International Chemtrail Symposium May 29 2010

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


Wrong, apparently Im the biggest shill here not on ignore

I know of that document is been done and debunked here on ATS before. I do recall something about acid rain last time it was talked about

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

Hmmm, interesting. So we know that the word chemtrails has previously been used in a totally innoculous context - as a title for a basic science course, to make it sound more interesting.

You bunch are a riot.

Put chemistry and contrails together. What do you get? *jeopardy music*

Please, continue reinforcing your point. Can you show that acid rain chemistry is used by USAF pilots for anything else other than weather modification?

Originally posted by sandwiches


Please, continue reinforcing your point. Can you show that acid rain chemistry is used by USAF pilots for anything else other than weather modification?

First of all we are not dealing with "USAF pilots". This is a school we are talkin about, the USAFA, not the USAF. There is no evidence that the USAF ever used these documents to train anyone; it was used at the USAFA where the teaching of chemistry is to be expected (since it's a school)

Actually, since you are making the claim: Please provide evidence that acid rain has anything to do with weather modification at all. It seems to me this is one thing that we are all denying and you are asserting. You know about the burden of proof, right?

so in essence.

1) It's not USAF, it's not pilots. It's cadets, and it's a basic chemistry textbook like any other, especially the parts that are linked to in the op.

2) There is no obvious, sui generis connection between acid rain and weather modification.
Acid Rain is used as a typical topic in any chemistry textbook that pertains to atmospherical chemistry since it is a good topic to base examples and technical problems on... It's ideal to practice nomenclatura.


So Chemical and Trail together spell chemtrails. Is that enough for you to believe that this is a handbook on how to spray the populace despite that what you can read in the pics is nothing but a normal chemistry textbook? really? wow?



[edit on 31-5-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

reply to post by sandwiches

Please, continue reinforcing your point. Can you show that acid rain chemistry is used by USAF pilots for anything else other than weather modification?

Why would pilots need to know anything about acid rain, or for that matter, chemistry? Aren't they just supposed to follow orders and gas themselves? Isn't it just possible that this document is intended for Air Force chemists, who would need to know about things like acid rain, just in case federal laws forced them to change the power plants on their bases or something? BTW, did you know you can use your scanner to read the microfiche? It might save you some nickels. You might also be able to find a pdf file somewhere. I think Icke might have one.

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

I'm just investigating and I keep an open mind.

In fact, I stumbled across the following opinion which supports you.

It appears that this course was related solely to the chemistry of traditional condensation trails and that this use of Chemtrails was simply a "catchy" coined term used in the title of the courses - so don't take this too seriously! But one has to wonder...

Source

I would most prefer to restore this thread to the original topic, but if it's so important for you to discredit and ridicule everything you think gives the "wrong view" of the subject, I suppose it's a free board.

Good luck

Any of you debunkers, please give me 8 examples of compounds made from Valence Metals.

If you guessed Barium Fluoride (BaF2), you get a point.

Global-Warming Mitigation Strategies; UV Mitigation and the cessation of the effects of Atmospheric Greenhouse-gases were given a commonality by Teller, et al, and this was the use of a sub-micron particulate. Barium, Aluminum, Thorium, Selenium were to be processed into a sub-micron particle dispensed from high-altitude aircraft, ionized with a specific electrical charge. (BARIUM FLUORIDE OPTICAL CRYSTAL SAFETY DATA SHEET: www.crystran.co.uk...

libertyforlife.com...

The mechanism of heterogeneous ice nucleation on inorganic substrates is not well understood despite work on AgI and other materials over the past 50 years. We have selected BaF2 as a model substrate for study since its (111) surface makes a near perfect match with the lattice of the basal face of Ih ice and would appear to be an ideal nucleating agent

jcp.aip.org...

Or, if you guessed lithium phosphate (Li3PO4), you get a prize.

Or maybe hydrogen cyanide (HCN) is one of your choices. Winner!

Go ahead, there are 5 more listed on page 17. Can you guess which they are?

reply to post by sandwiches


"Restore" to the original topic? OK:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The OP was about a nonsense "symposium" to begin with. The four blue linkys in the OP are nonsense too, as has been borne out in the threads they link.

The narrative and discussion ever since is pertinent, because it clearly shows (yet again) that there is NO MERIT to these so-called "chemtrail" claims....

NOT in the sense that so many, many wish to claim. The 'field' is rife with totally outrageous claims that are mostly based on complete misundertandings, and misidentifications of normally-occuring contrails and even cirrus clouds, produced under scientifically understood and comprehensively studied condtions.




