It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Have These Chemtrail Formations Been Appearing In Your City Lately?

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:09 PM
reply to post by dplum517

As far as the disinfo thing goes, that's the brilliant part. Put enough truth in there so it seems to make sense, especially to someone with technical knowledge of some sort but spin it just a little or leave important information out so that all the pieces don't fit the way they should. Do that for both sides, and viola, you have enough subterfuge to keep everybody in the position to "know they are right" and pit both sides against the middle. It's the same model most wars are based on. And people are blind to it unless they know enough about enough different kinds of things or are simply open to information without prejudice. And on a forum like this? Forgeddaboutit. It's that very model on steroids because it is more or less anonymous. You mix in the legitimate skeptics and people that have bought into that end of the line with "paid" disinfo agents, mix it around with the people on the other end of the spectrum that believe everything they are fed (thereby giving the whole conspiracy nut image which functions rather nicely as part of the same dynamic) and it becomes what I have seen some of these threads devolve into. Always mix the legitimate with the illegitimate

NPR is another good example. I did a critical content analysis of them one time. The majority of their pieces over time ended up being fluffy human interest, sports commentary, entertainment. The news pieces that were more important than that were generally spun just slightly while still maintaining the same undercore as the rest of the media. They do a better job than Fox at being balanced but still work the same line from the left rather than the right. Even their experts are often drawn from places like the Rand Corporation or many of the think tanks the Koch brothers have their hands in. Same thing in politics, get sick of the right spin, move to the left spin. It's the same dynamic that has kept the EBE (alien) presence successfully hidden and ridiculed over the decades. It's fairly obvious once you are able to see it for what it is.

I just read this article that sums up a different aspect of this in a somewhat lengthy but scholarly and interesting way,


edit on 15-12-2010 by coyotepoet because: added another example

edit on 15-12-2010 by coyotepoet because: word

edit on 15-12-2010 by coyotepoet because: add link

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:37 PM

Originally posted by coyotepoet
Okay, lets try this again, Defcon didn't prove anything except by the fact that he completely disappeared when I called him on his stuff (do you see any posts from him after that point?)

To begin with, I did not disappear, you made it quite clear that when you started to lose the conversation, you wanted me to leave the thread, which I respectfully did. Allow me to refresh your memory:

Originally posted by coyotepoet
I didn't really create this thread for a bunch of doubters/potential psy-ops to try to debunk what I saw. I'm interested in whether other people are seeing it in other places.
Now please go away or at least stop trying to disprove that this is occurring as the more you do the more it starts to look like perceptual psy-ops. Again, I started this post to hear about other peoples experiences not to be used as a tool to debunk and disinform.
Now again, could you please stop flooding this thread with your D-bunk? Besides, also again, this is a thread to see if other people have seen this particular pattern too, not a discussion about whether they do or do not exist (which they definitely do.) I mean, when you look at it that way, extensive space on such a thread spent on telling people they didn't see what they are saying they see could be considered off topic.

I also have a life off ATS, and other duties to preform here when I am present.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
"FAA Map"???

She was basing it on the pattern of yellow lines going in a thick loop she pointed out on the FAA map. If she is incorrect about what those yellow lines are about than I would appreciate your explanation as an aviator.

Don't know WHO made that "map", nor WHO drew "yellow lines" on it....where did she say it came from??

It’s a noise abatement map used by airports to track noise levels per number of flights over flying or landing at particular airports under X number of feet. It does not show aircraft flying above certain altitudes as they do not make enough noise to create a noise abatement issue. Here is an example of another noise abatement map:

TPA Noise Abatement (Click the North or South Flow maps halfway down the page)

the yellow flights are flights traversing the area but not landing.
i.e… At higher altitude as they are not on approach or departing, often commuter flights.

Oh, BTW… Those maps do not come from the FAA, but rather the local county aviation authority who run each individual airport.

Originally posted by dplum517
Hmmm Well ATS staff member I would like you to get me some pictures of "Persistent" "Contrails" with commercial planes landing at any domestic/international airport. This does not include planes flying overhead above 10,000 feet that are clearly not landing at any commercial airport.

