Real Contrail Science, why they persist and why they spread out and why they are not chemtrails

reply to post by Zepherian


That's all fine. Just show us where chemtrails have been verifiably demonstrated to have happened. That's all I'm asking for.

The real way the world works is "put up or shut up", and unfortunately you have not put anything up. You've voiced your opinions, supported by no evidence at all. You have extrapolated pieces of information you've read about past studies, experiments, and spraying (though not high-altitude), into some macabre paranoid theatrical plot, where grossly inefficient methods are used to achieve something yet unknown.

If you could just convince someone who relies on evidence to believe, you'd have something. I've yet to see you achieve that.

reply to post by dave420


I have provided the evidence of my testimony, and you have been linked ad nauseam, over several threads, to credible reports, up to and including official acknowledgement of military spraying operations.

I am not in the business of wasting time with people that have so far proven to me they will discard and ignore any and all evidence provided on this topic that goes against their negation of it. Remember I called you a liar, this is why.

Don't waste my time, and do not tell me to shut up, the Chemtrail warning side of this debate has provided many a link to what's going on, within the limits of the secrecy of the phenomenon. What more do you want? A A340 loaded with pathogens crashing on your lawn? If the evidence seems light to you pseudoscientists out there, it's because we are talking about a cover up, not the mateing habbits of patagonian bees.

I am however going to bow out of this thread, and specifically of this discussion with Dave, this has become circular and we're not getting anywhere. If the debunkers come up with some new angle, I'll come back and shoot it down again, if not I think we are all clear as to where we all stand.

Peace.

[edit on 25-11-2008 by Zepherian]

reply to post by Zepherian


Thank you for bowing out, gracefully. Should you ever come up with actual evidence of intentional chemical additions to jet exhaust, all of us would be interested in seeing it. Until then, the rest of us will be able to discuss the formation and dissipation of ice and water vapor as products of combustion.

reply to post by Zepherian


I'm just saying if you read your evidence, there is nothing demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that anything strange is currently going on. All you have is historical documents talking about completely different ways of dispersing chemicals from planes. None occur at the levels of commercial flights, and all the evidence provided that it is currently happening is non-existent.

This discussion is not getting anywhere because you have no evidence. Don't pin this on me - the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders, not mine. Good luck in finding some - and I mean that. We'll be here waiting to discuss chemtrails when they can be demonstrated to be happening now.

reply to post by wmd_2008


Oh noes!!!11! regular flight patterns! Must be chemtrails! :-P

It seems the entire foundation for the chemtrail myth is historical documents talking about something completely different, taken completely out of context, coupled with the lack of knowledge of jet engine exhaust interaction with the atmosphere.

Originally posted by dave420
That's all fine. Just show us where chemtrails have been verifiably demonstrated to have happened. That's all I'm asking for.

DONE

CHEMTRAILS not CONTRAILS

Albeit these are for an airshow, nevertheless less they are chemtrails consisting of smoke and colored dies.



This was taken at Volkel in the Netherlands... that US Air Base where they keep NUKES..

Seems Google won't let you see it

Volkel, Uden, Netherlands
+51° 39' 27.92", +5° 42' 8.09"



CHEMTRAILS









...---...

[edit on 25-11-2008 by zorgon]

oh, forget it.

[edit on 25-11-2008 by Phage]

Originally posted by Zepherian
reply to post by DarkSecret

 

Then read up on the NWO conspiracies, as they give insight as to how the world really is run. The people who are in charge of our society are not at all the people most people believe that are, and are much more self serving and shadowy personages.

NO they give us an insight into how some really paranoid individuals think the world is run thats all!

reply to post by wmd_2008


Follow the money. It's not paranoia when you're right.

reply to post by zorgon


And that smoke will not even reach the ground, but drift around in the air and eventually dissipate. Hardly an effective means of contaminating a specific part of the ground (or even country). Put a single drum in the water supply of a major city, and there you have a much more effective way of contaminating a specific population.

reply to post by Zepherian


It is paranoia when there is no evidence for it. Paranoiacs might be right, but the method of them finding the truth is illogical, irrational, and prone to be incorrect virtually all the time. It is not an advised investigatory course of action, as you are feeling in the dark for something you don't even know is there.

reply to post by dave420


The common thread in your posts is you're trying to kill intuition, claiming it's irrational, nay a pathology. Get this into your head, if you can: Intuition is the subconscious processing of vast amounts of information by the brain. There is nothing irrational or ilogical about it. Sure, the results are probabilistic, and, as anything, could be wrong. But I could be here two weeks pointing out where the classical authoritive science model you want to cram down everyone's throat has been wrong in the past, despite the "evidence", because in essence it's the same mechanism, and falible. We can't always have evidence and proof, a lot of the time we function on a best guess basis. And most of the time, thanks to the value of intuition, we get things right. My warning on chemtrails stands on it's own merit.

