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.

 

Chemtrails? Need Help. 5/6/2010

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2010 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChemBreather

Can I ask you this then: How often do you see planes leaving 6 hour long trails ? According to YOU it is very rare, so how come this happends almost all the time ?


I never once said that persistent contrails were "very rare". I live in a city containing America's largest airport. I see them all the time.




posted on May, 7 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by ChemBreather
Well, OBVIOUSLY you are not paying attention, you are in Denial , just Wake up already, You have No profe What So Ever it is Untrue, you 'guys' in that Basement, you toss around so called 'science' that is 'approved' by Corrupt agencies, nothing you provide will change my mind on this or explain why planes ONLY have a contrail for 500 Meters that the Engine STOPS and GLIDES along .. Yea, planes coming with Normal Contrails, then a 'Spray is Acuring' then it goes back to normal contrails, how you explain that ? Hu ! Just derailing the Thread by getting the People focused on Are they chems or are they NOT chem trials, rather than discussing the CHEMTRAIL which is the topic.. I dont care a bout Contrails, I dont think the others here does either... Okey ? Get IT ?!

It is like talking about Rats in a Ferrari discussion....Savy !?


1. I am paying attention. I reviewed your videos and comment on them.

2. The one in denial is you. You dismiss known science as coming from "corrupt agencies", and made the horrible admission that "nothing you provide will change my mind on this". That is ignorance of knowledge, lack of skepticism and unyielding dedication to a paranoid conspiracy theory.

3. Like I explained to Goethe, it's not my job to prove your contentions untrue. One cannot prove a negative. It's your job to support your contentions.

4. Discussing the topic in the OP and the items you post is hardly "derailing" in any way. It's proper discourse.

You have these beliefs because you do not have proper education on contrails, their formations and reasons for their changes in appearance over time. Your beliefs are unsupported by any evidence. The knowledge of contrails is supported by huge amounts of evidence involving many branches of science.


Got any links to these studies?


I still havent seen anything from anyone saying these dont exist. And again, NO EXHAUST LAST FOR HOURS AND TURNS INTO CLOUDS


AND, instead of demanding proof, like mentioned before too, wheres your studies and proof its all normal and what I saw 15 years ago is the same as today? Cause, its not.

Got any friends in the govt? I do. I dont know all the answers, but I know something is beign sprayed.

Theyll tax the world for global warming, but they wouldnt or couldnt do this?


Wheres your rebuttal evidence?
(And if the evidence presented by me and others is not crediable, I guess a link to a thread here at ATS wont work either fo yous...)





posted on May, 7 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChemBreather
I know what I see in the Sky , I am 38 years old , I rais 4 children and have a steady job, do you honestly believe I can not tell the diffrence when some thing changes ? I stopped with Fluor and Aspartame etc many years ago, and things add up pretty nicly, and as you said: You do Not know the Past, so you cant even image the present, I know the future is without us, it is our children that will be indoctrinated with the New stuff, the New Religion, The New Technology etc. Not us, You see it every day on Main stream , they are doing stuff, I do not know what , is it a Radiation Shield ? Is it Germ Warfare ? Is it disease Spreading for the Big Pharma to make more Money ? I dont know, what I know, is that they Contain Barium which Obsorbs Radiation.... The Earth is losing its MagneticFields, so is the Sun.. So.......


I don't understand what that has to do with contrails.

I can say - and you can admit - that all kinds of technology has changed over the decades. To expect that things should remain the same when all technology advances is not reasonable.

Persistent contrails existed when we were children also. We didn't much care. They seem more common today because we pay more attention to them, especially if we believe in a conspiracy about them. And since air travel has increased exponentially since we were young, when persistent contrails form there are many more of them. This is not conspiracy, but reality.

There are indeed very real and dangerous things happening in the world that we need to worry about. Things like "chemtrails" are a distraction from those things. Let us not lose our focus.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe

AND, instead of demanding proof, like mentioned before too, wheres your studies and proof its all normal and what I saw 15 years ago is the same as today? Cause, its not.



