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: 7
43
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:44 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChemBreather
Nice responce Defcon
, but your links dont exist.

Its a re-porst of an old post I made. Express Jet obviously took their training manual down (maybe because I used it in a post
) but you might be able to find another online somewhere. They still all work the same way though, and the truck just does not hold enough chemicals to do what that Mechanic claims. Besided this, there are a lot more then two people who work lav service at each airport, as its a cabin service job, and each airlines either has its own cabin service personnel or uses a contractor.

But maybe a more important lesson from that Mechanic Post is that there are those out there who outright lie to try and say this is a real conspiracy when its not. As I said that story has been around since the early 90's and might even be the origin of the Chemtrail Hoax.

[edit on 3/16/2009 by defcon5]



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by fooffstarr
 


I've done more than show proof of chemtrails - you can search my profile for the link - I don't do deniers work for them - it is a drain.

The chemtrails are real - the OP continuously starts these same propaganda threads every second day?

I think this is referred to as flooding. I don't think you should be able to REPEAT the same lies time after time.

He says he is a meterologist - well if he has nothing to hide why does he not tell us his real name and where he really works... I saw a mod on another thread basically out a meterologist for his stance on these real chemtrails and in public view spelled out his name.

wZn

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

Please address the issue at hand and refrain from attacking fellow members.

Furthermore, ATS values the anonymity it offers its members. Demanding that a fellow member identify themselves goes against the spirit of this site.


[edit on 3/16/2009 by maria_stardust]



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmenStop
The OP is wrong. He is correct in explaining what contrails are, but he is ignoring chem trails. I watch jets fly over all the time, some leave trails that go away in a few minutes (those are contrails) then some stay all day and make clouds (those are chem trails). The funny thing is with their chem trails you can see they start just above the city then they go all the way across then they stop. the plains don't land the trails are in different areas. How come they only happen over the populated areas, and when they leave those ares they go away.

This is just another attempt at covering up what is going on. The German Air force admitted that they are spreading filaments to control the weather. Our government is doing the same. But don't let them fool you, they are doing more than just that. Operation Clover Leaf has four parts to it. W heather control is only one.


No, you're wrong. There is a ton of evidence, in this thread alone, to explain "chemtrails." Post pictures of these trails that start and stop exactly over populated areas. Go on. Didn't think so
And even THAT could be explained anyway.....difference in air temp directly above the city/town....more pollutants directly above the city/town. Those are just the first two that spring to mind.

Yes, some countries have experimented with spraying stuff into the atmosphere to alter the weather. No. there is not a global, chemtrail making conspiracy. Somebody standing on the ground saying "ohhh look a chemtrail" cannot argue against airline industry employees, pilots, scientists and meteorologists - who all bring CREDIBLE, first-hand experience and expertise to the subject. You, standing there, gawping up at the sky, simply does not even come close to being an expert opinion.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 

Sure:
B-17 WWII
B-17 WWII


STS-036 February 28, 1990
STS-30 May 4, 1989
STS-30 May 4, 1989
STS-30 May 4, 1989
STS-27 December 2, 1988
STS-27 December 2, 1988
STS-09 November 28, 1983

I can keep this up all day long if need be...
So much for Operation Cloverleaf, eh?

LOL -- like I said, BESIDES the typical debunker photos of WW II piston-engine bombers spewing massive amounts of particulates.

Nothing but STS space photos?

How about JUST ONE film, TV program or commercial shot between 1921 and 1998?

That shouldn't be too hard, should it?



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


But yet, with no proof except hearsay, you are telling everyone that they are spraying us for every reason from making us sick, to blocking global warming. You have never managed to show a single REAL sprayer aircraft except the ONE NKC-135 that sprays water on other planes. And you expect everyone to believe you. The biggest argument for the existance of chemtrails is "Look up! They look different than contrails!" I've been looking at contrails since I was a kid, and have never seen anything that looks different than a contrail.


You keep slapping the 'no proof' around, I post proof, you say it is no good becaus 'you' dont believe in chemtrails, that is why.plain and simple.

