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.

 

What in the World are They Spraying [Official Trailer]

page: 2
52
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 


AS I (and many others) have pointed out --- your snippet there tells the whole story --- scientists are studyingthe earth's climate. They are analyzing the effects of "aerosols", and what changes may or may not be occuring as a result of thier influences.

It is really quite simple to understand, in an overall sense. The science is much more complicated, of course.

Part of the studies' efforts are to determine which components of these aerosols are naturally-occuring, and which are the results of human activity (AKA pollution, mostly from ground-based industrial sources).

There is a lot to it, NOT some "chemtrail" myth....




posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 

Please show evidence that the studies you cite are referring to anything other than aerosols which are produced naturally in the atmosphere or as ordinary byproducts of combustion.

Please show anything in any of those studies which shows that: a) contrails cannot persist and spread, b) that persistent contrails consist of massive amounts of aerosols other than the same ice crystals which make of natural cirrus clouds.

I've looked, I must have missed those parts.

[edit on 5/25/2010 by Phage]



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
I live on the coast of Oregon and have seen these planes in greater number over the past 10 years.

Many do not believe that these are chemicals being sprayed on us.

But what one has to realize is that we are not in an area here that is any kind of flight path, and also when these planes do large circles in the sky it is not right.

I would like to also state that here they will some times fly well below the contrail height and you can see the chemicals coming out. This is all at about 5000 feet, if you had binoculars you would be able to make out the pilot.

Here is my take on the trillions that are missing.

First the documentary said they spend billions if not trillions on this process

Second if you give some one billions of dollars they can not hide it in any way they are not taking it in cash. If they had this amount of money they would buy something with it like land, companies and the such, this is not happening.

Third I drive a diesel truck and the cost of diesel is now more and has been for about 10 years then that of gasoline in most cases premium. Why would that be it is called supply and demand.
It is not because they are making more diesel engine vehicles but because jets use kerosene which is high grade diesel.

Hench you have jets flying spraying aluminum and barium and other elements into the atmosphere on a twenty for hour basis.

The only companies that are profiting from the trillions of bail out are the mining and oil industries.

I would also like to state that chem jets make a different noise then regular commercial jets as I have been watching and listening for several years now.

I can be in a conversation with someone when one of these jets flying at high alt. is going by and notice it right away.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Yeah like they did not know if the first atom bomb would cause a uncontrollable chain reaction and destroy the earth.

but they did it any way.

Or the Hadron Collider and the unknown effects of smashing atoms that way and the possible crossing of dimensions at the risk of all of us/



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Goethe
 


Yes! Everyone should, and read for themselves...because many will understand correctly...


Its called Aerosol Forcing.

Want proof? Go to the Department of Energy's website.


(Hint...some people think immediately of human actions, when they see the word "aerosol"....and the same when they read "forcing"...but most people can read and comprehend when scientific papers are discussing activities in NATURE).




[edit on 25 May 2010 by weedwhacker]


As was pointed out to Goethe at another post just yesterday. It's all a big deal with "chemtrailers" calling them something besides "chemtrails". At YouTube, they are using "geo-engineering", no matter the proposed end result. They think it sounds better.
I love gettting "atmosphere aerosol" and the like getting sent to me by concerned others who want me to "know" what they do.......that the Gov is behind it all, because they are talking about it. Obviously they do not read or understand (or both) what they are submitting.
After all, "aerosol forcing" surely means a program of spraying something unwanted and unawares, right?
heheheheheehehehe. Let's hope none of these people teach our children.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 



But what one has to realize is that we are not in an area here that is any kind of flight path, and also when these planes do large circles in the sky it is not right.


I'm sorry, but you don't seem very knowledgeable on the subject.

In fact (you live in coastal Oregon, right?) thre is a lot of air traffic transiting your area.

AND, it's increased in the last ten years BECAUSE there are more flights!

Now, this part tells me for certain you aren't interpreting what you see with accuracy:


I would like to also state that here they will some times fly well below the contrail height and you can see the chemicals coming out. This is all at about 5000 feet...


I seriously doubt that....

Let me put this into perspective. 5,000 feet is just about one statute mile. Go out to the airport, and look at an airliner from one mile away, and note its relative size. (Most major airport runways are 10,000 feet long, or so...it's an average, close enough for this estimation purpose).

These airplanes that you think are "spraying"? Do they look as large as what you see, on the ground, from one mile away? (Naked eye, for now...)

If you are seeing contrails (for that IS what you are seeing) then the airplane is at least 25,000 feet.

If you occasionally see 'circles' or arcs, then it could be passenger jet in holding pattern, at altitude...or military re-fueling operations. Military tankers also make contrails too, sometimes.


... if you had binoculars you would be able to make out the pilot.


