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.

 

The Chemtrail Phenomenon

page: 16
20
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mindmelding


Many have reported seeing completely white planes, when seeing chemtrails at a lower altitude. The only white plane I know of are from the UN.


Funnily enough I saw 3 white planes laying down chemtrails just a few hours ago. Twin jets, probably smaller airframes, like 737's, but a bit too far away for me to identify.


So you see white aircraft that look like airliners leaving contrails and it never occurs to you that they might just possibly be airliners which, in most cases are ........ white?



Originally posted by Mindmelding

That is one detail which bothers me too, the lack of whistleblowing pilots. I have two theories...

1) They are military pilots. These won't talk about classified operations for fear of getting thrown in the brig.


Well if they're military then it either means that military pilots fly all commercial airliners or the picture I take of contrails left by commercial airliners which you claim to look identical to chemtrails are not chemtrails.


Originally posted by Mindmelding
reply to post by neformore
 


No, you're not well educated on the topic


I'd say Nef is better educated on the subject than you are since you seem ignnorant of what contrails are and how and why they form and determined not to accept 80 years worth of scientific research into the subject.

A bit of homework for you: pick any 10 and read and learn Then come back and explain to us why what you see cannot be contrails.

Chemtrails may be real. But what you see and claim to be chemtrails are contrails - there is no evidence whatsoever that they are not contrails. And pretending otherwise simply plays into the hands of the chemtrailers (if they exist)

Smoke and mirrors. The illusionist makes sure you look exactly where he want you to look so you miss his sleight of hand. Why does he want you to look at contrails? What's he hiding?

Why are some folk so determined to make us thing that contrails are poisoning us? What are they diverting our attention from? Or maybe they just want to discredit those of us highlighting the real issues about contrails and their effects on weather and climate?

The conspiracy is not always the obvious one.

[edit on 4-6-2009 by Essan]




posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   
I've been hearing conspiracy people (not that I'm NOT one lol) talk about chemtrails for 15 years... how about some real proof! What's in them, what chemicals, what companies/governments are involved? how about even a time-lapse video of one of these 4-hour long chemtrails floating in the sky.

I'm really not convinced. Empirical evidence is NEEDED and not just some pictures of things in the sky that might or might not be contrails...

It's also funny to me that it seems the less evidence the more passionate and angry people become when you stand against them



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by notreallyalive
 



No one asks you to believe anything you don't believe.

I don't come here trying to convince anyone, I come here looking for answers, not fights, but that isn't the way it plays out, is it?



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


No, because you miss one fundamental point. I am a witness and you are a debunker. No amount of talking will get you from this fundamental reality. I am telling you what I saw and nothing you brought up, logical as it seems to you, covers my observations, so I keep telling you you're wrong based on my experiences.

It is not logical for me to abdicate from my experience, which I double check, research, re-experience over time and mull over, just because you come up with logical thought experiment type arguments. It's not that your angle is bad, I used to think in the exact same way as you do now, but reality taught me otherwise.

I trust my own senses more than I trust any attempt at debunking, and any sane and rational person that witnesses and double checks and takes his time to decide what he or her has seen should do so to.

And this without going into the vast amount of chemtrail literature, videos, reports and history which is out there for any serious investigator to consider.

I experienced it and you, Neformore, have not debunked my experience, nor should you even try, it's rude and self centered. You should have listened and, based on your own experiences either believed me or not, something which I would have had no problem with. But no, for some ilogical reason you honestly expect that your mere argumentation will dissuade me from talking about what I saw and how I fit it into reality and change my account to fit your own preconceived notion of what reality is not.

Give me a break.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   
The more I read these chemtrail threads I can't help but wonder:

Do ANY of you, chemtrail proponents, ever cite anything??
Do ANY of you ever show videos?
Do ANY of you ever show chemical analysis?
empirical data??

I haven't seen one single convincing piece of data other than a few pictures that look unusual...