[edit on 31 May 2010 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by sandwiches
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

I'm just investigating and I keep an open mind.

Why does this sound like Eric Cartman saying "I'm just asking questions" to me when I read it from you? LOL....

No harm done. It just seems that everytime someone tries to discuss any of the claims made in this thread the people making them refuse to engage in discussion. But I bet that's your impression too - ironic, isn't it.

I didn't want to derail your thread but the only meat in here was in "OUrskiesRpoisened"'s claims and I found them to be too extravagant to not challenge them.
We could both grow from discussing this with each other. But we're just going in circles. Maybe that's the internet, maybe that's just the human mind.

I just can't get over that someone would deceive other people to think that a simple textbook is a conspiracy manual. That reminds me of the guy who "synthesized" anti-gravity on here some weeks ago. There's always going to be people like me on the net who feel challenged by such claims. Challenges are a good thing for the mind.... A shame that everything is debunkable so easily... LOL.. well... almost everything...

Now I seriously derailed this thread. Sorry. I'll keep out until I'll smell the chordite from poison's smoking gun.

reply to post by sandwiches


It's what is know as a pun, a play on words.

A guide through chemistry, a walk though, a trail through chemistry, a ......... chemtrail!

reply to post by Granite


Okay, this is just getting silier.
Please think a bit. A plane leaving a contrail flying north to south, and an airplane leaving a contrail flying east to west will, wait for it.....

HAVE CONTRAILS THAT CROSS!

Do that a few times, and you will make a "tic-tac-toe", even more and you have a "grid". Add in planes flying anything but N-S and E-W leave "x's" and "triangulation".
Please look up something about aviation navigation and routes.

Why do people continually have to be told this? It's even dumber than the people who keep insisting a dark line in the sky, a "black chemtrail", is sprayed or projected to guide a plane. Apparently some people must learn about shadows, too.

reply to post by stars15k

Have I got a video for you...

It cannot be a shadow because it blocks the sun.

reply to post by sandwiches


YouTube videos! Gotta love an education on the world's most public, unregulated WORSE source of information on the web. Here's something for you to think about:
The contrail is between the sun and the shadow. It's still a shadow, and yes, you can have a shadow between you and the sun. It's being projected onto a cirrus cloud. That's what they all are. The only known way to remove completely remove light is either when you block light, creating a shadow, or a black hole. So are you saying there is a black hole, small enough to suck just a line of light out of a small region of the atmosphere AND that it is controlled to do it? Can you think of another logical solution?
It's a SHADOW, it can only be a shadow. Here's a diagram of how it all works:

www.atoptics.co.uk...

Jeez, what passes for "proof" is absolutely amazing. You should really go show your proof at:
www.bautforum.com...
They'll love it.

reply to post by stars15k

I'm afraid I disagree.

Originally posted by sandwiches
reply to post by stars15k

I'm afraid I disagree.

And I, and thousands of other weather geeks around the world, disagree with you. We see this all the time

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/eacf35f8a314.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by Essan


Interesting, i have been a weather geek all my life as well, funny how none of these massive long-lasting contrails appeared till the last 10 years roughly.

Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
reply to post by Essan

 

Interesting, i have been a weather geek all my life as well, funny how none of these massive long-lasting contrails appeared till the last 10 years roughly.

LOL. That's a big fail when you write that to Essan. I bet he would give you this link if he was around....

contrailscience.com...

If you're a lifelong weather geek I must wonder why you just came up with the single most debunked talking point of chemtrailers there ever was.

reply to post by Essan


I was kinda hoping for a new explanation. I've never been given any when this same question came up.

Usually, they block me, or start insulting my person, mental health, or intellect. But they never answer my question.

Originally posted by stars15k
reply to post by Essan

 

I was kinda hoping for a new explanation. I've never been given any when this same question came up.

Usually, they block me, or start insulting my person, mental health, or intellect. But they never answer my question.

Stars15k.....

No.....Dumb & Dumber never answer questions truthfully.....nor do they respond truthfully to the information that is presented to them.

Rational & sensible debate with Dumb & Dumber is not possible.....if you keep trying to achieve that as I have done previously, you too will be on the Dumb & Dumber ignore list.

They know EXACTLY what they are doing in that they simply want to deny & remove all those who disagree with them.

I see no point to it.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

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

reply to post by stars15k


Totally use to it! I'm blocked by people on YouTube before I even comment on their videos. Pre-emptive ignorance through censorship.

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

Photos don't prove indefinite persistence.

And you try to appear scientific.


[edit on 2010-5-31 by sandwiches]