Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Chemtrail Debunkers are Losing.

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by sanchoearlyjones
 


Based on THIS post, you seem to have a severe lack of understanding in many things, not just what you've shown already, IE, the basics of airplane design, and WHY jets are modified to meet Customer's demands, in the good old Capitalistic way of making a PRODUCT that will SELL!!!

I am, of course, referring to your red herring about the Boeing product, the B747-400ER. IF YOU CANNOT figure out why a company might wish to market an airplane capable of a greater payload, and range, then I cannot help you. Your are truly lost.




posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Ah Gawd, Okay I was pointing out how darn big planes are. There is no way for You to disprove that through Special Access Programs that chemtrails planes aren't used. They have only govt. funding; with no oversight.

Aerodynamics??? Putting a nozzles in a plane won't effect anything. Look at the space shuttle being transported



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by sanchoearlyjones
 



A Special Access Program I covered in one of my first posts in this thread. Go read what they are.


Oh My Gawd!!!

You're serious??


THAT is the height of idiocy, wrapped in a bacon strip to surround a pile of pork to define the incredible lunacy that points to many of the "conspiracy theorists", and their bowel "movement".

I just....I just....I just cannot stop giggling long enough, now that I realize what you're attempting to convey!!!

Boeing, making an existing airplane...a PASSENGER airplane, hoping ot (GASP!!!) sell more units, and make (GASP!!!) a profit by marketing a newer, longer-range version of an established design....a design that, if they get ORDERS and therefore commitments, will mean more PROFITS because they've already tooled up to produce the basic airframe...the onely changes involve minor "beefing up" because of higher weights, and a re-design of fuel capacity to accomodate more fuel...AND, once built and sold, minor what's called in the industry "differences" training to the pilots already qualified on the basic equipment, vishte B747....!!!



THIS is such a PERFECT example of a layman, knowing NOTHING about aviation, and trying to MAKE SOMETHING UP out of thin air, to support some dubious fantastical at its nature "theory"...it is incredibly funny, but unfortunately can only be appreciated by people who KNOW how funny it is.

Sadly, there are just a handful of ATS members capable of understanding this. AND, I doubt they'd be bothered to stop in and get the joke....BECAUSE the subject ("chemtrails") is SO LUDICROUS!!!!

There are better things to tilt at....this is a NON ISSUE!!

Sad, really....

"the stupid! It burns!!..."



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Hey now, make sure Your giggling doesn't make You start sharting uncontrollably as well.

I picked a random jet. Most all of them have incredible payloads, and ranges is what I was pointing out.

Combine the average payload, range, and throw in a SAP, it's possible; watch the sharting now.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by sanchoearlyjones
 



Aerodynamics??? Putting a nozzles in a plane won't effect anything.


Again....you show an incredible lack of understanding.



Look at the space shuttle being transported...





You TRULY do not know what in the heck you are talking about!!!

Typical.

Ya know...instead of ME explaining it, why not do us all a favor and look it up for yourself. We are seeing your joke, now. Responding to you is a waste.

Good luck on your "Search for Flags", since that seems to be your goal. Can't understand why.

Ego?

Bah!!!!!



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I've got all the time in the world for YOU to explain. All you've done is throw insults....What flags? The ones which don't amount to a hill of beans? The ones that are going to Udontknowme; since this is his thread?

Your the one spouting aerodynamics, payloads, and the like.

All I did was point out that a huge flying brick is transported riding on the back of another plane.

I also pointed out that planes can carry A LOT of stuff a LONG DISTINCE.

Combine those with a Spècial Access Program, and there are real chemtrail planes.

Your resorting to childish banter. Is this a kindergarten, or are You defeated, and cannot admit it???

I am leaning toward both in Your case.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by sanchoearlyjones
 



All I did was point out that a huge flying brick is transported riding on the back of another plane.


OK....since you refuse to research the details, I will have to fill you in.

WHEN NASA is forced to land the Space Shuttle anywhere other than the Space Center, THEN it is an incredibly extra expense to fly the specially equipped B747 to pick up, take the time to hoist and mate, then FLY at very slow, NON-NORMAL airliner speeds (somewhere around 270 knots) because of the unusual configuration. This INCREASES the fuel consumption (burn) and requires refueling stops, further adding to the expense of the procedure.

Really, I am JUST GOING FROM MEMORY, based on what I remember reading...you can certainly Google the exact details, if you care to. (I certainly will, now!!! Just to get "current")




I also pointed out that planes can carry A LOT of stuff a LONG DISTINCE.


SO??? Passengers, luggage and any cargo as payload....check!

An appropriate amount of fuel (which, BTW, has weight) for the flight length, plus extra, Plus other extra for alternates.....check!


Combine those with a Spècial Access Program, and there are real chemtrail planes.


Right [color=cyan]HERE!!! is where you jump the shark!!!

"chemtrail planes" means, by definition, a whole lot of more stuff....