I'm trying to give the idea a chance but y'all are seriously failing the Scientific side of this!



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Two reasons I won't get into your post much:

I don't debate with self proclaimed misanthropists.

I consider your posts, in an even worse manner than Neformore, to be just academic psuedo knowledge. You stick to what you know, you repeat it endlessly and you basically don't accept any evidence to the contrary. I've read you on a few threads and quite frankly don't wan't to waste my time with you. Perhaps, one day you'll actually go outside and see chemtrails, think about it for a while and say "bugger me, I was wrong", but untill then discussing the issue with you would be pointless.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by notreallyalive
The more I read these chemtrail threads I can't help but wonder:

Do ANY of you, chemtrail proponents, ever cite anything??
Do ANY of you ever show videos?
Do ANY of you ever show chemical analysis?
empirical data??

I haven't seen one single convincing piece of data other than a few pictures that look unusual...

I'm trying to give the idea a chance but y'all are seriously failing the Scientific side of this!


You have not read many threads, most of them are full of external links and information, everything from law bills to technical documents to videos of both the operations themselves and even weathermen confirming them.

Posts like yours, which are very frequent, just throw the idea out that there is no evidence and hope it sticks.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Mindmelding
 


Concerning proof vs experience...

I've seen the inside of an alien ship during a few abduction experiences; I really don't try to share that often because it's just "out there" for most people and not provable.

Chemtrails, on the other hand, are something we all can see and experience apparently. If this is so, give us some chemical evidence. I believe you saw trails being laid down - is this dangerous? who knows! Find out and get back to us with some actual evidence of what the trails are.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mindmelding

Originally posted by notreallyalive
The more I read these chemtrail threads I can't help but wonder:

Do ANY of you, chemtrail proponents, ever cite anything??
Do ANY of you ever show videos?
Do ANY of you ever show chemical analysis?
empirical data??

I haven't seen one single convincing piece of data other than a few pictures that look unusual...

I'm trying to give the idea a chance but y'all are seriously failing the Scientific side of this!


You have not read many threads, most of them are full of external links and information, everything from law bills to technical documents to videos of both the operations themselves and even weathermen confirming them.

Posts like yours, which are very frequent, just throw the idea out that there is no evidence and hope it sticks.


So post something!
If you have read lots of these and are a proponent then obviously you have links stored on your computer or favorites.

I watched a 10 minutes video earlier that seemed to be the end-all of proof and wasn't convinced at all.

Bills, laws, and technical info would be most appreciated by many on this thread I assume



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.




Originally posted by Mindmelding
But no, for some ilogical reason you honestly expect that your mere argumentation will dissuade me from talking about what I saw and how I fit it into reality and change my account to fit your own preconceived notion of what reality is not.

Give me a break.


Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. I'm not trying to dissuade you at all. I'm asking questions and trying to learn why you perceive something different to me.

But still I'm left with lines in the sky that look like contrails to me.

I want you to show me the maths on how you can calculate the distance to a moving aircraft from a single fixed point, when all you have is a viewing angle. (In fact I'd really love to see that, seriously, get down and dirty with the trig.).

I want you to tell me what supposedly makes a "chemtrail" look different from a persistant contrail when you could be observing both from 5 miles away.

See, I want to learn. And people learn by asking questions, and getting answers. And science develops because people test theories, and put one set of evidence up against another, and so the theory is modified and develops, or gets rejected.

And yet as soon as the hard questions get asked....



Again, you can't be well versed on the topic because you're wrong.


Educate me. I'm not some dumb sheep. I'm not going to believe you just because you tell me to.

I'm not afraid to be wrong. I've been wrong before.

All I ask is proof and decent explanations over rhetoric and blind alleyways.



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



[edit on 4/6/09 by neformore]



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Spirit Warrior
 


With all of your qualifications I can see why you are hush, hush, either that or you dont understand what's going on here.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by notreallyalive

Bills, laws, and technical info would be most appreciated by many on this thread I assume


The 'bill' is this one.

www.fas.org...

