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.

 

Lets DEBUNK this once and for all... CHEM-TRAILS

page: 15
20
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2010 @ 08:12 PM
link   
I cannot seem to get the link to show up properly. Chaff is used for evasive maneuvers by military aircraft to avoid being struck by a radar-guided missile. The missile locks onto the larger radar contact created by the aluminum chaff and aims for this aluminum cloud rather than the aircraft (hopefully). It is often accompanied by the use of flares, which would have a similar effect on countering heat-seeking missiles.

Having utilized it myself over Iraq a few times, I can tell you that, while it creates a blip on radar, it does not disperse a long vapor trail into the atmosphere which might be at all confused with a "chemtrail".

[edit on 5/16/2010 by bagari]




posted on May, 16 2010 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by bagari
 


Then this would be the link you want.

en.wikipedia.org...

That it?

I understand this concept and that it is not related to chemtrails nor does it disperse in vapor trails or clouds. However, it doesn't sound like something I would want to breathe or have in my groundwater supply.

The correlation between that and chemtrails is they both end up in the same place: air, lungs, and groundwater.

I am not completely sold on the chemtrail thing. I've seen contrails my entire life. It seems to me if they had been spraying all these years, there would be destruction on a massive scale and no one would be an exception. I still hold that it's shady.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Hasn't the US gov. admitted to actually spraying the coast in the 80's or something like that? And also the UK government without telling people? I'm sure there are documents somewhere. But I agree, chemtrails are very real and it pisses me off they don't talk about it and people don't get it. I don't care why they spray the sky, I care about the simple fact they do.



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe
So, we all know this is one of the most highly debated issues here... Reptilians live amongst us, but these are a hoax... Ok, Ill bite.

What specific part of this issue is a hoax?



Debunking is the act of disproving a claim. You are trying to "bunk" (the operative word here) the chemtrail conspiracy theory in this thread.

Debunking the debunkers would have been more appropriate title



posted on May, 17 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cybernet
I agree, chemtrails are very real and it pisses me off .....


Cybernet.....

I agree completely


How DARE the debunkers agree with the following information & discussions!

Chemtrails? Need help
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Contrail Chemtrail Research Thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Chemtrail Hoax
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Are these proof of Chemtrails or Contrails?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Chemtrail believers, I challenge you to debunk contrail science
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Contrails: Understanding why they aren’t chemtrails
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Chemtrail Myth
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is not a chemtrail! Atmospheric Phenomenon explained
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why the Chemtrail Conspiracy is Unplausible, and Meteorologically Innacurate
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Astounding Effect Of Contrails On Climate
www.abovetopsecret.com...

How To Forecast Using Clouds Part 1
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Atmospheric Phenomenen You May or May Never See- Part One
www.abovetopsecret.com...

OzWeatherman Profile Page
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Full ATS search on Chemtrails
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Kind regards
Maybe…maybe not



posted on May, 18 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   
This is what ive seen today

img257.imageshack.us...

[edit on 18-5-2010 by mrbonds]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not
 


Thanks. Nope, I have no idea how can they agree there isn't anything going on. It's just as if most of the people avoid looking at the sky at all, having no clue what's flying up there. I look at the sky every day, day and night, commercial planes fly by all the time. I'm sure I can spot a difference between a spraying ***** and a normal airliner. I have made many photos throughout the years...
Anyway, thought was worth linking:
www.fourwinds10.com...
astrology.yahoo.com...
www.guardian.co.uk...



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Cybernet
 


OH NO!!!!! Not again.....(sigh).....

Your links are laughable, once more....you've been had!

The 'fourwinds' site??? LONG ago debunked, as total hogwash.

The photo that they claim to be the interior of an Evergreen Airlines "sprayer" is NOT!!!

That is an example of what it looks like inside when they are flight-testing a NEW commercial airliner design.

All of those tanks? Yes, they contain a "chemical"...it's chemical designation is "H2O".

Why is it that the average person knows NOTHING about aviation, and airplanes? Hopefully, at least, most people know the concept of 'center of gravity'?? Well, the 'CG' is very important, in airplanes. There is a defined 'range' of acceptable CG (this is sometimes referred to as the CG 'envelope'). It relates to the center of lift, and also the moment-arms of the control surfaces, mainly the elevators and rudder.

During flight testing of a NEW jetliner (or a newer version, such as a "stretched" model) actual CG changes, whilst inflight, are possible by moving the water around, between those tanks. The performance data is collected, and compared to the computer predictions, in the original design models.

ALL of that data is compiled and utilized to prepare the performance charts for the airplane's operation, once it is certified and deemed fit by the FAA (or whichever government authority has jurisdiction).

You next link has 'astrology' in the name, so that wasn't worth the effor to look at.....