It's not my job to prove your contentions untrue. One cannot prove a negative. It's your job to support your contentions.

I am not here to provide your education. You need to make up for your lack of it yourself. As I said, I'm not your internet search function or your library. If you want to understand the nature of contrails it is your job to educate yourself.

Since all of the sciences know exactly why contrails exhibit the various behaviors that they do, and you claim otherwise, it's up to you to prove that all of the sciences are somehow wrong about all of it. Good luck.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by ChemBreather
I know what I see in the Sky , I am 38 years old , I rais 4 children and have a steady job, do you honestly believe I can not tell the diffrence when some thing changes ? I stopped with Fluor and Aspartame etc many years ago, and things add up pretty nicly, and as you said: You do Not know the Past, so you cant even image the present, I know the future is without us, it is our children that will be indoctrinated with the New stuff, the New Religion, The New Technology etc. Not us, You see it every day on Main stream , they are doing stuff, I do not know what , is it a Radiation Shield ? Is it Germ Warfare ? Is it disease Spreading for the Big Pharma to make more Money ? I dont know, what I know, is that they Contain Barium which Obsorbs Radiation.... The Earth is losing its MagneticFields, so is the Sun.. So.......


I don't understand what that has to do with contrails.

I can say - and you can admit - that all kinds of technology has changed over the decades. To expect that things should remain the same when all technology advances is not reasonable.

Persistent contrails existed when we were children also. We didn't much care. They seem more common today because we pay more attention to them, especially if we believe in a conspiracy about them. And since air travel has increased exponentially since we were young, when persistent contrails form there are many more of them. This is not conspiracy, but reality.

There are indeed very real and dangerous things happening in the world that we need to worry about. Things like "chemtrails" are a distraction from those things. Let us not lose our focus.




Like reptilians or secret societies and sacrifices?



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Goethe

AND, instead of demanding proof, like mentioned before too, wheres your studies and proof its all normal and what I saw 15 years ago is the same as today? Cause, its not.



It's not my job to prove your contentions untrue. One cannot prove a negative. It's your job to support your contentions.

I am not here to provide your education. You need to make up for your lack of it yourself. As I said, I'm not your internet search function or your library. If you want to understand the nature of contrails it is your job to educate yourself.

Since all of the sciences know exactly why contrails exhibit the various behaviors that they do, and you claim otherwise, it's up to you to prove that all of the sciences are somehow wrong about all of it. Good luck.


Why not go to my thread and debunk what I already posted... Ill post more... But, since youve yet to post anything backing up your claims, Ill assume you have none.


If you dont need to back up what you say, why the hell are you here?



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Wow. Well after going through all the responses, I had no idea how controversial this topic was. I've looked on both sides of the fence, and the evidence, and I still can't lean one way or the other. I'm going to keep watching my skies and see if I can document this phenomena again. Thanks to both sides for posting, as obviously controversial this topic is.



Peace be with you.

-truthseeker



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe

Like reptilians or secret societies and sacrifices?



This is your rebuttal? Do you have any intellect? I suppose this is what I should expect from someone unable to support their own theories.

By the way, the realm of fantasies appears to be yours. I am firmly based in reality. You're spouting a "chemtrail" conspiracy, and it's you that may as well be claiming reptilian overlords or whatever you keep yammering about. Provide evidence or abandon your ridiculous cheap shots.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   

As I said, I've reviewed your links and commented on them. None are credible, most are comical.

It's not my job to prove they don't exist. One cannot prove a negative. It's your duty to support your contentions.

I provided an explanation for contrail differences in my first post in this thread. Review those items and begin your research. I am not your internet search function. - Traditional Drummer


Let me paraphrase this into something more readable :

"I've not actually done more than scan your links (if that!) and made scant comment on them. I laughed at them, and couldn't care less.

