Official USA/AUS Chemtrail Experiments From The 1960s

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

don't you mean alleged normal contrails?


No I don't!



You are the one who is alleging that they are not normal. It is up to YOU to prove that they are not. You have yet to provide a scintilla of proof that it is impossible for normal contrails under the conditions in which you observe these alleged “Chemtrails.”

You can not do that. You will never be able to do that. Digging up a bunch of cold war era atmospheric dispersion tests will never change that.




posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ixataar
www.abc.net.au...


What does cloud seeding have to do with the chemtrail hoax?



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by roniii259
how is this related to aerospace


I guess that because the chemtrail hoax requires the mysterious "white tankers."




posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by billybob

don't you mean alleged normal contrails?


No I don't!



You are the one who is alleging that they are not normal. It is up to YOU to prove that they are not. You have yet to provide a scintilla of proof that it is impossible for normal contrails under the conditions in which you observe these alleged “Chemtrails.”

You can not do that. You will never be able to do that. Digging up a bunch of cold war era atmospheric dispersion tests will never change that.




my, my. such big words!
however, until you prove that they are normal or i prove they are not, they are neither. they are in a state of quantum uncertainty, basically.
so, they are [typesize900]allegedly normal[typesize900].



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:06 PM
link   
For the bloke who can't make the connection...
I keep forgetting I have to spoon-feed people, who can’t analyse basic information.
From;
www.hydro.com.au...
“Hydro Tasmania uses a twin engine aircraft, a Cessna Conquest which is under contract for the period of cloud seeding each year. This plane has two silver iodide generators or burners, containing the silver iodide solution under pressure, one mounted under each wing. Every cloud seeding flight is conducted by one pilot and one cloud seeding officer.
When airborne the cloud seeding officer advises the pilot of a seeding track upwind of the target area. Once suitable cloud is encountered on the seeding track, the cloud seeding officer ignites the burner using switches mounted inside the aircraft.
Once suitable cloud is encountered, the cloud seeding officer sets up a seeding track and ignites the burner using switches mounted inside the aircraft.”

Nice list of some Tracer experiments;
www.google.com.au...:SV8VhDZrpI4J:www.arl.noaa.gov/datem/datem.pdf+aircraft+tracer+experiments+in+Australia&hl=en



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 10:24 PM
link   
So? What is the big deal about cloud seeding?



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Sigh (please read before asking stupid questions)

From;
www.tip.csiro.au...
“Rainmaking 1939 - 1972
Wartime work on radio wave propagation led to an extended study by Dr E.G. Bowen of atmospheric behaviour and cloud physics. It was suggested in the USA that if a seeding agent were intoduced into supercooled clouds of water droplets, tiny ice crystals would be formed, collect water droplets and fall from the cloud. Within a few weeks of the announcement, field experiments were in progress. Australia quickly became a leader in cloud physics research and the techniques of artifical stimulation of rainfall. Scientists from India, Pakistan, the Philippines, Korea, Israel, Singapore, USA, Egypt, Malaya and Chile came to study at the Laboratory or to use the Australian methods.
In October 1952 a rainmaking Dakota aircraft disappered in cloud off Cronulla. Laboratory scientists R.S. Styles and F.W. Campbell and the whole R.A.A.F crew lost their lives."

From;
www.dar.csiro.au...
"2.1 Early CSIRO Single Cloud Experiments
Cloud seeding experiments began in Australia in 1947, shortly after the classic experiments of Schaefer (1946) in America showing that pellets of dry ice could rapidly glaciate a laboratory cloud. The first cloud seeding trials were carried out by Kraus and Squires (1947) near Sydney. In these and subsequent experiments from 1947 to 1952 scientists in the CSIRO Division of Radiophysics used Royal Australian Air Force aircraft (mostly Liberators, Beaufighters and DC3s) to drop dry ice into the tops of cumulus clouds. The conclusion reached from these experiments was that the method worked reliably and initiated rain that would not have otherwise occurred. However, the success of the rain-making was determined by the temperature of the cloud top. Below -7°C there was a 100% chance of producing precipitation, but at temperatures of -15°C and cooler the results lose their significance because of the high probability of naturally occurring rain (Bowen, 1952)."

www.dar.csiro.au...



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ixataar
You idiot.

The documents and papers (over 60) have all the dust, smudges and even RUST (on the staples), that you would expect from documents about 30-40 years old. they are in (a now extinct) typeface.

Best forgeries I've ever seen.

Which website did you see this on?
Can't remember hey?
Liar.


Ixataar, you have a bad attitude. Also, if you purchase anything off of E-Bay... chances are everything that has to do with such documents as these are fake, or common everywhere.

