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.

 

International Chemtrail Symposium May 29 2010

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2010 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned
 


So where is your grand disclosure?

Have you finished your world-changing youtube video yet?

Care to explain how "chemtrails" is anything other than a funny name for a textbook used in teaching chemistry nomenclature 101 at the USAFA?

Or were you just BSing us?




posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


Care to explain how "chemtrails" is anything other than a funny name for a textbook used in teaching chemistry nomenclature 101 at the USAFA?

Dude, there's tons more evidence than just that USAF document.

L2 Google.


Do you have anything positive to offer?



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by sandwiches
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


Care to explain how "chemtrails" is anything other than a funny name for a textbook used in teaching chemistry nomenclature 101 at the USAFA?

Dude, there's tons more evidence than just that USAF document.



Dude, why don't you google Unicorns? There's plenty of links... does that make them real?

The only claim that has any semblance of substance in this thread is the one made by the other guy who said that his documents are "proof" of the USAF srpaying chemtrails.

It clearly isn't, so I'm calling out his BS.

Open a new thread with your "evdience" and I'll consider participating there.

So far this thread hasn't provided anything convincing. Just the usual hype and misrepresentation. I will respond to what is in the thread, not to what is on the net.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by sandwiches
 


Truth is, the shills are pretty nervous about this document. It took almost a year for me to obtain..

Sorta sorry I shared it. Where are all the other chemtrailers? Have they all been banned?

Thought it might be interesting to share for the symposium. Maybe not.



[edit on 31-5-2010 by OurskiesRpoisoned]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
reply to post by sandwiches
 

Truth is, the shills are pretty nervous about this document. It took almost a year for me to obtain..
Sorta sorry I shared it. Where are all the other chemtrailers? Have they all been banned?
Thought it might be interesting to share for the symposium. Maybe not.


OurskiesRpoisoned.....

Shill here!


Your document has been shown to be a crock.

So.....what will you & sandwich do now?

Regards
Maybe...maybe not



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned
 


It's been nearly twenty four hours; where is your "ace in the hole?" One of your detractors actually confessed to being a paid meteorologist! Isn't that enough to open the floodgates? Shouldn't information that vital be trumpeted from the rooftops?



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:45 AM
link   
I have a document that proves the US Air Force made up the term Chemtrails.

The document is a course on weather modification chemicals.

I will show everyone the whole thing when I get the whole thing copied off.

It takes forever, because you can only produce one page at a time, and each time I have to put a nickel in. But I'll get the whole thing loaded up.

The video will explain the document, how I obtained it, etc. The video will also show a group of people protested at the front gate of US Air Force Academy in CO Springs. A couple of pilot interviews, pictures etc.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:47 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by sandwiches
reply to post by OzWeatherman

I suppose you failed to notice the NASA Contrail Science link in my signature.

Documentaries found on YouTube contain references which you can then go verify.

Stop choosing an authority and learn to think for yourself.

Or are you just here to deny this well-known phenomenon and impede free and independent investigation?


The NASA contrail science relies on a chart called the Appleman chart. The Appleman chart, made by Herbert Appleman, to test when seeded contrails would form for weather modification.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:52 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
I have a document that proves the US Air Force made up the term Chemtrails.



Ah.. so that is your new position? It doesn't prove the teaching of chemtrails, only that they came up with the name?

For other readers who may be worried of the above posters bias. What he is saying is actually this:

He has found a textbook that is used to teach basic nomenclature of chemistry to students of chemistry at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.

What that proves is not that the "Air Force invented the name" but simply that someone teaching chemistry at the USAFA in the early 90's gave his textbook about chemistry the name "chemtrails".
The poster has failed to produce a single shred of evidence that would make one think that the document even pertains to chemtrails in the sense the he is implying. "Chemtrails" in this document is simply an entertaining title for a dry textbook, a textbook whose contents are familiar to anyone who finished High School or an equivalent facility.
It's certainly not sophisticated science and it in no way appears to be a manual on how to spray chemtrails.

So let's go on in circles. I'm here.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
I have a document that proves the US Air Force made up the term Chemtrails.



Ah.. so that is your new position? It doesn't prove the teaching of chemtrails, only that they came up with the name?

For other readers who may be worried of the above posters bias. What he is saying is actually this:

He has found a textbook that is used to teach basic nomenclature of chemistry to students of chemistry at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.

What that proves is not that the "Air Force invented the name" but simply that someone teaching chemistry at the USAFA in the early 90's gave his textbook about chemistry the name "chemtrails".
The poster has failed to produce a single shred of evidence that would make one think that the document even pertains to chemtrails in the sense the he is implying. "Chemtrails" in this document is simply an entertaining title for a dry textbook, a textbook whose contents are familiar to anyone who finished High School or an equivalent facility.
It's certainly not sophisticated science and it in no way appears to be a manual on how to spray chemtrails.

So let's go on in circles. I'm here.