Finally, the news item from the UK??? Gee, THAT one is so old, I can't believe anyone still falls for it.

It's been sensationalized, and trotted out by the "chemtrail" hoax machine (who have vested interests in keeping this cash cow of theirs active --- it's called profit) to ramp up what was a very mininmal event, that was related to the Cold War, at the time, and was a study to determine effective BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS ATTACK defense strategies, should the old USSR have employed them upon Great Britain, back then!

Really....I suggest to people to GET OUT of the basement, and go learn! The Internet does have a lot of GOOD information, but unfortunately is has a lot more CRAP!




[edit on 24 May 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Hey, I don't have the time to go through all chemtrail topics on ATS to check out if these links are BS or not. I simply posted them and thought they were interesting, that's it. If they have been debunked and are false, then fine. I don't have a problem with that. But my stance towards chemtrails won't change, I know what I see and what I see just isn't normal. Everyone around the world can see the sky is being sprayed regularely, more frequently than in the past. And after several years of observing this phenomenon on a daily basis, I can see and tell a difference between a regular commercial plane (doesn't leave any trails, flies low in my area), a military jet (flies higher, leaves trails that quickly disappear), spraying planes/jets (fly at high altitudes, random and weird angles, trails remain in the sky for hours and form random formations). So again, if those links aren't useful, we can ignore them and focus on what we see. Maybe I'll start a thread for that to get photos from all members...

[edit on 24/5/10 by Cybernet]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Cybernet
 



I can see and tell a difference between a regular commercial plane (doesn't leave any trails, flies low in my area)


I would suggest a more thorough study, and that can be accomplished pretty much here on ATS, just use 'search' function.

You should have leaned, by now, that contrails do NOT form behind low-flying airplanes. You said they fly "low" in your area...that's a clue. I'm assuming you are referring to the vicinity of a major airport? Again, below about 25,000 feet, NO contrails. Oh, and BTW...determining relative altitude isn't as obvious as you may think...how do you go about it?


... a military jet (flies higher, leaves trails that quickly disappear)...


This relates to above comments. HOW DO YOU KNOW they are 'military'?

In any event, YES contrails will not remain, sometimes....only lasting for a few minutes, or a few dozens airplane lengths. This applies to ALL jets, military or civilian, when they are at altitude, and conditions are ripe for contrail formation.



...spraying planes/jets (fly at high altitudes, random and weird angles


No, now you're just confusing normal overhead air traffic, on different routes, making contrails that DO linger, again because of atmospheric conditions. USUALLY when a contrail forms, and lingers, you will ALSO see various forms of natural cirrus clouds too.




Maybe I'll start a thread for that to get photos from all members...


I only repeat....try the 'search' feature first....one like that exists. There are already a LOT of others, too; and most are retreads and re-hashings, over and over.


[edit on 24 May 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Alrighty, some good info, but still, nothing debunking anything.

This post will contain more than enough evidence for anyone willing to go through them all and read them.

Now, to any mods of skunk works:
Since this forum is for little to no hard evidence theories... I ask you to go through the following documents and maybe lets have some talks about a Aerosol Crimes forum or something other than skunkworks for this proven topic.

Whos doing it? The Department of Energy and several other agencies. How do I know? Here:
______________________________________________________________
Some of the agencies:
______________________________________________________________
www.asp.bnl.gov...

www.pnl.gov...

www.agu.org...

www.battelle.org...

www.spaceandscience.net...

www.haarp.alaska.edu...
______________________________________________________________
Some of the documents proving this is going on:
______________________________________________________________

www.ecd.bnl.gov...

www.igac.noaa.gov...

www.climatescience.gov...

www.asp.bnl.gov...

www.asp.bnl.gov...

www.asp.bnl.gov...

www.asp.bnl.gov...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

cires.colorado.edu...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys.org...

www.atmos-meas-tech.net...

pubs.acs.org...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

cires.colorado.edu...

pubs.acs.org...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.ecd.bnl.gov...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...

cires.colorado.edu...

www.atmos-chem-phys.net...

www.atmos.washington.edu...

www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...
_______________________________________________________________

So, where do we go from here ATSers and mods?

Is this still so undocumented and just a big hoax?

I ask anyone and everyone willing to take the time to post and have an opinion to have a truly informed opinion about this.

DEBUNK THAT



[edit on 24-5-2010 by Goethe]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 


SIGH....

Flooding a thread with disparate links isn't an 'argument', and in just dipping into the first two, you actually destroy your credibility right off the bat:

www.asp.bnl.gov...

www.pnl.gov...


BOTH of those links take the reader to sites that are discussing the STUDY of climate change potential, as it relates to what is observed, measured and collected from scientific studies done on the atmosphere.