Despite the fact that those fact filled articles prove your point, I'm going to disqualify them again and again. and make you restate your proofs again and again, until you run out of articles!

My singular proof rules all, and it was my first post. Refer back to it, and believe what I do. I will do no more work than this."

There, minus the wordiness and right to the points. Please ignore the baiting. You've already proven it past a doubt, I've proven it past a doubt, dozens and dozens more have proven it n the past beyond a doubt. So have the authors of many an article we present, so has the Carnicom Institute, so have independent researchers. Rest easy, no need to worry about your head against the brick wall any more.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Edit - Double Post.

[edit on 7-5-2010 by Northwarden]



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by Goethe

Like reptilians or secret societies and sacrifices?



This is your rebuttal? Do you have any intellect? I suppose this is what I should expect from someone unable to support their own theories.

By the way, the realm of fantasies appears to be yours. I am firmly based in reality. You're spouting a "chemtrail" conspiracy, and it's you that may as well be claiming reptilian overlords or whatever you keep yammering about. Provide evidence or abandon your ridiculous cheap shots.


Have a lovely day.

I have no time for people like you honestly.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe

Why not go to my thread and debunk what I already posted... Ill post more... But, since youve yet to post anything backing up your claims, Ill assume you have none.


If you dont need to back up what you say, why the hell are you here?



1. I don't care about whatever thread you're referring to. You've posted things in this thread that are laughable and easily debunked. I can't imagine you have another thread with anything better, else you would have posted it.

2. Multiple fields of science already back my position. I encourage you and others to research them. It's your job to debunk the multiple fields of science which have logical explanations, not the other way around. I am here to force you to produce your evidence for your extraordinary claims. So far, you nor anybody else can do so.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe

Have a lovely day.

I have no time for people like you honestly.



No. Get it right...

You have no evidence to support your claims, honestly.

I, and the rest of the board, are willing to be convinced by the solid evidence you could produce.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Northwarden

Let me paraphrase this into something more readable :

"I've not actually done more than scan your links (if that!) and made scant comment on them. I laughed at them, and couldn't care less.

Despite the fact that those fact filled articles prove your point, I'm going to disqualify them again and again. and make you restate your proofs again and again, until you run out of articles!

My singular proof rules all, and it was my first post. Refer back to it, and believe what I do. I will do no more work than this."

There, minus the wordiness and right to the points. Please ignore the baiting. You've already proven it past a doubt, I've proven it past a doubt, dozens and dozens more have proven it n the past beyond a doubt. So have the authors of many an article we present, so has the Carnicom Institute, so have independent researchers. Rest easy, no need to worry about your head against the brick wall any more.


Sorry, those links provide evidence of nothing. I watched, reviewed the "facts", researched them and found them lacking, full of conjecture and inconsistencies. Tell me then, which of these links provided indisputable evidence of a "chemtrail" conspiracy. Your weak attempt at ridicule provides as much fact as all of those links.



[edit on 7-5-2010 by traditionaldrummer]



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Because I do not have air samples, or photos, or a signed confession by the perpetrators DOES NOT end the debate.

If I witnessed a murder yet did not have photos, or blood samples, or a signed confession DOES NOT mean I did not witness a murder.

Crop dusters and fire-fighting aircraft are a completely different sort. They operate within 1,000 ft of the ground and are completely irrelevant to this debate. I expect even a lay-person to be able to identify the difference between crop dusting, firefighting, and high flying airliners producing contrails or Chemtrails as easily as we can tell the difference between a Cardinal and an Eagle (Size, shape, color, and most importantly: behavior).

When I saw the Chemtrail activity with my own eyes I KNEW it was suspicious because of the behavior of the aircraft(s) and the behavior of the clouds.

Let me explain my eye-witness account:
I was out of town for the weekend at a friend's cabin. In the north USA. I am reluctant to give out to much personal details due to my paranoia and ATS rules.