It was re-presented a couple more times but never accepted. Some more info on it here:

contrailscience.com...

Make of it what you will. But importantly it does not say what chemtrails are and provides no evidence at all that chemtrails would be visible, let alone appear identical to contrails .....

(no chemtrail believer has ever provided any explanation as to why they should be visible, nor act and behave identical to contrails, either)



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by notreallyalive

Bills, laws, and technical info would be most appreciated by many on this thread I assume


www.fas.org...
contrailscience.com...


I really appreciate the links!

The fact that "chemtrails" was mentioned in the Bill is interesting, unfortunately at the same time they also mention these:
(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;
(v) laser weapons systems;
(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and
(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.

Pretty sure we don't have extraterrestial weapons or tectonic weapons.

Also, the fact it was mentioned in the Bill is really off, and of a blanket group of possible weapons, due the fact that this Bill focuses on space-based weaponry with a definition of space as:

Section 7 (1) The term `space' means all space extending upward from an altitude greater than 60 kilometers above the surface of the earth and any celestial body in such space.

That's WAAAAAY higher than any plane would be dropping purported chemtrails.

***

I really like to give people the benefit of the doubt. I'd love to see some data on this and find out if we're being harmed. For now though, not my problem...



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Mindmelding
 


Let's keep most of our relevant info away from these guys. We know chemtrails exisit. They can choose to deny, if they wish. It's just another cover-up attempt.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by wonderworld
reply to post by Mindmelding
 


Let's keep most of our relevant info away from these guys. We know chemtrails exisit. They can choose to deny, if they wish. It's just another cover-up attempt.


So you would rather keep relevant information hidden until I believe on faith and join you? Sounds like religion lol! You can keep it.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


Contrails and Chemtrails are not alike. Chemistry doesnt work that way. You get a different moleculur structure, all together with a different result.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   
1953: Joint Army-Navy-CIA experiments are conducted in which tens of thousands of people in New York and San Francisco are exposed to the airborne germs Serratia marcescens and Bacillus glogigii.

In 1953, an odious series of 36 tests was conducted on citizens of Winnipeg in Canada. Our government lied to the Winnipeg mayor, assuring him that the tests were non-toxic and defense-necessary. The actual purpose of these CIA-designed tests was to see how large a percentage of the population could be given chemical-induced cancer.

1953: CIA initiates Project MKULTRA. This is an eleven year research program designed to produce and test drugs and biological agents that would be used for mind control and behavior modification. Six of the subprojects involved testing the agents on unwitting human beings.

1955: The CIA, in an experiment to test its ability to infect human populations with biological agents, releases a bacteria withdrawn from the Army's biological warfare arsenal over Tampa Bay, Fl.
1967: CIA and Department of Defense implement Project MKNAOMI, successor to MKULTRA and designed to maintain, stockpile and test biological and chemical weapons.

1960 and 1970 Altogether, there were 103 tests scheduled between 1960 and 1970, but so far the Pentagon has only confirmed 12 took place. Three of the tests used live nerve agents, one used a live biological agent and one used a stimulant that, while considered harmless at the time, has since been found to be hazardous.

1970: Funding for the synthetic biological agent is obtained under H.R. 15090. The project, under the supervision of the CIA, is carried out by the Special Operations Division at Fort Detrick, the army's top secret biological weapons facility. Speculation is raised that molecular biology techniques are used to produce AIDS-like retroviruses.

1970: United States intensifies its development of ethnic weapons (Military Review, Nov. 1970), designed to selectively target and eliminate specific ethnic groups who are susceptible due to genetic differences and variations in DNA.

Congressional hearings of 1975, 1977 and 1994 confirm in nauseating detail that our illustrious Department of Death has used the American population as hapless guinea pigs since WWII. Rutgers professor Leonard Cole collected from U.S. military records a horrifying list of biological and chemical agents furtively tested on American and Canadian civilian populations.