They do NOT advocate human intervention, IE, actual distribution and organized implementation of any global conduct. They are STUDIES!

(I wonder, when you ask ATS members to read them, if YOU have read them? Or, have you actually understood them?)


There seems little need to address each and every link in that mess, but IF I see one that even comes close to supporting your claims, I'll let you know. Better yet, why not FOCUS on one or two that you think best support your assertions, and point them out?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To add:

On a related note, a very apt comparison to just what can and CANNOT likely be accomplished by any Human endeavors is to look at what Mother Nature can do....rapidly, via volcanoes.

Pick a figure...I just read (was in a book, will look for online source) *** found it HERE*** that Mt. Pinatubo erupted and spewed total of about 20 million TONS ....that's 40 BILLION pounds, when you do the math.... of material (sulphur dioxide) into the Earth's atmosphere. This HUGE amount of mass expulsion resulted in an average temperature dip worldwide of about 1-2 degrees, AT MOST!

Now, would anyone wish to do some more math, and figure out how HUMANS could equal that? 40 BILLION pounds, to loft into the air!! All for a measely 1-2 degrees temp change??



[edit on 24 May 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   


You really shouldnt bother posting. I had to take ya off ignore just to read your ignorance.

'That mess' huh? So my links are not ok, but the utter none sense of saying ATS threads are 100% fact. Not the govts own papers?

Please, someone with a working brain and an unbiased view read them, maybe a mod, and tell us this aint happening.

Now, again, anyone want to try to debunk those docs?

Or is the blind ignorance rampant?




[edit on 24-5-2010 by Goethe]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 


By admitting you use the 'ignore' feature when actual science and rational thoughful discussions are presented, you indicate to all that you aren't interested in denying ignorance.

I have given you plenty of information, not only in the field of aviation, for you to study and learn from, but I have just now brought up, yet again, the logistical problems that "chemtrail" believers keep ignoring.

YOU keep ignoring, as well. YOU would rather wallow in ignorance...despite all evidence to contrary.

You have a ready-made resource, as well, in your Uncle, the retired airline pilot...I noticed that you referenced him, then ignored any attempts and suggestions to contact him, to give you a further understanding.

A challenge was given to study the area, in your region, using the aviation tools and links I gave you, so that the contrails you may see can be compared to ACTUAL routes that actual commercial passenger jets fly...yet I see no evidence that you've done anything with them.

Head in the sand, still?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   



Like I said, your documentation is golden and should be the only tool used right? And yea, Ill ignore people with nothing useful to add. Like you.

Now, go read those docs I posted and come back in a few days. Cause guess what, it takes weeks to read them all. I KNOW I read them, and the ones you included.

See, unlike you, Ill read everything provided. What I wont read or bother to respond to usually is the ignorance of your comments mixed in with your less than thrilling attempts to debunk SCIENCE AND FACT



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 


Trying to goad me isn't going to work....my contributions are based on solid reasoning, and actual facts and science.

You, on the otherhand, have not fully understood, nor integrated the information you have been presented with, so your continued thoughts regarding me:


...your less than thrilling attempts to debunk SCIENCE AND FACT...


...are woefully misguided.

I ain't the one 'debunking' science, here! YOU are ignoring science, though....and apparently misinterpreting everything you read through the foggy lens of "chemtrail" belief...almost as if you take what "chemtrail" sites spout on a measure of faith, rather than with a properly critical and skeptical eye.....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

At this point, I suggest readers click back to the OP of this thread, and see how misguided it started out, fromthe very beginning.

Photographs of normal jet airplanes making normal contrails. Only the original poster believes them to be some nefarious "chemtrails"...oh, and there are always a few "fans" who pop into threads like these, as well, to cheer on the nonsense....but people who actually understand, from experience and knowledge, see the "chemtrail" hoax for what it truly is....







[edit on 24 May 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   



Please, go debunk the SCIENCE I presented, unless you are one of those pesky disinfo agents Cass talks about...



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 

Yep. Lotta science there all right.
Studies about how aerosols (dust, salt spray, natural things) might influence climate. Important factors in climate studies.

Can you show us one that says that "chemtrails" exist? That persistent contrails are impossible? That there is a global program of "spraying" going on?



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 



....one of those pesky disinfo agents Cass talks about...


Who's 'Cass'?? Wouldn't happen to be a certain rather prolific poster and fellow "chemtrail" believer, would she??? Ah, if so....she's been thoroughly trounced, as well.

AND, kiddo....I'd go easy on the "disinfo" accusations. Not only is it poor manners around here, it is usually seen as the final refuge of the losing 'argument', the last act of desperation.....



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Im sure you can figure that out for yourself by reading the provided documents like I did.

Other than that, I openly welcome further discussions in afew days after you do read them all.







 
20
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join