Anyways... I was outdoors all day on a Saturday on the lake. I was in observance of the same sky all day from 9am to sundown.

The morning began crystal clear. It was a hot mid-summer day about 2 years ago. When we headed out for morning fishing and lunch on the pontoon boat I remember seeing the occasional airliner cruising on by leaving no trails. Around 10am a white four-engine aircraft (I believe to have been a KC-135) at cruising altitude leaving a thick white billowing cloud behind it.

Now with regards to my visual acuity and perception. I have perfect vision and during college was a member of the competitive aviation team, one event is called ACID: Aircraft Identification.

Back to the eye-witness account: I saw this aircraft fly from sky's edge to sky's edge carving a single cloud into the sky. Withing a few minutes a second IDENTICAL aircraft about 5 miles parallel to the original entered and flew a direct parallel to the first trail. Both aircraft were present in the same sky for a few minutes.

As I watched closely I witnessed a suspiciously large cloud being put out DIRECTLY behind the aircraft. It appeared to be trailing from many points along the aircraft wing INCLUDING the wing tips.

I watched the clouds themselves closely as I became increasingly suspicious. The cloud did not appear to behave like a normal cloud. It seemed to spread and expand with unusually strong intent.

The clouds hung in the sky without moving much. But they did spread. They grew thick and seemed to increase with depth and size overtime without the slightest amount of dissipation.

Around 11am I witnessed a similar, or the same, aircraft enter the sky from the opposite direction 180 degrees from where the first trails were initiated. This aircraft flew another parallel to the first two lines. Creating three thick parallel lines in the sky with not another single cloud in the sky.

A few minutes later another similar aircraft proceeded along side the 3rd trail creating a total of 4 parallel trails in the sky by around 12pm.

During this period I witnessed a number of other aircraft in the sky at various altitudes. Including airliners of similar altitude to the spray aircraft leaving NO TRAILS. The other aircraft which I witnessed varied from small 2 engine commercial airliners to the occasional larger 4-engine types at cruising altitudes.

This spraying behavior continued through the afternoon until by 4pm there were 10 parallel trails laid out across the sky as if in a search pattern or lawn-mowing pattern. The trails increased in size as the day went on. The first clouds spread out and by 4 pm the original trails were unnoticeable. What remained was and evenly dispersed haze the blanketed the sky.

The last time I saw the aircraft was around 3 or 4pm. By around 6pm all but the last made trails had spread out completely creating a FULL SKY BLANKET of haze. Still no other clouds or contrails were created this day from any other aircraft and various altitudes.

Were it not for this pattern of parallel trails the sky would have been clear and blue all day and into the evening.

Now before the obvious questions arise I will address them.

Q. Why did I not take video or photos of this?
A. This event which I describe was my awakening to the Chemtrail question. As the event unfolded above me I did not begin to pay close attention until about the 3 or 4th waves of aircraft. I saw the whole thing unfold above me. But was not seriously suspicious until late in the day. At which point I did seek a camera but there was none on the boat. (I didnt head out that day hunting for Chemtrails.) By the time I got back to the cabin it was 5pm and the clouds were entirely a haze but the last two and the aircraft were gone. The photos would have been meaningless.

Q. That is a convenient story about having no camera.
A. Considering that now I realize how important this day was to awakening me to the suspicious activity I am remorseful to say the least that a camera was not on hand. I believe a daylong time lapse video of this event would be shocking to most people. Like Andrew Dufrense said in Shawshank Redemption when asked to provide proof of his story "I find it decidedly INCONVENIENT that I cannot".

I have seen plenty of regular contrails. In fact I suspect that about 99% of the trails left by aircraft seen are normal contrails put out by regular everyday airliners. These clouds mimic car exhaust. More visible the colder it gets. Also how fast they dissipate depends on the temperature.

A normal contrail will dissipate with some degree over time. They may spread but they will dissipate in intensity to some degree.

