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.

 

Why the Chemtrail Conspiracy is Unplausible, and Meteorologically Innacurate

page: 25
43
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 


Thanks for being so gentle Mr Penny....

Sorry Mr Penny but you are incorrect... My first chemtrail was one I saw and questioned and then looked up to find out what the hell it was.... It didn't look right and I researched and found out that most contrails occurred at 30,000ft or above when the engine would heat the moisture in the atmosphere to 50degrees difference etc.... Then I said to myself... why isn't that trail leaving the skies after 30secs like contrails are suppose to do and why is it dispersing and creating a cloud. Then I started noticing on clear days when these planes would leave trails behind in a row, not following the normal flight paths of the aircrafts of yesteryear, thereby dispersing and covering the whole sky above from horizon to horizon sometimes. I know that normal contrails don't do that.... contrails with particulates and poisons do though... they are called chemtrails....

***ADDED**** I must add that I also had the ability to ask Meteorological Technicians that I worked with and that were at the station I was posted to. This led me to visit them at other stations and learn their trade and also talk candidly to them about the REAL chemtrails and why they are not contrails....

That's why I really hope the some people have the ability I did to talk to some people in the know that are not afraid of losing their pension for voicing their concerns about the governments policy of killing it people. They like the others would not speak out in public for fear of retribution and in the military you have an Information Officer who is the person anyone talks to for the "Truth".


Information about these poisonous clouds are on numerous websites that promote the safety and livelihood of the human population. I for one know that if I frequent websites that provide such data, it only increases the knowledge that is being spread about the web that promotes unrealistic views of our world. Why would people want to believe info from a website like contrail when they have all the proof they need in the skies? And when they see they are not normal then they can look up what they are seeing and verify all the correct data on websites like this.




Rgds


[edit on 19-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

[edit on 19-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]




posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


You can think whatever you like. But, just between you and me, your world view looks to be taken directly from the Middle Ages.

I can look at the sky and "prove" the Earth stands still and the sun revolves around the Earth.

So where did you do your research? I'm curious as to how someone could question things they see in the sky, research them, and fail to stumble across the reams of meteorological data that explains persistent contrails. If you knew nothing about "chemtrails" when starting your research, how could you have arrived at "chemtrails", given the term is a child of the Internet?

Did you not do your research on the Internet? And believe what you read on the Web?



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 


I will not be baited into stating that my information came from the internet and that the web formed my opinion.... I was in the military for 26yrs and spent most years doing lots of research on various subjects, part of my job... I know how data works and how wx data works also. As I stated I worked with the mettechs and also the Seismologists of the stations and learned lots of new trades on my days off. I was quite the knowledgeable person on our station and was frequently called for backup when even some of those jobs I didn't do officially needed assistance. I'm proud of my knowledge and the levels I've attained... Reverse engineering various pieces of electronics gear etc....

I do not get led astray easily when it comes to data... You see I've been studying NLP for about 28yrs now, just after I joined the military, and I've learned how to tell information that is directed at steering the listener or the reader away from the truth. After 28yrs you become quite good at it and it becomes second nature.

As I stated in post above... I worked with these guys and I believe the over 100 years experience of the gentlemen that I worked with as being truth since they proved it to me over the years.

Rgds



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


I am at a point where I don't know what to say next. If I tell you I ate chicken for lunch today, you would tell me that I was wrong and the government sprayed my cheseburger to make it look like chicken. I will walk away and admit defeat. Not defeat in the sense that I lost, but in the sense that you won't listen. Go and warn everyone that the government is sparying them with chemicals that do nothing to change the way things are or that they will turn them into zombies. I don't care. And by the way, there are reptilian overlords who shapeshift into regular looking people and climb into planes and spray fairy dust on you. Do not believe anyone who tells you different. They are all disinfo agents. I am their leader. You should go have a celebration with the parakletos.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


That's fine....no "fishing" intended. So, where did you do your research? Although, to be honest, your answer sure does seem to indicate that your information and opinion came from the Internet.

There are at least two experienced meteorologists here giving you useful, relevant information. Why is what they tell you less authoritative than some "techs" you met in the military?



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Mason mike
 


Thank your for your comedy... It was comedy wasn't it?