Oh, I do believe that's an exagerration!



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   



I'm sorry, but you don't seem very knowledgeable on the subject.






And you do?

You and the two other wannabe debunkers have done nothing or said anything to debunk anything. Expect maybe the perception of your own ignorance.

APS and the DOE have more than enough info for you 3 wannabes.

Have fun chasing your tails in your lil pack of debunkers.


I say again, name another subject on ATS with more documentation and evidence...

YOU CANT




posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by stars15k

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Goethe
 


Yes! Everyone should, and read for themselves...because many will understand correctly...


Its called Aerosol Forcing.

Want proof? Go to the Department of Energy's website.


(Hint...some people think immediately of human actions, when they see the word "aerosol"....and the same when they read "forcing"...but most people can read and comprehend when scientific papers are discussing activities in NATURE).




[edit on 25 May 2010 by weedwhacker]


As was pointed out to Goethe at another post just yesterday. It's all a big deal with "chemtrailers" calling them something besides "chemtrails". At YouTube, they are using "geo-engineering", no matter the proposed end result. They think it sounds better.
I love gettting "atmosphere aerosol" and the like getting sent to me by concerned others who want me to "know" what they do.......that the Gov is behind it all, because they are talking about it. Obviously they do not read or understand (or both) what they are submitting.
After all, "aerosol forcing" surely means a program of spraying something unwanted and unawares, right?
heheheheheehehehe. Let's hope none of these people teach our children.


Instead of spouting off at the mouth with nothing but your opinion and some snide insults, Alinsky?, try reading some of the stuff you claim to know about...


Other than that, got anything backing up what you state? Or is it merely your opinion based on your two buddies?



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Goethe
 

Please show evidence that the studies you cite are referring to anything other than aerosols which are produced naturally in the atmosphere or as ordinary byproducts of combustion.

Please show anything in any of those studies which shows that: a) contrails cannot persist and spread, b) that persistent contrails consist of massive amounts of aerosols other than the same ice crystals which make of natural cirrus clouds.

I've looked, I must have missed those parts.

[edit on 5/25/2010 by Phage]


Why not reading all the links and documents I provided in my debunking thread... Theyre on page 15... More than enough enough on the questions you seek.

I mean, unless of course you already have an opinion and feel reading the very agency doing its own research...

Kinda hard to debunk fact, but you guys sure like claiming you do.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by 30_seconds

For those who are saying chemtrails are not real, how do you account for the barium and aluminum being found in the atmosphere?

Either all these people who are running independent tests are part of a conspiracy to convince the public that they're spraying something in our skies,

Or they are spraying something in our skies.

Which do you believe?

Actually, all these independent studies are very, very flawed. For example, the "news" story about "chemtrails" from KSLA TV. I'm sure you've seen it, it has a pretty newsdesk reporter. It's famous. If you haven't seen it, look it up.
At around the 1:00 mark, the reporter is pointing to the tested level of barium written as "68.8 ug/l", but says "6.8 ppm". That is not the conversion of ug/l to ppm, far from it. The tested level is read in BILLIONTHS of a liter, 1000 times smaller than millionths. Big error, and a lot smaller than the EPA 2ppm. The sampling was done even worse--rainwater collected from someone's backyard from open jars.
Carnicom has a test on his site. He uses ground level air filters. He uses ONE sample, and doesn't account for any ground level contamination. You cannot do a valid test that way. It needs to be done well, and be repeatable.
Barium is found all over, and is the 14th most common element in the world. It's in our air anytime the wind blows dirt. It's used in the making of glass and bricks. It's in just about every unfiltered breath you take and any unfiltered water you drink.
Aluminum is the third most abundant element in the earth's crust. It's everywhere too.
See what a little knowledge shows? The tests used are wrong, and it would be such a small amount as to be no different than working outside in dirt.
Oh, and the news reporter at KSLA knows the report is full of errors, too. He knows he was wrong. I know because I contacted him myself. Have you ever done likewise? If he knows it is wrong, why do people continue to proclaim it is correct?



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:55 PM
link   
www.asp.bnl.gov...


All the info you need if you think its not going on...

And let the 3-4 debunker wannabes claim its all nothing... Just climate change...


ITS CALLED WEATHER.

And its called Aerosol Forcing

Deny ignorance?
Only those that are not ignorant can do this...



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 

I have seen those studies and more.
I must have missed the parts that have the answers to the questions I asked about them. Can you point out those sections or provide, in your own words, answers to my questions?