Aircraft do not make persistent contrails when landing as the climate is generally too warm at that low of altitude to have them persist. I am sure you are already aware of thiis however, which is why you are asking for something that is impossible for anyone to provide.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:51 AM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Here look at this “Interflight” on the map I linked above:


That must be them spraying chemtrails around in circles above someone’s house, right?

Now lets look at the empty base map for that location and see what’s written underneath:

Clearwater Airpark
Yep, I bet they're spraying lots of nasty stuff out of those private aircraft, helicopters, and skydivers aircraft.

You ready to admit this is bunk yet?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 01:43 AM
reply to post by defcon5

Started to lose was not my perception of how that was going I merely asked you to take the debunking to some other chemtrail thread as I was not intending on engaging in that debate at all with this, as I said in a previous post-content squashing. Apparently it was somebody's impression that I "schooled" you, though I wouldn't have put it or thought of it that way. I appreciate you have a life and respectfully eventually stopped (or did you?) and I took a cheap shot with that. Apologies. I appreciate the "schoolin" regarding the maps. The explanation of the yellow lines makes sense and gives me more insight into that aspect. Thank you. Still doesn't provide a blanket dismissal. So no, don't believe it is bunk. I'd invite you to consider my post just above your perfectly timed debunking re-entry and consider the sage wisdom "the more I know, the more I know I don't know" and I will endeavor to do the same. Perhaps we can agree to meet in the middle on this but there absolutely is spraying going on in the atmosphere for whatever reason and if there are legit persistent contrails as you are so convinced (and you seem to know what you are talking about in that area-thanks again for the map explanation) there are those too. But again, proving one, doesn't disprove the other.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 09:42 AM
reply to post by defcon5

Would you mind giving the precise link to those maps?
I mean sorry to say but those maps are a bunch of colors. That shows nothing of what is actually in the air at that time.
Great you have shown us a digitized colored map of some private airport. I am sure there is nothing above that airport as far as contrails. Also, who is saying those "colored" lines are chemtrails??
Skeptics love to take things out of context and context is everything.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:08 AM
reply to post by defcon5

Your little maps offer no more proof for your position on this matter than what has been offered by the members who are on the opposite side of the fence.

I really dont understand some of the heated rhetoric in this thread when the OP only asked if anyone else had seen similar trails in other cities and made no attempt to open a chemtrail vs contrail debate.
For some reason, just that simple question brought wave after wave of "proof now" posts, along with subtle and not so subtle character attacks.

For someone thats "been a member as long as you have" and is a Moderator, you actually have a pretty poor attitude, at least in this thread.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:41 AM
reply to post by Animatrix

No, the thread name is

Have These Chemtrail Formations Been Appearing In Your City Lately?

This statement sets up a debate on "chemtrails" because "chemtrails" do not exist. You cannot see something that isn't there.
The trails are not formations, they are evidence only of the direction the plane was flying.
The cannot "appear" anyway, because you cannot possibly tell chemical content by eyesight.
Three fallacies in one title requires attention and correction.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:51 AM
reply to post by coyotepoet
I haven't seen those formations but it seems that every time I look at sunrise or sunset the planes are diligently flying across the sun starting early sunrise(I call them sky gnomes).I haven't seen a clear one in quite awhile.I mean really when you consistently see contrails across the sun you have to come to the conclusion that something is up,I don't know what but something sure is.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 10:52 AM
Maybe this will help a few people.

Ask ANY chemistry teacher in ANY school in the world.
What is the one byproduct of any form of combustion?
Answer = Water vapor

Then ask “What are clouds made of?”
Answer = Water Vapor

Then ask yourself “Do clouds persist?”
Answer = Yes they can depending on weather conditions.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:02 AM
reply to post by samkent

Once again the skeptic has no sense of "context."
No one is denying that contrails and clouds exist. There is an added variable called chemtrails. My dad is a pilot and have grown up around and love aviation. So, if you think "contrails" should persist for 2+ hours then form plasma looking clouds, you have been a victim of disinformation.
It's almost as if you skeptics don't believe that the government has the power to do this. Our government loves to hide things and this is one of them. These are military operations.
I only wish everyone could see what I have seen. They spray in a very orderly fashion at certain times. I have seen two of the jets that are identical flying literally right next to each other and one was leaving a chemtrail and the other was leaving nothing, almost as if one was tagging along to watch or monitor or research...idk.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:02 AM
reply to post by stars15k

Right.. and thats the same thing people said when they first heard about Project ECHELON in the 90s.
Our Govt would never do something like that, youre just a bunch of paranoid, tinfoil hat wearing nuts etc..

