spit that dummy!!!

Its not pointless to present facts. It IS pointless to recite them and not think of the actual meaning of them - surely?

The HAARP patent mentions exactly what you said. However as the Ionosphere is in the region of above 290,000ft, spraying something out of a plane at 30,000 feet or less isn't going to affect it.

And the magnetosphere starts even higher than that, the same can be said.

Didn't you just post this:

STOP

If you actually read the T&C it says this, very plainly

2) Behavior: You will not behave in an abusive, hateful and/or racist manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack anyone.

So, the name calling stops now please.

I hope thats clear.

If your only retort to people who provide information to a thread is to call them a "shill" or "disinfo agent" then your whole credibility is blown. It means that you have nothing to offer.

Likewise, speculating on peoples motives for posting just blows your whole credibility out of the water. Think about it this way

Maybe there are people who promote the chemtrail theory solely to make money off gullible people

It's exactly the same the other way round as well - but the simple fact is that not one single person posting in this thread knows anyones motives at all, and speculating about them is off topic.

Debate the post and NOT the poster

Provide actual facts to back up your claims. Provide proper, educated science if need be, but understand this;

Hot air, rhetoric and ad-hominem arguments prove nothing, and are off topic.

Some people do know what they are talking about when it comes to atmospheric sciences, flight sciences and other related subjects. ATS is about reasonable informed debate and that requires listening sometimes, as well as talking.

Finally

Courtesy is Mandatory

Thats Mandatory as in;

Mandatory
Adjective
1. obligatory; compulsory

So lets have a proper reasoned discussion, shall we?

You should practice what you preach. I can't believe you're a moderator.

[edit on 8/8/2008 by Matrix1111]

I think you're making a big deal out of nothing there, all he said was dummy and it was in a playful manner. I don't think he meant to insult anyone.

And as for the chemtrails, I'm a firm believer in ockhams razor.. the simplest explanation is usually the right one. If barium and aluminum are being found in rainwater and mud and other surface areas which normally would not have these substances, it is quite obvious that they are coming from above. Coupled with the presence of these unnatural non-dissipating formations of cloud-LIKE structures in the sky, usually appearing in grids. Grids are DEFINITELY not natural, and the whole mis-identification as contrail thing falls flat on its back because these things do not evaporate at ALL.. they just spread out and after spreading out so much they loose their attraction to one another and fall to the ground, thereby dispersing over a wider area. I am highly suspicious of anyone anywhere claiming that this is a natural phenomenon or the result of normal contrails that evaporate a short time after the plane leaves the area, because it is the line of a propagandist. These things exist, are tangible and contain substances which are indeed harmful to the entire ecosystem and the only possible scenario I can conceive of is that this is some sort of extremely advanced method of forced evolution that will cover our entire food supply and ecosystem as well as ourselves.

reply to post by Matrix1111


Non sequitur

What makes you think a) the patent idea actually works b) the idea is being carried out and c) it manifests itself in the appearance of contrails or other high level clouds?

Originally posted by Matrix1111

You should practice what you preach. I can't believe you're a moderator.

[edit on 8/8/2008 by Matrix1111]

Ah. So effectively you are trying to censor my opinions because I'm a moderator, and obviously I'm not allowed to have them, am I?

I'm not the person who posted

Well, I'm done with this thread. It's pointless to present facts.

Am I?

In fact, I have presented some facts to you about the Magnetosphere and the Ionosphere in relation to your posting something about HARRP.

You haven't responded to them. Instead you've decided to take a cheap shot at me because - gasp - I have an opinion on the issue and I called out your attempt at drama bomb.

Discussion is a two way street. If you - or anyone else on ATS for that matter - just wants to post your opinion and then have no one question it, or counter it, then sadly you are in the wrong place.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
P.S. neformore, I think you care about this topic a little too much. Your magnum opi are beginning to feel like a religious crusade.

I believe what your trying to say is;

"This guy has looked at this subject, thought about it alot, weighed up the pro's and cons and has put forward and argued some points that I either can't counter or can't be bothered to try to, so I'm going to attempt to discredit him subtely"

But hey - this is my 12th post in the thread, and the 11th after asking for people to discuss the issues and not name call, and this one only really responds to your subtle accusation. You're on 19 posts so far. Who is on a "religious crusade" ?

I just saw 3 planes flying in formation laying parallel trails...
3 lines, 3 planes, all close together, all heading in the same direction. I looked 90 degrees to my left and 2 further planes were flying in formation laying parallel twin-trails towards my house. I then looked another 90 degrees to my left and another 2 planes were laying trails, this time not in formation, just in generally the same direction. Directly above me was about 20 trails that were already in existence and they had started to spread out. In the distance was a singular white plane flying somewhat slowly laying no trails.

8 planes above my house this morning. And 20+ exisiting trails already in the sky when I looked up. So 8 planes visually sighted and confirmed. 7 spraying, 1 not. I live nowhere near an airport.

Essan I clicked your links and I have seen nothing that debunks the existence of chemtrails.

Now, let us get the wheels in motion to prove, right now, that there are trails that do not behave like contrails. And let us right now state that these trails that behave differently than contrails are referred to as chemtrails.

Contrails are made of water vapour? Yes.

Can you eradicate a contrail with a reich cloudbuster? Yes. FAST.

How can we test if a trail is a contrail or other? Blast it with a reich cloudbuster and see if it behaves like water vapour.

Cloudbusting information

I suggest to all the experts on here, research the effect of ions on normal clouds, contrails and chemtrails. Then work out the purpose of HAARP.

