Contrail Patent?!?!, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 01:49 PM by Essan

Originally posted by no one special
I would oblige essan.. if you need hep im in!!!!

Sorry I;ve not gotten back to you, been rather busy this week and I'm about to set off for a long weekend camping on Dartmoor, so please bear with me and if you're interested in a rational, logical, look at the subject I;ll get back to you next week.

Or you could just believe everything TruthTellist posts since he's an Omnipotent God, knows everything and thus cannot be wrong*

* he won't see this because he has me on ignore because I dare present evidence that doesn't support what he knows without any doubt to be true. He doesn't understand that us mere mortals have to go through a process to find the truth but testing and examination, rather than just accepting stuff without question

reply posted on 28-8-2008 @ 06:37 PM by stealthyaroura

reply to post by TruthTellist

hi TRUTHTELLIST thanks for the info, i need a break from the UFOs
so i shall look foward to sinking my teeth into the chemtrail info you
provided

it may take me a while tho. thanks in advance.

reply posted on 9-9-2008 @ 07:13 PM by VIKINGANT

reply to post by stealthyaroura

Absolutely. Truthtellist has given quite alot of interesting info to think about. I am not pro or anti Chemtrail. Just curious. I have seen alot of good onfo for both sides of the argument.

Oz / Essan,
I appreciate both of your input hear and elswhere but this is one topic I am still having to consider further befre making my own personal judgement.

I have another quastion relating to the anti radar chaff. It is apparently tiny pieces of aluminium right? If enough is spread around, even in minute particles, will we not end up breathing it in? This is not good for us I am sure.
My point here is, if the airplanes do dispurse this stuff, as well as anything else that they are doing (cloud seeding, sky writing, and a host of other inentional emmissions) are they not techinically chemtrails? It may not always be done with malice and the conspiracy says, but they are still not 'natural' formations if anything is being sprayed or released intentionally. Can you agree to this much?

Also, if they have the equipment to disperse smoke, or anything else, is it not possible for harmful chemicals to also be dispursed? I am not saying that this IS happening, but that it is possible. Again I ask, can you agree to this much?

reply posted on 10-9-2008 @ 08:05 AM by Essan

Originally posted by VIKINGANT

I have another quastion relating to the anti radar chaff. It is apparently tiny pieces of aluminium right? If enough is spread around, even in minute particles, will we not end up breathing it in? This is not good for us I am sure.

I'm not sure what size it is, nor what happens to it? I daresay the chaff used extensively in WWII was comprised of larger stuff than they use today. Maybe one for the military experts?

What does seem apparent is that such stuff can be readily identified on weather radar so at least we'd know if there was any about!

My point here is, if the airplanes do dispurse this stuff, as well as anything else that they are doing (cloud seeding, sky writing, and a host of other inentional emmissions) are they not techinically chemtrails?

Yes and no. They certainly are spraying/deploying chemicals in the atmosphere. But I understand the term chemtrail to specifically refer to persistent white lines emanating from high flying aircraft. And as yet the only valid explanation for these are that they are contrails.

I have, however, pointed out a few times that, IMO, if there really is any secret spraying going on it's most likely to be invisible from the ground. I see no reason to suppose otherwise?

I do think cloud seeding is a concern and am glad we don't do any in the UK.

Also, if they have the equipment to disperse smoke, or anything else, is it not possible for harmful chemicals to also be dispursed?

I don't see why not. Though of course, just because someone owns a gun doesn't mean he shoots people every night. What we can do and what we do do are not the same thing.

reply posted on 10-9-2008 @ 12:01 PM by welivefortheson

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Because they affect the environment by trapping out going long wave radiation during the night time, trapping in the heat and creating warmer temperatures. Plus most of the fuel burning process emits hydrocarbons like cars do, increasing the presence of greenhouse gases in the atmopshere

bingo,as ive said before somone is artificially warming up the planet ,its darned obvious.

reply posted on 10-9-2008 @ 06:36 PM by VIKINGANT

reply to post by Essan

Thanks Essan,
I am glad it now appears there might be some (very little bit some) common ground on the Chemtrail issue. So we have now established that Chemtrails, athough highly unlikely, are possible in that they could do it if they wanted.
For some one of your caliblre and stance on the subjct to make the statements you did is a big step IMO. This should appease some of the Pro Chemtrailers for now.
Now all we need to do is convince the pro chemtrail that the logic of using them does not make sense. As has been pointed out time and again, there are considerably easier ways to kill, manipulate or otherwise effect the health of common citizens.

reply posted on 10-9-2008 @ 10:30 PM by TruthTellist