His thread title was calling out for other chemtrail believers to offer their opinions and observations, not a challenge to prove they exist.
He didnt say, "these are chemtrails and you cant prove otherwise" but you guys ,on the other hand, do come in and basically say, hey these are ALL contrails and they NEVER spray any chemicals and YOU cant prove otherwise.

The fact is, you can say they dont exist all you want but you cant prove it, he can say they do exist and he cant prove that either.

The guy asked a question and offered an opinion and you took it upon yourselves to come in and "prove" his opinion wrong, as if your opinion means more than his.

Well, you know, if you want to be technical and you guys seem to really rely on technicalities, whats that stuff that comes out of Crop Spraying planes and choppers?
And what does it leave?
OH, its a chemical and it leaves a trail (chem-trail)

edit on 16-12-2010 by Animatrix because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:10 AM
reply to post by Animatrix

I know I have posted it before, but this is an awesome chemtrail link.

For a phenom that doesn't exist, the list of "delusional" scientists and engineers just got a lot longer.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:21 AM
One more thing, to even imply that civilian and OR military aircraft arent equipped to spray chemicals is ridiculous.
There are many, many situations where chemicals are sprayed, one instance that comes to mind is the spraying of Agent Orange in Viet Nam.
Another would be the dispersants in the gulf or flame retardants on wildfires.
And I personally witnessed a C130, flying at about 300 feet, spraying insecticide (or whatever) over Southern La after Katrina and Rita. At least they claimed it was insecticide.

So, again, your theory that all trails are contrails is proven wrong and with that im done playing your little games with your multiple accounts.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:30 AM
reply to post by samkent

Ask anybody, what is the stuff that looks like clouds that is used in "skywriting"?
Most can't tell you, but it sure looks like clouds don't it?

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by Animatrix

Oh, for Pete's sake!!

One more thing, to even imply that civilian and OR military aircraft arent equipped to spray chemicals is ridiculous.

NO ONE has said there are no airplanes able to spray things!!! What is happening, though, is take a look at any "chemtrail" website, or UTube video...and they show AIRLINERS!!! Making contrails! NOT "spraying" anything!

There are many, many situations where chemicals are sprayed, one instance that comes to mind is the spraying of Agent Orange in Viet Nam.

Yes. Secially rigged airplnes, of various types. I'v e linked the informaiton already...did you read it?

Another would be the dispersants in the gulf or flame retardants on wildfires.

Yes, again...the dispersants. BUT, firefighting is different...they DUMP a huge quantity, all very quickly.

AND...something that dispersants, "Agent Orange", insecticides, aerial firefighting, crop dusting, etc ALL have in common? Know what it is??? I think you do, because you wrote it next:

And I personally witnessed a C130, flying at about 300 feet, spraying insecticide (or whatever) over Southern La after Katrina and Rita...

Exactly!! Bingo!

LOW ALTITUDES!! That is why those tactics work....NOT at 35,000 feet. How hard is this to undertand?
AND....airliners, which are so often featured by the silly "chemtrail" beliving websites and videos....they don't spray! Only occasional, and very rare example is for SOME jets that can "dump" fuel. ("Jettison" is the more technical term, but we also say "dump')...

Most narrow body jets simply don't have the capacity to fuel jettison. So, you see the ability only on the larger, "jumbo" jets....or "wide-bodies". In any case, they dump the FUEL.....and it goes real, real fast. Using the Boeing 767 (since I'm familiar with it) as example....the rate of jettision, with ALL fuel pumps operating, and BOTH (only two) nozzles open, is about 2,400 pounds per minute. (about 350-375 gal per min). Fuel dumping is done ONLY in emergencies, and then only as much as needed to get down to the maximaum landing weight limits, in that emergency.

edit on 16 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 11:57 AM
reply to post by Stewie

Didn't I already answer this, to you, in another thread??