Here is another Rense post, I dont care if you believe it or not, an Ph.D. should mean something.
Rense.com
From source


2. Bronchitis, flu-like symptoms, and pneumonia (now at epidemic rates). These are not responding to the usual antibiotics [perhaps in part because of overuse for minor medical illnesses and, also, because it may not be the kind of pneumonia physicians are used to seeing]. "The EPA reports that sub-micron particles bypass lung filters and enter the blood stream, triggering high blood pressure that can cause heart attack within two hours of inhalation. Researchers document 'a significant increase' in the number of stroke victims when PM [particulate matter] pollutant levels rise."(5) Particulate matter air pollution is dangerous with those who have chronic lung diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD, which includes bronchitis and emphysema].


This is an news paper article .
News paper article

[edit on 16-3-2009 by ChemBreather]

[edit on 16-3-2009 by ChemBreather]



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Here is a chat answer from *another* worried person,
from another forum:


posted 10-07-2002
Chem 11 I'm with you. (Haze)

Start at the top.
LOOK UP. Explain what is seen.
Explain what the red powder substance is in my bird bath.
Explain what the very fine strands hanging from my trees and telephone wire, bushs etc, are.
Explain Why the doctors are at a loss to explain why so many people have breathing problems
such as asthma etc.
Explain why we cannot get this subject reported on in National papers.
Explain why this topic is so high on the debunkers agenda if there is no substance to the
claims (backed with evidence) by so many people.
The fact that we ARE being sprayed is not in question, Why and what with, is.

There is more than one answer to each question.

Normal contrails are NOT the answer to either.

I do not get involved in debates with debunkers I know they know, or they would not debunk,
so I do not preach to the converted.

However several people are reading about chemtrails, talking about chemtrails, and looking up,
to see with their own eyes. this will go on and on and on.

The chemtrails are not about to stop.
and nor is the debunking or the debunkers.
-However the gap is growing between the aware and the unaware, and it can only get bigger.
(100 monkeys and all that)


That seems a seriously made study:
www.chemtrailcentral.com...
And one result is ?:



Summary of Results
Additionally it was discovered that the jets that were responsible for leaving highly persistent trails that last for hours did not ever appear on Flight Explorer and were
documented for 8 separate instances, including one instance with two jets in formation.


As you can see here, no evidence.
Just stuff to think about.

Blue skies.

[edit on 2009/3/16 by C-JEAN]



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ChemBreather
 


Hello! I admire your stance on this subject of chemtrails being real.

If I could offer you any advice, and to others out there hesitating to post on chemtrails. Don't be put off by the "usual suspects". They have an agenda and are simply doing what is asked of them.

They will try to anger you and get emotional response out of you, which in turn takes away from the truth you/we bring forth. Don't fall into that trap.

With ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL the PROOF, whistle blowers, insiders, scientific proof, AND government admission - let alone what YOU and I see up in the skies that we NEVER saw only a decade ago - we know. We truly know. Question is - what do we do about it?

wZn



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by GoldenFleece
 

Sure:
B-17 WWII
B-17 WWII


STS-036 February 28, 1990
STS-30 May 4, 1989
STS-30 May 4, 1989
STS-30 May 4, 1989
STS-27 December 2, 1988
STS-27 December 2, 1988
STS-09 November 28, 1983

I can keep this up all day long if need be...
So much for Operation Cloverleaf, eh?

LOL -- like I said, BESIDES the typical debunker photos of WW II piston-engine bombers spewing massive amounts of particulates.

Nothing but STS space photos?

How about JUST ONE film, TV program or commercial shot between 1921 and 1998?

That shouldn't be too hard, should it?


Nope, not too hard at all actually...




posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

LOL -- like I said, BESIDES the typical debunker photos of WW II piston-engine bombers spewing massive amounts of particulates.

Nothing but STS space photos?

How about JUST ONE film, TV program or commercial shot between 1921 and 1998?

That shouldn't be too hard, should it?


Out of interest, why didn't those ones count? Are you suggesting that someone added all those contrails to the bomber imagery or something?

Let me guess, all these must be fake and not count too:
picasaweb.google.com...#
Even the ones over London during the blitz, sure.