You're whole position in this thread is posturing, and sorry if I offend, I don't buy it. I don't buy the hype about the authority of science, although I do think the method is important in building a knowledge framework, we can't cristalise in the process. If everyone thought like you did humanity would still be eating raw food because there is no evidence it could be cooked. Ironically we would probably be healthier, but that's another thread...

Originally posted by dave420
And that smoke will not even reach the ground, but drift around in the air and eventually dissipate. Hardly an effective means of contaminating a specific part of the ground (or even country).

See? Now that's typical... you demand proof of trails OTHER than contrails and when I show you one you change the subject to poisoning the masses. You generalize everything into your belief pattern.

Since I have not been able to prove yet what they are doing, for all I know protecting the atmosphere from the sun or creating a HAARP friendly environment are also possibilities

It seems that the anti chemtrail crowd seems to be pushing the poisoning aspect more than the believers

:shk:

Put a single drum in the water supply of a major city, and there you have a much more effective way of contaminating a specific population.

Such anti social ideas.... Maybe we should have DHS run a check on you...

reply to post by zorgon


We know what those smoke trails are. They are not contrails, and they are not intended to be anything other than a visual display. I'm not changing the subject - it's the chemtrailers who change the subject (as to what chemtrails are, what they are for, who's doing it, and why).

And no, HAARP has nothing to do with this. HAARP's effects are very, very, VERY limited indeed. Its function is very well-known to the public.

I'm not in the US, so the DHS can go take a running jump. Plus that is a FAR better way to spread chemicals among a population than spraying from 30,000ft where the chemicals would travel for thousands of miles in any direction.

reply to post by Zepherian


I just want evidence. You have none. No chemtrailer does. All they seem to have is an innate misunderstanding of what a contrail is, and what happens in the atmosphere. They couple that with documents describing spraying chemicals in fundamentally different fashion (the only similarity being is chemicals being released from a plane - the altitudes, speeds, effectiveness, chemical composition, etc. all different).

I don't have any authority in science, barring a high-school education. Which, funnily enough, is all that's needed to realise contrails explain every strange "chemtrail" anyone has seen in the sky as being a contrail.

Originally posted by dave420
We know what those smoke trails are. They are not contrails,

THANK YOU

reply to post by dave420


No, you want to have last post on a thread full of external links, derailed by you and your kind, so that people are missguided into thinking there is no evidence.

If I linked you externally, experience tells me the material would be rejected, the thread would be hijacked by two or three clones of you dragging the topic from the discussion of said evidence, and we'd be back where we started.

My evidence is my testimony, and it is true. It is corroborated by dozens of solid links, as solid as they can be when we're talking about a covert operation in all likelihood, and you're just playing debunker, just playing the "give me evidence" game, which is ok over one or two posts, but your insistance betrays your intentions.

You weasel around this, but your posts are all the same, and you have added nothing to the discussions.

If ATS has serious moderation I suggest it start figuring out ways to deal with these weasels derailing threads, because if you don't the same suspicion I have for them will be atributed to you too. And I think like your average ATS conspiracy theorist, my opinion won't be isolated.

As I have posted before, I think that the chemtrail issue is a done deal and ATS should take a stand and actually deny ignorance, not hide behind an empty slogan, however, if you fine folks at ATS are unwilling to go that far, you should at least address the ad hoc debunkers derailling this thread. They are easy to spot, they post a negative opinion ad nauseam in the face of any and all argument or external link, often without time to even review it.

reply to post by Zepherian


We've been over this before. Your testimony, no matter how compelling to you, is not proof of ANYTHING other than you claiming to have experienced it. That's it. Unless you have a mass spectrometer in each eye and repeatedly sampled the contrails and found substantial strange chemicals, there is no way your testimony means squat. I'm sorry if your ego places your own experiences above actual physical data, but that is your problem. You will repeatedly have problems with people requiring something a bit more concrete than your gut feelings before accepting something is going on.