As far as I know, I'm the only civilian on the planet that has this document.

You are doing an awful lot of assuming, since you most certainly have not read this document.

I have people that are smarter than me in chemistry examining this. There's plenty in this document to wake people up, but it has to be presented right.

So whine all you want, you don't get to see it all until I am ready, you dig.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
I have a document that proves the US Air Force made up the term Chemtrails.



Ah.. so that is your new position? It doesn't prove the teaching of chemtrails, only that they came up with the name?

For other readers who may be worried of the above posters bias. What he is saying is actually this:

He has found a textbook that is used to teach basic nomenclature of chemistry to students of chemistry at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.

What that proves is not that the "Air Force invented the name" but simply that someone teaching chemistry at the USAFA in the early 90's gave his textbook about chemistry the name "chemtrails".
The poster has failed to produce a single shred of evidence that would make one think that the document even pertains to chemtrails in the sense the he is implying. "Chemtrails" in this document is simply an entertaining title for a dry textbook, a textbook whose contents are familiar to anyone who finished High School or an equivalent facility.
It's certainly not sophisticated science and it in no way appears to be a manual on how to spray chemtrails.

So let's go on in circles. I'm here.


As far as I know, I'm the only civilian on the planet that has this document.

You are doing an awful lot of assuming, since you most certainly have not read this document.

I have people that are smarter than me in chemistry examining this. There's plenty in this document to wake people up, but it has to be presented right.

So whine all you want, you don't get to see it all until I am ready, you dig.


Again, you have the evidence, but you won't show it.

To me that translates to: you don't have the evidence.

I've done my own research - I've contacted the supposed author and I even found people online who used the textbook while studying chemistry at the USAFA. They don't seem to remember that it had anything to do with chemtrails in the sense that you are imypling. They do notice how funny the title is though now that is is a conspiracy theory.

Anyway. Just come back an post your "evidence" and cut out the shill talk. Maybe someone will take you serious then. Until then.. Well.. you know...



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned

Originally posted by Maybe...maybe not
reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned
 


Well if you get hungry, you can always gobble a sandwich!!!



[edit on 31-5-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]


Another shill goes on the ignore list. You have nothing to offer to the conversation. Buh Bye


Bye Bye.....




posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 


Jeez, do you work for the government too? How is it, may I ask, that you contacted the author of this report? Why would you go through so much effort?

I'm enjoying seeing you guys squirm.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned
 


As far as you know?

So that makes it true does it?

Missed the first link I gave you then?

catalogue.nla.gov.au...

It's available here in Australia!

Hard to get...pfft!

You're seeing only what you want to see aren't you?



[edit on 31/5/10 by Chadwickus]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 


Jeez, do you work for the government too? How is it, may I ask, that you contacted the author of this report? Why would you go through so much effort?

I'm enjoying seeing you guys squirm.



Simple. I mailed the faculty and asked them. Since they are not part of some grand conspiracy but merely normal humans like me and you they provided me with the answers.

I'm here to deny ingorance, out of a personal motive. Since you seem to be spreading ignorance, I've got beef with you. No need for a conspiracy here.

I go through so much lenght because I have published stuff too and I know how frustrating it is if your material is used to promote ignorance when the intention of your material was the opposite (denying it; furthering knowledge). So I kind of feel sorry for the USAFA; in some ways you are smearing their names - and especially since you are implying that the author of a simple chemistry textbook is somehow part of a sinister conspiracy to kill us all or make us all sick.



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned


As far as I know, I'm the only civilian on the planet that has this document.


If that is as far as you know, then I guess I'm starting to understand what the problem with your premise is. There's tons of people that study at the USAFA and then do not stay in the USAF for their lives - they could all be in possession of said document or at the very least they all have knowledge of it.

Can I ask you a simple question? Do you, yourself understand what is written in the textbook? Have you had chiemical nomenclatura? Maybe the problem is that you haven't, then it would be excusable that you don't recognize it for what it is.

Ask any of the many natural science folks on here and they will tell you what the contents of a basic chemistry textbook will be (pretty much the same as what you posted pics of)



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by OurskiesRpoisoned
 

As far as you know?
So that makes it true does it?
Missed the first link I gave you then?
catalogue.nla.gov.au...
It's available here in Australia!
Hard to get...pfft!
You're seeing only what you want to see aren't you?


Chadwickus.....

For convenience:

Edit to add: FYI.....poisonsky & sandwich won't see this because they've got me on ignore



Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 31-5-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]



posted on May, 31 2010 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin

Originally posted by OurskiesRpoisoned
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 


Jeez, do you work for the government too? How is it, may I ask, that you contacted the author of this report? Why would you go through so much effort?

I'm enjoying seeing you guys squirm.



Simple. I mailed the faculty and asked them. Since they are not part of some grand conspiracy but merely normal humans like me and you they provided me with the answers.



How about a copy of the response. Did you supply the doc #?



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join