I'm glad you are walking away and admitting defeat... I will continue to tell the truth about chemtrails and make people aware of what to look for to prove it to themselves they are being sprayed. I think the average person looking at this thread already has the ability to look at my data and see for themselves that I've shown everything to be valid on the chemtrails side of things. They don't need to know how science works to understand they are seeing planes spraying poison out there arse ends.... Only common sense..

Rgds



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Books lie also mr Zaphod... Some pictures from books are on the web too.


So a book from 1984 is lying about the pictures in it? Clouds of the World was published then.

How about a book from 1976? A Colour Guide to Clouds was published then.

So either they knew about the whole chemtrail conspiracy then and were lying, or they were telling the truth about when and where the pictures were taken.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 


Why do I believe somebody I met and worked with in the military compared to a couple of guys that have an Avatar that may indicate that they know something of wx?

"I am a former president of the US. They could be saying I'm dead" I made a statement that I can't justify... do you believe it? Is it possible to believe this statement from me without some type of proof? I really hope you said yes...

Rgds
**Added*** Bold portion to help with some thinking...

[edit on 19-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


But you already said you spent 26 yrs in the military. None of our living former presidents can claim that. So it's false. See how easy that was? Based on fact too.

OzWeatherman and Essan both have never claimed to be something else, then claimed to be meterologists.....

So ignore what they claim as their credentials....how have you decided to discount and ignore the information they've provided? Just ignore who presented the information for a moment and tell me why you have decided the information is not valid.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


As I've stated earlier as other posts have also done... The governments around the world have admitted to spraying poisons from planes above cities on the populations of their own people for testing purposes... So, knowing this and maybe seeing pictures during the 70s when they look similar maybe an indication that someone took a picture during a time when they were spraying those chemicals the government admits to spraying. Find out the dates and times of their spraying and then find out when the chemicals were sprayed and you'll have your proof. I don't need to find out if maybe a handful of pictures are made in this way or that. I know that the millions.... I SAY MILLIONS of pictures that are available to anyone now prove.. PROVE that particulates and other things are being sprayed above our heads and falling to the ground. It doesn't matter what the weather is like up above, these particulates will fall and get to the ground. Thinking any other way doesn't make sense... If something is dropped from a plane it must reach the ground eventually... even water vapor will eventually become water in a lake or stream or puddle.

Rgds



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


The airborne tests in England were carried out at an altitude of 500 feet. During the Vietnam war, Agent Orange was released just above tree top level (about 150 feet) because above those levels it was not effective or controlled enough.

Can you produce evidence of such testing or dispersals above 20,000 feet?

[edit on 3/19/2009 by Phage]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
It doesn't matter what the weather is like up above, these particulates will fall and get to the ground. Thinking any other way doesn't make sense...


It's where they get to the ground that's important.


Ah the hell with it......



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 


Who said I was living as far you know? They may have staged my death...



Just ignore who presented the information for a moment and tell me why you have decided the information is not valid.


I ignore all the people who present information... I do not judge a persons thread on their avatar or title... I will take the information and go with it to find out for myself... Always have and always will.... I may find something that is interesting and then make a comment etc but I won't believe it being fact until I view evidence pointing to it....

So, in answer to your last question, I don't believe the data that's been presented because it really is fluff data. They are great numbers that show they have different temperatures at different heights etc. But they don't explain why we see what we see in the millions of photos provided of the unidentified aircraft that are spraying chemicals along flight paths that are not normally used in some areas. They have photos of aircraft turning and then laying the rest of the chemicals a few thousand feet away from the other... Normal aircraft don't just turn around in mid flight and lay row upon row of chemtrail and then leave. Most aircraft have a destination to go to and want to get there. I could provide the pictures again if you wish....

Rgds


[edit on 19-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
I ignore all the people who present information...


Okay...I knew there was an answer. That explains it.

Dude, you are a piece of work. At least you're having fun.

[edit on 19-3-2009 by MrPenny]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 


THis is why you and the rest of the contrail crew are having a rough time understanding what is going on... You are only able to read certain parts and then you read the rest into what you read...




I do not judge a persons thread on their avatar or title... I will take the information and go with it to find out for myself... Always have and always will.... I may find something that is interesting and then make a comment etc but I won't believe it being fact until I view evidence pointing to it....


This text followed what you quoted me as saying and it amplifies what you used out of context or added to it to come up with your own meaning. I don't do that... I'm able to look at anothers work and see if its correct.