You think it's a done deal, but no evidence on the face of the planet agrees with you. It's a gut-feeling. It's a guess. It's paranoia. It's irrational.

And your call to deny ignorance when you clearly are ignorant of aircraft-induced condensation and atmospheric conditions is, well, laughable.

My posts ARE all the same - I'm asking you to verify your claims with actual evidence. I assume if someone is going to say "this happens - believe me" then they have evidence for it. If you don't, that is not my problem, but squarely yours. If you are believing in things for no rational reason, don't be surprised when rational people "LOL! WUT?" you when you start pouring your guesswork out and frame it as the truth.

So here we go again. Here's the basic rundown of a chemtrail thread:

believer - Chemtrails are REAL! I saw them in the sky!
rational person - Do you have any evidence?
believer - I know what I saw!!!
rational person - That's not evidence - that's your opinion. Human senses are easy to trick, and unless you know everything in the world and are 100% accurate in your perception, which no-one in the history of the world has been, that is open to debate
believer - You are a disinfo agent! You don't want to know the truth! You are in on it!
rational person - No, I just need evidence before I believe something. Just like I need evidence the computer I'm buying is an actual computer, or the drugs my doctor gave me will actually help.
Rinse. Repeat.

I'm not derailing the thread. This thread is about how chemtrailers think they can perceive everything in perfect accuracy, and know everything that goes on in the sky. That is clearly not true (as it is for everyone), so there is nothing to derail. Just as if I started a thread on what I think Bigfoot's favourite sandwiches are, people saying "but there's no evidence Bigfoot even exists" are not derailing it - they are merely drawing attention to my assumptions.

If you had actual evidence, and not just your opinion, you might have a case. As it is, you have nothing of the sort - just wild guesses and an obvious lack of knowledge of what happens at altitude when you mix hot jet fuel exhaust with cold air.

reply to post by zorgon


Yes - they are smoke trails. I guess the Blue Angels are the vanguard of the NWO, and the Red Arrows are their British counterparts!

They are not the same thing as contrails. They are not the same as the hypothetical chemtrails, either, as they serve no purpose other than draw a line in the sky indicating where a plane has been.

You really want to believe in chemtrails, even if there is no evidence, don't you?

Where there's smoke there's fire!



*sprays zorgon with some harmless DDT*



wZn

Originally posted by Zepherian
No, you want to have last post on a thread full of external links, derailed by you and your kind, so that people are missguided into thinking there is no evidence.

If I linked you externally, experience tells me the material would be rejected, the thread would be hijacked by two or three clones of you dragging the topic from the discussion of said evidence, and we'd be back where we started.

My evidence is my testimony, and it is true. It is corroborated by dozens of solid links, as solid as they can be when we're talking about a covert operation in all likelihood, and you're just playing debunker, just playing the "give me evidence" game, which is ok over one or two posts, but your insistance betrays your intentions.

IMHO - solid evidence is peer reviewed evidence. let's say the powerful and rich control all the media and peer reviewed publications in the US. but there are hundreds of other countries which have scientific journals. i can't honestly believe they are all controlled and none would publish a valid study.

Originally posted by Zepherian
If ATS has serious moderation I suggest it start figuring out ways to deal with these weasels derailing threads, because if you don't the same suspicion I have for them will be atributed to you too. And I think like your average ATS conspiracy theorist, my opinion won't be isolated.

so if someone doesn't agree with you - censor him or ban him from your world (forum). this sounds just like the thing you're blaming the current system for - yet you're not willing to give others the option to have a different opinion than yours... how are you better than they are?

i would say - no matter how hard one believes in conspiracy - you can't wish away the principles of physics - hot water vapor and very cold air at low pressures will expand a lot fast and freeze very fast...

as i said before - i can accept that the military has cloud seeding and similar stuff - on a small scale. but on a large scale i think you may want to start calculating the volume of material needed to seed the entire planet - or even only the western world. add to that the fuel used up, the energy invested, the people and infrastructure. the cost would be more than even the US can afford.