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goethe

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Goethe
 

lol:

'The ASP is the only federal research program with a mission to quantify the effects of aerosols on the atmosphere's raditation balance. It uses laboratory studies of the climate-relevant properties of different aerosols, field campaings, to quantify aerosol properties and atmospheric processes in their real-world setting and to test the accuracy of models of aerosols, and theoretical modeling to develop sub-models of aerosols for use in climate models. It focuses on (1) the effects of aerosols on cloud formation and cloud properties and (2) the role of Black Carbon and organic aerosols in climate change'.


You can embrace ignorance all you want, but until any other conspiracy has more hard facts and proof, you fail at all your weak debunking attempts.



[edit on 25-5-2010 by Goethe]


For about the sixth time today: AEROSOL does NOT mean "sprayed by man". It is anything suspended in the atmosphere that is not an atmospheric gas. Water is an aerosol. Volcanic ash is an aerosol. So is smoke. Dust blowing in the wind is an aerosol. Ever smell the ocean? That's because salt is an aerosol along the sea coast.
Your continued denial of that fact will continue to lead you astray. Man does contribute aerosols to the atmosphere. Does it means "they" are spraying stuff on "us" for some nefarious purpose? No.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 

Ooooooh. I see.

The fact that weather and climate are the subject of much research proves that "chemtrails" are real.

Nnnowwwww. I get it.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:06 PM
link   



You guys should really get better at this.

Like I said, if you have any of those questions... READ THE DOCS.

And Im sure youve read them all... LIAR, Cause, if ya did, you wouldnt be asking me anything.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 


Estimating a planes altitude requires specialized training and almost constant use. Do you have either? I've talked with pilots and ATC and they know an untrained person cannot possibly make even a close call.
Planes flying circles are in a holding pattern. This is a common practice.
People who live in the middle of no where, without an airport close by can and will have planes flying over their heads because planes must fly over land to get from one airport to another. Have you ever tracked your local traffic? You can at Flight Aware. Have you ever plotted out the routes over your head? You can with a US Air Routes app on Google Earth.

To prove "chemtrails" exist, you must show a trail is somehow different from a "regular" trail. The onus in on you the claimant to prove the difference, not on me and the others to prove to you they do not. Where is the evidence to support your claims beside your personal observations? You cannot possibly detect chemical content with your eyes, so sure you have something else concrete?



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by stars15k
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 


Estimating a planes altitude requires specialized training and almost constant use. Do you have either? I've talked with pilots and ATC and they know an untrained person cannot possibly make even a close call.
Planes flying circles are in a holding pattern. This is a common practice.
People who live in the middle of no where, without an airport close by can and will have planes flying over their heads because planes must fly over land to get from one airport to another. Have you ever tracked your local traffic? You can at Flight Aware. Have you ever plotted out the routes over your head? You can with a US Air Routes app on Google Earth.

To prove "chemtrails" exist, you must show a trail is somehow different from a "regular" trail. The onus in on you the claimant to prove the difference, not on me and the others to prove to you they do not. Where is the evidence to support your claims beside your personal observations? You cannot possibly detect chemical content with your eyes, so sure you have something else concrete?



Really, I dont need to do any of that.

And Ive provided more proof on this one subject than most subjects ever get.

Instaed of just demanding more and more, why not read what has already been given to you without you doing any work... If you cant read the files, Im not going to hold your hand and take the bay steps with ya.


And everything Ive provided is more than concrete, unless you have something stating otherwise? I mean, you should right?

Ive used multiple govt sources, research facilities, and published reports... And you, and the couple of others, have given what... Opinion and insults.




Deny Ignorance?



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Goethe
 


You have provided quite a lot of evidence to back up my point. I have read most of them, and just doing a quick overview, you seem still to misinterpret "aerosol".
Until you get over that hump, you are a lost cause.
The aerosols you are reading about are NOT coming from the back of, or the tanks of, an airplane.
You, the claimant keep insisting the documentation is there. Where? What you provide is not it.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by stars15k
Testing is done that shows NOTHING but jet fuel through a jet engine. Not aluminium, barium, viruses, blood cells, heavy metals, pharmacueticals, or any of the compounds alternately suggested.


That's quite the claim that flies entirely against what I've seen. There are several reports of people getting laboratory analysis and what shows up is aluminum and barium, amongst other things.

Have you any links for this claim or are we just to take your word on it.



posted on May, 25 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by stars15k
reply to post by Goethe
 


You have provided quite a lot of evidence to back up my point. I have read most of them, and just doing a quick overview, you seem still to misinterpret "aerosol".
Until you get over that hump, you are a lost cause.
The aerosols you are reading about are NOT coming from the back of, or the tanks of, an airplane.
You, the claimant keep insisting the documentation is there. Where? What you provide is not it.



Really? Cause you said so? And you are?


How about providing something other than just your opinion... Like science and maybe some fact or evidence...

Oh, I know why you cant... You dont have any do you? Its ok. Ive got about 500 files you can borrow...



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join