---equipment on board. All of the plumbing, pumps, tanks...nozzles.

---ways to refill the "tanks"

---switches in the cockpit, circuit breakers appropriate and dedicated to the cockpit switches, the valves, the pumps...all located on the Circuit breaker Panel, also in the cockpit

---the training for the flight crews, to wit, in operational details of said systems. TO INCLUDE emergency/non-standard procedures

---a HUGE amount of people to provide the on-the-ground servicing of these "TOP SECRET" onboard 'tanks, and associated plumbing'

---ALL of the airline personnel, to include the mechanics, who would HAVE to know about these things, since they would SEE anything out of the ordinary (as would the pilots)...


I really do not have to continue this farce. IT IS A FARCE!!! Period.

Every idea "floated" by the conspiracy nuts can be easily shown to be, well....NUTS! These concepts are suggested by people who have NO IDEA of the reaity of the real world...sorry to be so blunt, but it is the truth.

AND, it is a sad commentary on the state of education, and lack of scientific knowledge, that currently permeates our society.
__________________________________________________________

Well I looked it up, despite some computer probs:


Performance

Cruise speed: Mach 0.6 (397 knots, 457 mph, 735 km/h)
Range: 1,150 mi (1,000 nmi, 1,850 km) while carrying Shuttle
Service ceiling: 15,000 ft (4,500 m) (with Shuttle)


(emine)

Source with the rest of the story here



[edit on 22 August 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   
There is no such thing as a "chemtrail".

That's a fact.

Chemtrail threads belong with reptilian & rods threads.

I think it's a dam shame there are people out there who are losing sleep over this nonexistent issue.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   
i am an airframe and powerplant trained tech... that stuff that you think is a chemtrail is just simple physics.. a jet engine is basically a huge compressor.. when you compress air what happens ? it gets hot .. if the humidity in the air is high enough you get a visible water vapor trail.. why is this so hard to understand and also... if the government wanted to poison us they would just put it in our food and water ??? oh.. yeah... i forgot. lol



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Oh, okay, so You finally admit that planes equipped could actually exist, and carry out their mission with support personal.


You hint at the logistics not being workable........ It's been a joke for a long time that toilet seats in the White House really don't cost 50k, but the money is allocated for Special Access Programs.

There are tons of videos on the net discussing massive flights in, and out of Area 51; flying support staff.

So who´s to say how many areas of special access there are that are similar in nature to area 51....... Which could support the logistics........

Oh, one other thing You make it sound as though the logistics, or technologies are too complicated for the crew, or manufacturer to build a chemtrail plane...................

I think You just said the airline industry is full of stupid People; which We both know isn't true.

***************************************************************

Sam60 Your almost off topic with only insults to add, try better



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I was on the fence until the great thread by OzWeatherman Why the Chemtrail Conspiracy is Unplausable, and Meteorologically Inaccurate.

I trust that research, coming from an experienced professional Meteorologist rather than the web links posted by CTs.

If you haven't read it, please do so.

[edit on 22-8-2009 by fooffstarr]



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by sanchoearlyjones
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Sam60 Your almost off topic with only insults to add, try better


Where are these insults that I've added?

And......for the record.....

I was a "chemtrailer" ( a mild one) until I did some serious reading about it all.

I too refer to OzWeatherman's epic attempts to get proper knowledge of this out to the members of ATS.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by sanchoearlyjones
 


You're all over the map, "sancho". In that last post. No reason for me to trouble myself with any copy/paste and refutations, intelligent people can see for themselves.

I suggest you stick to what you seem to be best at, lately, based on what I've seen of the various threads you've started.

Casual innuendo, extreme hyperbole, and "flag" waving (or, is the proper verb 'fishing'? I get SO confused....)

BUT, if you keep making silly references, and unsupported claims in THIS thread, perhaps you will help lay the groundwork for the final death march of this "chemtrail" nonsense....for that I say, "Good Show!!!"



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Chemtrail "debumkers"? They're "losing"? Hardly.

Look, not everyone who questions the existence of chemtrails, or the significance of them, is a "debunker". Many people simply haven't seen any credible evidence that there is any such phenomenon as chemtrails.

I think everyone agrees that there are contrails coming from high-flying jets. These are said to be condensation of moisture in the atmosphere that results from water vapor cooling after the jet passes. The water vapor is a product of the fuel burning. When it condenses, it is visible as a whitish streak in the air. I have never seen a contrail do anything except either slowly expand and lose shape until it fades away, or else break up into parts as wind gusts push it around. Not once have I ever seen a contrail descend even a little bit, far less all the way down to the ground. Not once have I ever seen any fallout from a contrail.

Chemtrails are supposed to be mysterious trails of various chemicals or other substances released by someone - government jets, corporations, secret governmental projects, etc., that do a variety of things. Theories vary from them being relatively harmless, to inducing psychiatric illness, physical illness, poisoning, even causing deaths.