More than this though I propose that the BEHAVIOR of the clouds and the aircraft is more usable proof of some artificial cloud forming activity. Patterns of similar aircraft creating cloud patterns which would be logical if ones intent was to FILL THE SKY with a haze.

This debate is constantly derailed and overgeneralized by the uninformed who take photos of regular contrails and post them as proof of Chemtrails. Often these attempts are easily debunked by the avid debunker.

These debunkings serve the purpose of generalizing that the ENTIRE Chemtrail question is debunked. When, of course, this is an ignorant over generalization.

I am hoping this thread will encourage others TO HELP ME continue to search for the truth about these activities. To say ANYONE can prove that a secret program DOES NOT exist is preposterous. This thread is about a search for truth. If this patent turns out to not be attached to the actual suspicious activity; it will not close the debate or prove to me that Chemtrails do not exist.



posted on May, 7 2010 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Regarding the fierce attempts to debunk and/or discredit the Chemtrail question:

I easily understand how a meteorologist, scientist, skeptic, or whatever could think this is all just a mass delusion of ignorant science know-nothings... when they themselves have never seen the SPRAYING BEHAVIOR which I described for themselves.

I do not fault them in their attempts. They seem as zealous and fanatical to me as I must seem to them. Had I not witnessed this behavior myself, I never would have been awakened simply by photos from the internet or others claims.

I say that I have only seen the suspicious activity for myself just twice. The other time was after the first. So I knew right off what they were. The same aircraft making parallel lines similar to the activity of my original witness event. I was driving cross-country and saw the activity for an hour or so. Again no camera.

I believe the relative few times I have seen them are explained by the fact that unless you witness the same sky for an extended period of time, you will not get the entire picture of a days sky activities. I think back on how few times I have been out under the sky for an entire day undistracted and they number very few unfortunately.

I also believe this activity is in a TEST PHASE. They are most likely just TRYING IT out and conducting experiments now and then to test the results.

One common accusation is that this program would require SO MUCH PAYLOAD and SO MANY AIRCRAFT. True. Put that assumes they are using those materials. Is it not possible that the technology exists for a more exotic material which is designed to spread and form a cloud lay more efficiently?

Also if they are just testing it out... they would only need a few aircraft and crew. This would explain away this false choice of: "Either it is a massive program or it does not exist"



posted on May, 8 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by AllSeeingI
 


I read your story about seeing the parallel contrails. Interesting. Sounds to me as if you saw planes in a normal flight path on a day in which the temperature and humidity in the upper troposphere were perfect for conditions to produce persistent contrails.

The argument is always the same and rests upon a misunderstanding which you stated yourself. That is, some people believe "normal contrails" dissipate rapidly. This is simply not true and is what feeds the "someone is spraying us" paranoia.

Some planes, as you had mentioned, spray things. Crop dusters and fire fighting planes are known to spray their payload. Military craft can drop chaff and "spray" a grid for flight training purposes. Some planes can dump fuel and latrine water. No planes have been observed with "chemtrail spraying equipment" either in flight or on the ground.

ALL reported sightings of "chemtrails" come from people on the ground witnessing an event miles away in the sky. Nobody's eyesight is so good that they can positively identify any clandestine activity at that distance.

Finally, the greatest fallacy of the "chemtrail" believers involves the fact that should the military (or whoever) decide to disperse chemicals into the air, it could easily be done without leaving a humongous trail for everyone and their mothers to see.

Anyway, I don't doubt that you saw something. It's that your interpretation of it is highly problematic.



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
reply to post by AllSeeingI
 

Some planes, as you had mentioned, spray things. Crop dusters and fire fighting planes are known to spray their payload. Military craft can drop chaff and "spray" a grid for flight training purposes. Some planes can dump fuel and latrine water. No planes have been observed with "chemtrail spraying equipment" either in flight or on the ground.