Oh, and this one isn't WW2 bombers, it's fighters. From the ground. But like I said already, I want to know why they don't count.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   
A quick reply from me, as I'm not going to waste much time argueing in another redundant Oz (or essan, or wheedwhacker or chadwickus or a few more) thread.

1) Don't accept the words of these debunkers. Just go outside and look up if you live near any major or medium metropolitan area in the western world. You will, sooner rather than later see spraying. Correlate with available commercial aircraft flightpath data. This is something everyone can see for themselves, if they happen to know what they are looking at.

2) Whatever these people are doing it is accompanied by a disinformation effort. So if chemtrails are true, and I personally have experienced them and know they are, then you can expect people, in high places or presenting themselves as being from high places, to lie about them.

3) Chemtrails have been admitted in various locations, there are many threads on the subject. It is now like 911, anyone in their right mind can see what really happened, but there are powerfull interests that have to lie about it for their own survival. Chemtrails are much the same situation, it's just more evil from elitist powermongers, with some sort of agenda or agendas. It's a complex world, I personally don't expect these things to have just one reason for being, they are just another expression of science gone mad, something which I think a lot of you out there see.

So, in short, you are being lied to.

Oz, on the offshot chance that you're legitimate and just missguided, let me tell you sir that I was brutally hit by chemtrails a few days ago, and can see that they have increased their activity. We can't have more than a couple clear days without spraying being done, leaving us with a greyish goo of cloud cover and many ill effects along the population. So, if you're legitimate, please reconsider. And if you're a shill, well, you're going to be a victim of all this too, so that will be your own punishment.

Peace.

Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory – Please Review This Link.

Please address the issue at hand and refrain from attacking fellow members.

[edit on 3/16/2009 by maria_stardust]



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zepherian


1) Don't accept the words of these debunkers. Just go outside and look up if you live near any major or medium metropolitan area in the western world. You will, sooner rather than later see spraying. Correlate with available commercial aircraft flightpath data. This is something everyone can see for themselves, if they happen to know what they are looking at.


Why do you think what you see is "spraying". Why don't you think it is just normal contrails formed under the right atmospheric conditions?



2) Whatever these people are doing it is accompanied by a disinformation effort. So if chemtrails are true, and I personally have experienced them and know they are, then you can expect people, in high places or presenting themselves as being from high places, to lie about them.


How have you "experienced them"?



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ChemBreather
 


Because your "proof" isn't collected in a scientific manner, among other things. Or are things that are easily disproven. Collecting air samples in an air filter and having them tested doesn't prove anything, except that there's a source of that chemical in the region.

I have yet to see anything in any of these threads that would sway me towards believing in chemtrails. My fiancee has read the chemtrail threads and listened to both sides' proof and she doesn't believe in them either. And she doesn't know much about planes.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by sensfan
 


Just search for my name on ATS with chemtrails and you'll see the threads I've participated in. I'm not going to repeat the whole song and dance routine again.

Don't take mine or their word for anything is the message. This is something easy to spot, and it's just part of the pyramid of lies I think everyone now is experiencing first hand.

Just phone your local airports and ask what those planes are, it's not hard to do. Don't trust the people who tell you something isn't true, usually they have interest in you perceiving it as false. Those that tell you something is true could also have an agenda, but at least here you can confirm it for yourself.

It's dozens of planes spraying unnatural cloud cover on a regular basis. It's a tough secret to hide if people bother to look at it.

I suspect getting people not to bother is the intention of threads such as these. And my message is LOOK. Don't be a sheep munching at the grass, look at what they, whoever they may be, are doing, as it's in plain sight now.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
LOL -- like I said, BESIDES the typical debunker photos of WW II piston-engine bombers spewing massive amounts of particulates.

Those aren't particulate. particulates are smoky dark streaks. As a matter of fact you should check the second photo in that batch as it shows the fingers of a Vortex effected contrail that is typically pointed out as being a chemtrail by believers.


Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Nothing but STS space photos?

An excellent source to check as those are old file footage from the shuttle cameras, I pulled them from the NASA Archive.


Originally posted by GoldenFleece
How about JUST ONE film, TV program or commercial shot between 1921 and 1998?
That shouldn't be too hard, should it?