I can't "explain" chemtrails. In fact, I have never seen a chemtrail, nor have I ever seen any convincing evidence that any such phenomenon exists. I have seen endless photographs of chemtrails, but there was nothing about them that would distinguish them from the thousands of contrails I've seen in my life. Not saying they're not chemicals, but there's nothing about the photos that is suspicious.

Supposedly some scientists have examined these chemtrails and found various chemicals in them, or, at time, other substances, known and unknown. But who are these scientists? Where are they? Where are their reports? Zip.

The "debunkers" really don't have to do much. It's up to the people who think these chemtrails are dangerous, to somehow show that they are. This isn't happening. For all the various "reports", actual evidence is very sparse, a handful of questionable evidence such as tiny fibers found somewhere, some silky stuff that could be spiderweb for all I know, stuff like that.

I know you can't just open up a bottle and catch the chemicals in a chemtrail. Obviously, these chemtrails are thousands of feet above us in the atmosphere. By the time those chemicals reach the ground - assuming they *ever* reach the ground - they'd be so diluted you wouldn't be able to tell if you had anything.

But that's the point. How do we know *what's* in those contrails? Who's grabbing the samples and analyzing them?

You complain that finding an "honest scientist" is nearly impossible. What you are actually saying is, it's almost impossible to find a scientist that will support your claim. The reason for this, I believe, is not because so many scientists are dishonest. The reason is that honest scientists generally don't think much of chemtrails, and will say so. The definition of "honest scientist" is not, "a scientist who agrees with my theories".

So yes, it is difficult to find scientists who will seriously discuss chemtrails as sinister chemical pollution deliberately inflicted on America's people for various unknown, shady reasons. Most scientists will simply say that what are called "chemtrails" are simply contrails from ordinary passenger or military jets. Nothing more harmful than the usual emissions from burning jet fuel.

As long as the definition of "honest scientist" is "one that agrees with me", then no, you aren't going to find a whole lot of "honest scientists".



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 





I suggest you stick to what you seem to be best at, lately, based on what I've seen of the various threads you've started. Casual innuendo, extreme hyperbole, and "flag" waving (or, is the proper verb 'fishing'? I get SO confused....) BUT, if you keep making silly references, and unsupported claims in THIS thread, perhaps you will help lay the groundwork for the final death march of this "chemtrail" nonsense....for that I say, "Good Show!!!"


I am shocked. So Your watching what I'm writing, and keeping track of a KUDOS SCORE????


I just proved You cannot debunk Chemtrail Planes, and Now Your Attacking Me Personally.......


Again, for anyone new to this discussion: I pointed out that aircraft have incredible take off weights in excess of 800K+ pounds. I pointed out they have ranges of 7k+ miles. I pointed out that through Special Access Programs there is no way to prove ****undeniably**** that chemtrails aren't real. Another argument is that having nozzles out the back of a plane would not be aerodynamic; so I pointed out the Space Shuttle riding on top of a modified 747 isn't aerodynamic as well.......Kinda like a giant flying brick.


Again You've been debunked; so You resort to throwing insults at me for my prose???????


I'd like to see a progressive chemtrail thread where People such as Yourself with alleged Aircraft experience contribute positively with the flow of the thread.




[edit on 22-8-2009 by sanchoearlyjones]



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by sanchoearlyjones
I did back it up. there is a link in one of my original posts.


SAPS...

1.2 Special Access Programs Pertaining to Intelligence Activities. The National Security Act of 1947 and Executive Order 12958 authorize the DCI to create special access programs pertaining to intelligence activities (including special activities, but excluding military operational, strategic and tactical programs). This Directive covers all such programs.


Please note the exclusions.

Now, what do they have to do with this nonsense?



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by sanchoearlyjones
 


Please don't stop.....you're getting more entertaining with each post. Not to mention, more and more worked up.



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   
I've heard many question, "why would they want to modify the weather"?

I found an excerpt that sums it up brilliantly.



The threats of weather warfare, totalitarian government and famine dovetail together. As we saw in the famine which the Soviets artificially created in the Ukraine prior to World War II, famine is an effective means of subjugating a people. By controlling food, you can control people. Weather modification can affect food production and eventually the available supply. Starving resisters out is much more effective than having to track them down and shoot it out with them. If you have not surrendered your weapons, you don’t get a food ration coupon. Long-term food storage, well hidden, is the only insulation against famine and totalitarian oppression.

twm.co.nz...



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by sanchoearlyjones
Again, for anyone new to this discussion: I pointed out that aircraft have incredible take off weights in excess of 800K+ pounds. I pointed out they have ranges of 7k+ miles. I pointed out that through Special Access Programs there is no way to prove ****undeniably**** that chemtrails aren't real.


So, you're simply going by the theory that, thru a Special Access Program, chemtrails can exist?

That's quite a leap of faith!

"Hey, the US government has SAPs!! That's proof of chemtrails!" Not freakin' hardly.





new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join