Actually I believe the aircraft involved in this activity is likely the KC135 Stratotanker or similar type aircraft.

The US government currently holds over 500 of them in active, guard, and reserve forces.

These aircraft , as you stated have the capability to dump fuel. The KC 135's fuel cargo tanks could be modified or simply filled with another substance and vented to produce the desired result.

Therefore the technology exists for this operation to take place without commercial aircraft, new tanks or nozzles, and there are more then enough aircraft to conduct these experiments.

Your argument about no planes with this spraying equipment being observed is fruitless. I have shown how easily it could be perpetrated by the US govt with the tech and resources. But on top of all that.... all it takes is a bit of Top Secrecy or bribery/blackmail and no one will talk about the program or what they have seen. The govt been doing it for years. Would you be surprised?

[edit on (5/9/10) by AllSeeingI]



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by AllSeeingI
 


Again, but this time shorter, since I covered the details in another thread...


The US government currently holds over 500 of them in active, guard, and reserve forces.


Check again..."over 500 of them"??

As in most "chemtrail" claims, that is an exaggeration. From your OWN source, Wiki:


United States Air Force operated 454 KC-135s (184 active duty, 64 reserve, and 206 guard) as of September 2008


AND, they ain't building them, anymore. AND, the "replacements" are still not in production.

But, in any event, I refer you to the "Welsbach patent" thread, where I employ a little mathematics and logic, in this.

Adding, a portion of the above-referenced post:


Originally posted by weedwhacker
Now, about reality....let's dispel this "covering the skies artificially" notion by using a real-world, recent comparison to Mother Nature.

I have read that the volcano in Iceland was able to spew about 750 TONS of ash, PER SECOND, at its height of eruption. How long that continued, I know not. Minutes? Hours?

Keeping that figure in mind, you can do some math. Simple multiplication. THEN, try doing more, but divide up how many loads, at what capacity, and the number of them, that would be needed to reproduce that quantity, in the KC-135s (assuming the attempt would ever be made).

Then, take a look at the actual records of the ash cloud extent, from the Iceland volcano. How much area did it cover? How effective was it at altering the surface climate? How visible was it???

Even with a fleet of ~400 airplanes, with a finite capacity per each, and a requirement to spend time to takeoff, climb, do their "deed", then return, land, get "re-loaded", and repeat. ALL needing to be operated by the Humans, who have limits to their own endurance, and with a limited number of people available...

Do some maths. SEE if it is even feasible for humans to compare with Mother Nature, in that regard.


I decided to do the math, for everyone. 750 tons/second, in just one hour, if sustained at that rate, is....5,400,000,000 pounds of ash. 5.4 trillion.

From Wiki, the payload capacity of ONE KC-135? 83,000 pounds.

That would mean about 65,000 (or more) individual airplanes, fully loaded, each hour to compare with the volcano's output.

Ain't math grand?






[edit on 9 May 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on May, 9 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


You make a number of false assumptions here:

You assume that all the KC 135s are disclosed. There are also other types of tanker aircraft in the arsenal which could be used and a number of experimental KC 135s are not included in this Wiki roster.

Regardless I am not making the assumption that ALL KC 135s are being used for this program. I was making the insinuation that it would be simple to use a few of them for secret tests like these. Therefore your argument here is meaningless.

Regarding your ash cloud math..
It means nothing and does nothing but distract and falsely end the debate. It is no proof at all. You are demonstrating basic math skills in a self masturbatory way to distract from the logic of this debate in the hopes you will preemptively head-off the casual layperson by making them think you have proven a point. But you have not.

You falsely assume the substance being deployed is the same as ash cloud. You dont think science has developed substances which would cover and reflect albedo more efficiently than ash? Foolish.

You also falsely assume that in order for experiments to be going on they would need to be at a scale that would cover the globe. If they conduct just one secret experiment like this without disclosure, then we have a chemtrail conspiracy.

[edit on (5/9/10) by AllSeeingI]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join