There is much more to be discovered in the diverse variations of cloudbusting, and while the government is breaking its back trying to change the climate with megawatts of microwave power as in the HAARP project, you can accomplish ten times over what they can in the leisure of your own back yard using the gentle principles of nature discovered by the great Wilhelm Reich. Good experimenting to all!

Source www.montalk.net...

Research further Youtube search

Hopefully this will help your home experiments to prove/disprove this issue.

Best Wishes.

Hey everyone...

GREAT READ HERE

Moderators are People Too

Specifically

Among the most important attributes of our history is our diverse and often opinionated staff. However, it appears as though a growing majority of newer community members prefer to see our staff express a neutral opinion, or no opinion at all. There seems to be an inability to consider that the carefully selected staff of this board are able to separate involvement in discussion from performance of moderation duties.

I see this sort of thing every once in awhile and it does nothing to increase the reputation of an individual member.

What am I referring to?

The "calling out" of a Moderator in a vain attempt to deflect a topic.

neformore answered posts and engaged the thread with relevant material and then had to defend his position on the thread in reference to his being a Moderator. Now how is this Denying Ignorance?

I am a new Moderator but I have opinions and those opinions and thoughts are every bit as valid as any member on this board; because I am a member first.

Being a Moderator does not mean we can not be members as well..

Semper

Originally posted by neformore
But hey - this is my 12th post in the thread, and the 11th after asking for people to discuss the issues and not name call, and this one only really responds to your subtle accusation. You're on 19 posts so far. Who is on a "religious crusade" ?

Uh, make that 12 posts in 4 pages, many of which have taken up half the page!

I always get the feeling that chemtrail debunkers "doth protest too much", especially towards something that's so obvious.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Uh, make that 12 posts in 4 pages, many of which have taken up half the page!

I always get the feeling that chemtrail debunkers "doth protest too much", especially towards something that's so obvious.

Are you trying to censor me?

You are actually suggesting that replying to posts in detail is a problem, and that providing opinions and thoughts is "protesting too much" - because it doesn't suit your view.

Thats not denying ignorance, thats embracing it with open arms.

Originally posted by TrueLight
8 planes above my house this morning. And 20+ exisiting trails already in the sky when I looked up. So 8 planes visually sighted and confirmed. 7 spraying, 1 not. I live nowhere near an airport.

Hi True,

Have a look at this video, from the BBC Website.

Britain seen from the skies above

While its not all relevant to this subject, the bit from about 41 seconds in is, because it shows a snippet of just how much air traffic passes over the UK in a 24 hour period.

You will be suprised.

Edit to add - heres the actual BBC website for the series Britain from above This has a longer piece about the same subject in it.

[edit on 9/0808/08 by neformore]

reply to post by neformore


Thanks for the link It was interesting to see a computer demonstration of the density of air traffic. These this morning were flying 3 abreast, all level. What I saw was like this:

--------------------------- [plane]
---------- -------------- [plane]
---------------------------- [plane]

The middle one even had a gap in the trail. Anyway, I think my suggestion of researching the way ions hold clouds together is a worthwhile pursuit. As is physically testing to see if the chemtrails/contrails are made up the same way. It will be easy to prove/disprove , with a simple cloudbuster setup.

I've even seen a video somewhere of a hole being punched in cloudcover and in the "clear" gap there were trails remaining. Sure if the trails were water vapour one would assume they'd break up like the normal water-vapour clouds. When pummelled with ions.

That link again incase anyone is interested, I think it is well worth researching, we could finally prove there is a difference in the 2 different trails behaviour. Good debate let's try and prove this.

Cloudbusting at Home

Best Wishes

I don't think it is fair to the members to have a moderaotor start dominating the thread.

I think it stinks to high heaven - why come on now? ....now that the "debunkists" have been losing ground?

I find it suspicious that the moderator didn't post earlier in the thread - or at any other point in the discussion other than this. Clearly chemtrails are real and this is becoming more apparent to everyone with every day that passes.

Could the moderator not just post as a normal member?

Is there a need to impose your authority to haughtily on the rest of us?

We aren't all moderators, pilots and meteorologists - and I find it odd that we must be constantly reminded of this. I'm a doctor. I'm also a veteran (Korea) - yet you won't find that in my signature or profile.

Perhaps it is all just an issue of poor timing on the moderators part. (some might say he was summoned just in time)

But I do tend to notice that this sort of behaviour discourages the other members from their continued participation in such a thread. Especially when the posts occupy so much of the space, and force members to have to go back a few pages in order to see multiple users exchanging posts.

It isn't fair. Some members would be afraid to write a post such as this, and yet they wouldn't have been had the moderator simply posted as a normal member. They fear being penalized.

This is a conspiracy website - We are all very suspicious
-especially of the timing.

reply to post by TruthTellist


Well, actually TT....now that you mention you're a physician you've just elevated yourself (no pun) into a new realm of authority.

I am not mocking, hope it doesn't come across that way at all. It menas that if there are some suspicious diseases that might possibly be linked to 'spraying' then you'd be an expert in explaining such things to non-physicians...'laymen'.

See, this is how each field of expertise work together to find truth.....

reply to post by neformore


There is also a website here in North America, called 'FlightAware'. It's directed at pilots, but does have a lot of good info...not only about commercially scheduled passenger jets, but private jets as well. Everything that is in the FAA computers with a Flight Plan I should clarify, with an IFR Flight Plan.

[edit on 8/9/0808 by weedwhacker]