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.

 

Chemtrailers: Your time is NOW!

page: 10
34
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
Replacing an engine every 500 hrs is laughable.


Referring to rebuild and overhaul as "replacing" is also laughable.

Oh well. Enjoy your chuckles then




posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
Replacing an engine every 500 hrs is laughable.


Referring to rebuild and overhaul as "replacing" is also laughable.

Oh well. Enjoy your chuckles then


What do you think a complete rebuild is. It's easier to remove the engine and sent it back to the maintenance facility than it is to do a complete rebuild (replacing bearings, fuel ports, gaskets, chipped vanes, etc,) in situ.

Again, YOU made the claim that the engines require a complete rebuild every 500 hrs.

Show me the proof. If you can prove it, I would say that some bearing wear might make up for .05% of the metal present in the OP's sample.

You dig?

Edit to add: Why is it you debunkers log on and off so much?

[edit on 28-5-2010 by OurskiesRpoisoned]



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by GobbledokTChipeater

Why would somebody want to spread disinfo by claiming chemtrails exist?


Given the chemtrail hoax emerged at the same time the worldwideweb started to really take off, I have a (conspiracy) theory



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by GobbledokTChipeater

Why would somebody want to spread disinfo by claiming chemtrails exist?


Given the chemtrail hoax emerged at the same time the worldwideweb started to really take off, I have a (conspiracy) theory


Well then please start a thread, revealing your evidence. You may learn that there are other reasons why that correlation can be made.

[edit on 28/5/10 by GobbledokTChipeater]



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned

Edit to add: Why is it you debunkers log on and off so much?


>SNIP<

Anyway, are you up to the challenge of collecting the "chemtrail" samples and having them tested? That would certainly seal the deal as to whether they're real or not. Nobody else here seems up to it.

[Mod edit inappropriate off topic comment]

[edit on 5/28/2010 by yeahright]



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

>SNIP



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   
STAFF NOTE

Please remain on topic and courteous.

Failure to adhere to some basic, simple requirements for posting will result in the possibility of action ranging from post removal to post ban.

Thank You.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


So, I'm still waiting for you to show me any evidence that engines get a complete rebuild every 500 hrs.

Or would you like to stick with your childish insults?



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


So, I'm still waiting for you to show me any evidence that engines get a complete rebuild every 500 hrs.

Or would you like to stick with your childish insults?


Sorrr, sir. I am not your secretary, you can search the web on your own, and this thread is about someone taking the challenge to prove chemtrails with a bit of science.

I don't suspect you'll be taking the challenge since you seemed entrenched in your beliefs anyway. Same goes for all of the other chemtrail people here. Could it be that there's a fear that it would invalidate the belief by proving them non-existent?



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned
 


Can you provide any scientific evidence that what you see in the skies are chemtrails - and not, an thousands of scientists have been attesting for many decades, just contrails?

Until then, contrails are chemtrails in the same way that rainbows are painted by pixies.

Surely someone must be able to find some evidence that what you see are not contrails????? We've had dozens of threads on this subject and still not one ounce of evidence has been provided. Or is it just a hoax ..... Question is: why are some so determined to perpetuate the hoax and mislead the public?



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned
 


During the 757 experiment only 76 particles were analyzed, these particles were no larger than 14 μm (microns) in size.

To compare, a human hair is about 100 μm wide.

And red blood cells are less than 8 μm.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 


Click the asterix at the end of the external quotes.

As for calling out BS, the difference between you and I in this regard is that I will attack the post, not the poster.

You've come in on full attack mode from the get go, calling me a joke and brought nothing constructive to this discussion.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GobbledokTChipeater

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by GobbledokTChipeater

Why would somebody want to spread disinfo by claiming chemtrails exist?


Given the chemtrail hoax emerged at the same time the worldwideweb started to really take off, I have a (conspiracy) theory


Well then please start a thread, revealing your evidence. You may learn that there are other reasons why that correlation can be made.

[edit on 28/5/10 by GobbledokTChipeater]

I suppose you never read "ozweatherman's" in-depth analysis of contrail in which Essan has provided a lot of valuable input....AND I suppose you've missed the thread Essan himself has started on the issue.

Essan is not new to contrail/chemtrail discussions on ATS -- in fact I would say he (along with ozwetherman) are amongthe people who have provided the most analysis for this debate for the past few years here on ATS.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

I suppose you never read "ozweatherman's" in-depth analysis of contrail in which Essan has provided a lot of valuable input....AND I suppose you've missed the thread Essan himself has started on the issue.

Essan is not new to contrail/chemtrail discussions on ATS -- in fact I would say he (along with ozwetherman) are amongthe people who have provided the most analysis for this debate for the past few years here on ATS.



No I meant showing his proof that the chemtrail discussion started around the same time as the web started taking off. That would prove the web gave people a voice, allowing them to have a larger audience than before.



posted on May, 28 2010 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater
 

Is something like this what you are looking for?

Since then I have written the first complete book on Gulf War Illness – Bringing The War Home and, as the first reporter to break the chemtrails story on Art Bell back in January 1999, I continue to update my book, Chemtrails Confirmed.

willthomasonline.wordpress.com...



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


So that proves the chemtrail discussion started with this bloke in '99. Does that mean the internet has perpetuated this so called "hoax"? as essan was implying.



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by GobbledokTChipeater
 

Yes.
Yes, it does.
Do you know who Art Bell is?



posted on May, 29 2010 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

Yes.
Yes, it does.


No.
No, it doesn't.
Because this bloke wrote an article in '99 does not mean the internet has kept this discussion going on longer than it should.
That's quite a jump there lad.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join