Hell, I even found one error in a post of someone who is believing in chemtrails on this thread... But I didn't notice that you guys found it... that shows that most of you don't tend to follow the valid data links...

***ADDED*** At least I'm having fun? I find this frightening and sickening that I would have to actually do what I'm doing now to wake some up. People are smarter than you think and I know this... They will see the truth but its still sickening what some are doing here...


Rgds


[edit on 19-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

[edit on 19-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thank you Phage for your question but I do believe that an answer would be classified...

Do you really think you know all the data of how and when agent orange( and the other chemicals they kept secret and still don't know about officially) was sprayed because the governments decided to let you know? We currently have ex-soldiers fighting to get compensation from a government that has finally admitted they intentionally did this. Will we know all the information we need to know about how they spray various chemicals and viruses and nanotechnology against us humans? Not for another few years till some of those in on it get a conscience... Just like in the past....



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPenny
 





It's where they get to the ground that's important.


Why is this all of a sudden important? If they are spraying to have the sky covered with clouds then do they care where the particulates fall after they do their job? Obviously not in a world with mad scientists that don't give a damn about the environment...

If the purpose is to spread a virus across the population and the majority gets pushed by the winds away from a major city, does that mean it didn't work or that it was useless?? No, even if one person is affected that virus can spread... Like the flu.... Or maybe Morgellons...
**Added**
It may fall well outside of a city center but there are people living in the outsides of cities and they have been getting sick as well with indications of different things that point to the same spraying as what is being done over the populous areas. They also travel into the cities, thereby spreading anything they may have been infected with via chemtrails.


But I'm sure they're using the WMO Wx models that are from the Upper Air readings every 12hrs to help in finding out where their poisons will land on a given population. I imagine they're becoming quite good at it by now...


Rgds




[edit on 19-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]

[edit on 19-3-2009 by AllTiedTogether]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zepherian
Absence of proof is not proof of absence in any case, as you well put it, you can't prove a negative.


Absence of proof is not proof of absence, however, there is a sort of standard that most fringe and conspiracy theories follow, more or less. In order for the reality of Bigfoot to be accepted, we need physical evidence - a body, blood, hair with DNA, etc. The same is true for chemtrails - we'll need physical evidence. If we're ever going to get past all the sniping, we've all got to concede one simple starting point:

Pictures are not proof.

No matter how many pictures there are of uncharacteristic persistent contrails, a picture can not prove the composition of a contrail or cloud.

Why can't we set that particular argument aside as being pointless? 25 pages and it's gotten us nowhere... Contrailers, please concede that contrails are heavier and more persistent today than they were 20 or 30 years ago, and Chemtrailers, please concede that there were persistent contrails prior to 1998 (as proved by newspaper articles and pictures which have been posted in this thread), and that therefore not ALL persistent contrails are chemtrails. Then we can move past the pictures!


you will realise the debunking follows a pattern and rejects information and sources beyond reasonable doubt.


Assuming that your fellow ATS member has a nefarious agenda or is denying something they know to be true on purpose is counterproductive and is not at all helpful or conducive to constructive debate. Why is it so hard to accept that there are intelligent people who simply, genuinely don't believe in chemtrails?

Remember the Georgia Bigfoot in the freezer? Early on, there were people in the ATS thread about it saying that it was a suit, and those people took plenty of abuse and were accused of being disinfo agents and etc. In the end they were right, but as I recall it they didn't get any apologies nor does anyone seem to have learned anything much from that incident. Most of the time the people who have the opposite point of view from you and argue for their "side" are sincere! Can we not get over pointing fingers and making snide claims about agendas? For the sake of constructive debate, let's pretend (if you can't convince yourself to believe it) that we're all honest, sincere people here with no hidden agendas. Can we do that?

 



Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
website like here,


Okay, one of those sites you posted is someone's blog, and the other is just pictures. However, the first one - the one included above - is interesting and does have some evidence. OZ, Essan, and some of you other Contrailers - how about addressing the evidence on that site such as the chemical analysis reports, reports of illnesses, and maybe even the pictures since a couple of them look odd even to me?

What about this?

According to a report published 8/28/06 in The Idaho Observer recent lab reports found the following in samples of chemtrail fall-out:
bacteria including anthrax and pneumonia, 9 chemicals including acetylcholine chloride, 26 heavy metals including arsenic, lead, barium, mercury and uranium, 4 molds and fungi, 7 viruses, 2 cancers, 2 vaccines and 2 sedatives.
(from above quoted site)

If that stuff didn't come from "chemtrails," then where did it/could it have come from, and why is the newspaper saying that this stuff was found in "chemtrail fallout?" Why would those chemicals and heavy metals be in air samples?