1977: Senate hearings on Health and Scientific Research confirm that 239 populated areas had been contaminated with biological agents between

1949 and 1969. Some of the areas included San Francisco, Washington, D.C., Key West, Panama City, Minneapolis, and St. Louis.
1987: Department of Defense admits that, despite a treaty banning research and development of biological agents, it continues to operate research facilities at 127 facilities and universities around the nation.

1994, U.S. military aircraft began dropping a gel substance on the tiny town of Oakville near the Pacific coast. Everybody in town came down with flu and pneumonia-like symptoms. Some people were hospitalized and remained ill for months. Pets and barnyard animals died. The gel material was tested by a number of government and private labs which found human blood cells and nasty bacteria, including a modified version of pseudonomas fluorescens, cited in over 160 military papers as an experimental biowarfare bacteria.

1994, Dr. Cole testified before a Senate committee that he feared the military might develop new and genetically engineered pathogens. He could not have known then that our government had been working on such heinous pathogens since the 1960s, when it initiated a special virus cancer program in order to create contagious cancers for biowarfare.

1997: Eighty-eight members of Congress sign a letter demanding an investigation into bioweapons use Gulf War Syndrome.

1999: Ermina Cassani has investigated nation-wide reports of such biological waste being dropped on neighborhoods from low-flying planes. Cassani investigated over 30 different yuk drops during the years 1998 and 1999. In 1998, she obtained a sample that looked like dried blood from a Michigan house. Examining this material, a University of Michigan lab found pseudonomas fluorescens, the same bug used on Oakville. It can cause horrible human infections including fatal shock, and because of its glowing properties, it allows the military to track its path.

In 1999, Jonathan Moreno of Clinton's Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, also confirmed in his book Undue Risk decades of murderous military-intelligence experimentation on civilians without their knowledge or consent.

2001: Captain Joyce Riley stood before a group of government officials last year in Louisiana where the military was determined to conduct open air germ tests, against the vociferous will of the people. She boldly told them that the only acts of terrorism ever conducted on American soil have been perpetrated by our own government. Never were truer words spoken!

1997: Medical journalist Ermina Cassani reported 29 biological “drops” in the state of Utah. HAZMAT teams in biochemical hazard gear cleaned up the feces with chlorine. Utah is home to the infamous Dugway Proving Grounds, a chemical-biological test center where hundreds of former workers have contracted Gulf-War like symptoms, according to a 1997 testimony before a government committee.

Do you still believe the government is incapable of doing such a horrid thing. This stuff is old news. There is a lot more recent if you like.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by notreallyalive
 


You turn your back to relevance. I don’t see the point of convincing you.

This is intended to inform ATS members and non members who read these sites.

No one is trying to sway your opinion. You are entitled to it.



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   

I want you to show me the maths on how you can calculate the distance to a moving aircraft from a single fixed point, when all you have is a viewing angle. (In fact I'd really love to see that, seriously, get down and dirty with the trig.).


Since you already know it's trigonometry I'll let you get down and dirty with it, since it was you who brought up the (non)problem of determining aircraft height. I just stated it's possible to do visually. Google should bring up some sort of tutorial.
Personally I just identify the plane and since I know what they look like at cruising altitude I can tell if they are substancially lower. Can't everyone that knows planes, as you say you do?

As for the proof, I'm telling you where to go get it and asking you to be patient. I don't want to break anonimity and am not in the same geographic location. So, without trying to be insulting, if you really want to know you have to go experience, since nothing else will be good for you. Sooner or later you'll see the trails, the brownish unnatural looking clouds, the unidentified planes. And that will be your introduction to chemtrails. Yes, it's a somewhat subtle reality sometimes, but nevertheless, it's there.

Ironically, with chemtrails, the orbs really could be weather baloons now that I think about it. Who knows, maybe we're being sprayed with swamp gas?



posted on Jun, 4 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join