Actually it is because many movies stop filming when a aircraft is in the shot, or when they start to get cloud cover. Movies want a “specific look” and they do not want air traffic in the shot, so they will suspend shooting, or re-shoot that section of footage, especially in period pieces. But here are some more movies bloopers with contrails:

Back to the Future III (1990):

During the sequence with the Native Americans chasing the Delorean in the beginning, in one shot looking up at the sky you can see contrails from a plane, obviously not around in 1885.


Old Westerns:

I recall seeing contrails in the sky a couple of times on the old spaghetti westerns. Man, and to think it would take America West another 120 years to get a hub in Arizona.


The classic one, supposedly, was in a Wild West film and in the scene where the local Indians are attacking a wagon train; you can spot the contrail of a jet that had just flown over a few moments before the shot was taken. If goofs and guffaws set you chuckling, have a look at the Movie mistakes site as it shows goofs, bloopers, pictures, quotes and trivia from thousands of movies.


Maverick (1994):


Contrail visible in the sky behind Joseph while the missionaries, Coop and Anabelle are watching Bret parlay with the Indians.


SpaceBalls (1987):

When Lone Star and the princess are arguing in the desert about the luggage, you'll notice that there is a long stream of cloud in the sky clearly indicating that a jet had recently passed over prior to filming.


Patton (1970):

After acting as a traffic cop to direct two crossing columns of tanks and trucks, Patton steps off the barrel and goes to talk to Bradley. While talking to Bradley, a large jet contrail is visible in the sky behind Patton. Military use of jets in WWII came too late, and played virtually no role in the course of the war, let alone its outcome. It is unlikely there would have been a jet contrail visible in the sky at that time of the war.

Shall I continue with this?

Just run a Search on Movie Blooper Contrail, Movie Mistake Contrail, Movie Blooper Aircraft, Movie Mistake Aircraft.

Here is more historical military footage with contrails/chemtrails:

Watch the contrails behind the B-52's and chase aircraft..



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow They have an agenda and are simply doing what is asked of them.


Proof?

If you are going to label anyone that disagrees with you some kind of agent then please back it up, or it is slander.

Once again. By attacking the posters themselves, you are really hurting your own cause.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Chemicals released by aircraft don’t always leave a chemtrail. These planes are flying at lower altitude. You would know if it was a chemtrail if it the weather was warm at a lower altitude or higher if they were simply dumping fuel. If dumping fuel it would definitely dissipate before hitting the ground. Am I off topic? Are you trying to debunk chemtrails? If so any particular chemical?



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Infadel
 


the purpose is to refract light out of the atmosphere, which they say will help counter global warming.


If that's all it is, then why wouldn't they admit it?


when aluminum enters the brain it can do various things,


Yes, I read that too. And every source I found it in said that it was controversial and theoretical, not proven.


the square aluminum molecules destroyed his kedneys so we had to put him down.


Ok, now this totally makes no sense. If Aluminum Hydroxide breaks down in the body into something that destroys the kidneys, why would they give it to dogs suffering from kidney failure to help heal them??

 


Why do certain people keep posting evidence and scientific explanations for there being no such thing as chemtrails? Because they're disinfo agents and shills? Or, how about because they are people who know the truth and don't like people being scared of things that aren't real?

Why do you tell your children there is no boogeyman?

Why do people like me consistently debunk internet hoaxes from all the way back to the "good times" virus to spiders in airline toilets to kidney thieves to the infamous email tax?

Because we don't want people to be afraid of things there is no reason to be afraid of!

There are plenty of things going on that we should be concerned about, it's just senseless to make people afraid of ordinary contrails and meteorological phenomena.

Can't you understand people who KNOW telling you that substances sprayed from cruising altitudes will not reach ground level with sufficient accuracy or with sufficient concentration to accomplish anything?

Whatever you're seeing or smelling in your air and your trees is more likely to have been blown on the winds from some industrial plant than to have fallen from airplanes in the sky.

I'm afraid of a lot of things these days, even for the few years I probably have left to me, but I'm not going to waste my time being afraid of the boogeyman - or chemtrails.

[edit on 16-3-2009 by Heike]



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join