 



Originally posted by AllTiedTogether
I don't have to know science about TNT or bombs to know that if I see a stick of dynamite I shouldn't touch it.


True. But if you saw some powder, would you know whether or not it is explosive? We can recognize a stick of dynamite by looking at it because it is a familiar form. You can't tell what is in a chem/con trail by looking at it! Rainbows show us that water droplets in air can reflect every color of the rainbow (ha, ha), so color doesn't mean anything. Thickness, density, and persistence might mean something, but even if we concede that a particular trail is uncharacteristic and might not be normal, that tells us nothing about what substances it may or may not contain.

Even if we all suddenly said "okay, fine, there are contrails which are sufficiently outside the norm to be something other than plain old water vapor," where would that get us? What would it prove? Nothing!

 


I know that OZ and I are familiar with debate rules because we're ATS "fighters." Do the rest of you know anything about structured debate? (i. e. debates with rules)
The concept I wish to use, specifically, is that of Socratic Questions. SQ's MUST be answered, directly, by the opposing debater and may not be ignored or blown off.

One of the things I'm consistently seeing in this thread is questions and evidence which are ignored by the other side. So, instead of 25 pages of going round and round the same old arguments that apparently some of y'all have been through before even, in other threads, let's try something new.

I'm going to ask a few questions of both sides and request that they be answered. Each person, after answering an SQ directly and honestly, may ASK an SQ that must be answered directly and honestly by the other side.

Okay, here goes:

Chemtrailers:

1. Presumably the folks in charge of the Chemtrail program are human. They have friends and family which are not immune to the effects. Why, then, would they do this knowing that their friends and family would also be harmed?

2. Why are the 'effects' of chemtrails not seen in indicator animal species? (Or, if you say they are, please provide links to evidence of such).

3. What evidence is there that the illnesses and effects of "chemtrail" fallout are not caused by pollution, soil/water contamination from other sources, and ordinary person-to-person transmission?

Contrailers:

1. If the Barium, which is consistently reported at unsafe atmospheric levels, is not coming from "chemtrails," then where else could it be coming from?

2. Please choose one or two of the pictures on this site: Strange Days, Strange Skies and explain what is in the picture if not chemtrails.

3. Many people claim to be getting sick or having their health negatively impacted after seeing "chemtrails." Assuming this is not mass hysteria since thousands of otherwise reasonable people report it, how could ordinary contrails cause illness?

And, as I said in the beginning, let's assume for debate purposes that we are all sincere, honest people with no agendas.

Go ahead and roll your eyes and sigh, but let's try this once ... the results can't be any worse than 25 pages of the same old arguments, insults, name-calling, accusations, and mod scolding, can they?



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Balderdash. Of course there are chemtrails. I have been collecting photos of them for years. Similar to the many photos which are already here on this thread, and all over the web, from all over the U.S., they are obviously planes that are deliberately laying down some type of substance in the skies. These planes are whitish in color, very high up, and are seen across the U.S. They are not passenger planes. My husband and I looked through our telescope one summer night and they were laying down chemtrails behind the night sky and cloud cover. We saw the planes. Saw them! Late at night... I called the local airport regarding these planes laying cross patterns across the skies over our neck of the woods, and was told that there were 'no planes there.' Ahem. But we insisted, 'yes, they are right over our neighborhood laying huge spreading chemtrails in the skies above. Again, they told us 'no, we have no indication of any planes in your area." I mailed photos to our local congressman/woman, with no response. This scene has been repeated countless times over our city, for the past 5-6 years at least. While visiting other cities, my husband and I saw the same thing. Thousands of photos do not lie. What they are laying down is something else entirely; perhaps some type of weather modification, etc. The point that these are routine contrails is nonsensical. All one has to do is look up! I would venture to say that the anti-chemtrail folks are ones in denial.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by AllTiedTogether
 


You know, I have wondered about just going to my local tv station(right up the road from me!) and asking the weather guy about this, and his opinion. But do you think anyone would talk to me? I would love to hear their opinion on this subject. Any tips on how to approach this if any of us want to pursue the same kind of avenue of education you did? Thanks.



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join