Stop criticizing people for 20 seconds and then post something worth my time reading... everything up until now has been complete garbage.



posted on May, 5 2004 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ixataar
Sigh (please read before asking stupid questions)


(Sigh---------)





And so? Like the story says, cloud seeding has been around since 1946 in various forms with various success rates.

Again, what is your point? There is nothing unusual or conspiratorial about cloud seeding programs.

If you are claiming that there is, then please be a little more specific in your claims. Just posing a bunch of info on cloud seeding don’t mean squat.

So my question was not stupid, but your response to it is.



posted on May, 5 2004 @ 08:37 PM
link   
ixatarrblahblah watever your silly name is, you think you sre so much smarter than all the other people here, hate to brake it to you but you are nowhere close, and this thread is one of the worst ive seen it is garbage, and from what i see you dont know what to spend youre money on(gets ripped off by fake ebay documents
:lol
and you are probably some 8 year old kid, i dont mean to be mean daddio but you got ripped off next time post a good thread im sorry but then i will be nice to you, and also you need to respect the people that have been here longer than you. youre documents could be real though, but most likely not. learn from youre mistakes and ATS will be a much better place for you to discuss this kind of thing in, and please fix youre attitude



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Hey Shugo and Machine Gun Jordan.
You claim all E-Bay docs are fake (hope they sue your arses)...
I am in possession of the BEST fakes the world has ever seen (forget the MJ12 docs - these are better). Why? Because Machine Gun Jordan and little boy say so (even though they have never seen them).

What did your two posts above have to do with anything, except having a go at me? Nothing...

Machine gun Jordan. You're either retarded or a monkey (or Mupper Bush's SPEECH WRITER). You can't even string a sentence together.
Yes I have a bad attitude, because of pricks like you.


[Edited on 6-5-2004 by Ixataar]



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 12:19 AM
link   
I'm waiting for you to get banned. How about showing some respect. Maybe we know a little more than you do.

There is no reason for you do get all girly and pouty.

E-Bay filing lawsuit on what? Dissing them? lol... that is the funniest thing I've ever heard. The one thing you've accomplished with me is making me laugh.

ON TOPIC ONCE AGAIN! (talk about us going off topic eh?)

Show me a picture... I might believe it. I strongly doubt you have the original documents. Because if these cost $22 and you got these off of E-Bay, there is no way they are the originals.



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 12:22 AM
link   
i live in florida and i know of experiments a few years ago where scientists dropped a substance used in gardening that absorbs water (i forget the name) into the heart of thunderstorms in order to see whether it had an affect on the size of it so as to be able to weaken a strong hurricane. it was interesting. if i can find an article ill post it on here somewhere.



i thought australians were nice and liked to play with crocidiles and used funny slang like the crocidile hunter. boy was i wrong.

[Edited on 6-5-2004 by sometrendyname]



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 12:50 AM
link   
STOP THIS NOW THIS GETTING INTO NAME CALLING.



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by sometrendyname
i live in florida and i know of experiments a few years ago where scientists dropped a substance used in gardening that absorbs water (i forget the name) into the heart of thunderstorms in order to see whether it had an affect on the size of it so as to be able to weaken a strong hurricane. it was interesting. if i can find an article ill post it on here somewhere.



i thought australians were nice and liked to play with crocidiles and used funny slang like the crocidile hunter. boy was i wrong.

[Edited on 6-5-2004 by sometrendyname]


You are talking about dyn-o-mat, a cure in search of a problem.

After the initial experiments, their efforts apper to have dried up like the storms they seak.

It sounds good in concept, but it has dubious value in practice. this is basicly a sales pitch with no buyers.



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 03:13 PM
link   
As to the document that Ixataar purchased. It is quite probable that he has picked up an original copy of the journal article. Reprints are available from the publisher for $22.00.

What Ixataar has failed to do, however is to show any relevance for this experiment. Furthermore, his posts on cloud seeding are equally irrelevant.

Ixataar, please, if you want to salvage this thread, stop with the negative attitude and name calling and just post your analysis of the relevance of this data.



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shugo
There is no reason for you do get all girly and pouty.


Hey! Watch it with the "girly" comments, there, boy.


If there's a picture, I'd like to see it.

Also, the whole "they're forged -- they're real" debate is pointless. No one has seen them but ixataar, and, as far as I can tell, he is not an expert on document forgery. Besides, it seems the content he shared is valid, and has been published.

I don't see that it proves anything about the existence of chem trails. Is there a thread where the chem trail thing is debated?





 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join