...what is the stuff that looks like clouds that is used in "skywriting"?

Thought for sure I did....if so, why bring it up again?? :shk:

Well, anyway....gee, the answers are right there, just a few keyboard clicks away:

The typical smoke generator consists of a pressurized container holding a low viscosity oil such as Chevron/Texaco "Canopus 13" (formerly "Corvus Oil"). The oil is injected into the hot exhaust manifold causing it to vaporize into a huge amount of dense white smoke.

It isn't rocket science, you know.....

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:09 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Those were just known examples of chemical spraying thats been going on, to counter the posts that said that "there are NO chemtrails" etc etc..

Fact is, if you needed to modify the weather, you would dump the chemical at cloud level, preferably at the tops of the clouds.

And hypothetically speaking, if you wanted something to enter the rain water, you would spray it into clouds as you were seeding them with silver iodide or whatever newer chemical they may have.
Or just simply create a compound and dump them in the same tank.

Now whatever goes into the rain water, also enters the drinking water, water for crops etc.. which opens the door to all kinds of possibilities, economic, social or the more extreme military.

Is any of it true? who the hell knows. I dont and you sure as hell dont, even though you want people to think you do.
Thats why theyre called "Conspiracy Theories"

edit on 16-12-2010 by Animatrix because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:22 PM
Here are a few facts on

They accept donations ONLY via Paypal.
Nothing says quality funding like Paypal. It tells me their income is below the minimum level needed to maintain a normal credit card account. Even mom and pop retail stores have credit card accounts.

Their email is a Yahoo account.
What none of their writers, scholars or activists can research how to use a normal POP mail account? Not exactly the sign of quality organization.

Their own description for their domain is

The Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG) is an independent research and media group of progressive writers, scholars and activists committed to curbing the tide of "globalisation" and "disarming" the US military agenda. Global Research publishes new

Curbing the tide of globalization? Yea like that’s going to happen. Notice they misspelled globalization. I guess these scholars can’t use a spell checker.

“Disarming” the US military agenda? Nothing like starting a new story with an open mind is there?

And from their own website:

The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be held responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in Global Research articles.

So they can’t prove anything they publish. Sounds like a group of Science Fiction writers to me.

The whole thing is run out of a private residence. So when you go using these guys for your facts your conclusions are on par with their quality. And for me that’s way down on the list of trusted resources.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 01:00 PM
reply to post by Animatrix

The fact is, you can say they dont exist all you want but you cant prove it, he can say they do exist and he cant prove that either.

I don't need to prove it. I say they are the natural products of jet fuel combusted through a jet engine into a very cold atmosphere with enough humidity to trigger a chain-reaction with the water vapor already in the air to form a man-made cloud. They are clouds, and are composed of the same things as any cloud is....water in some form and pollutants.
"He" can say they exist and he can't prove it. You got that part right. But for there to be "real" "chemtrails", there should be a "chem-" factor of some type. Since he is the one claiming it is not exhaust , he needs to provide the proof it is somehow different. In order to do that, the trail itself needs to be tested. There are planes that do that.
Or you could look up the results in competent studies from decades of research, done by real scientists who are experts in relevent fields and find out what is in them, because the experts have, and do, and will continue to get samples from the trail itself.
Which would all show the debunkers are's exhaust and lots of water.

posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 01:15 PM
reply to post by dplum517

The dimensions of these trails, determined from the various satellite images, are summarized in Table 1. Most of the trails spread at 7-8 km h-1 and reached maximum width within 2-4 hours, except for G, which spread at about 5 kmh-1 and peaked after only 2 hours from when it was first detectable. Contrails A, F, and G lasted more than 10 hours, while B dissipated after 5 hours. The contrail areal coverage reached a maximum of 20,456 km2 at 1445 UTC just from six contrails.

This is from a study

I've just posted this on another thread, if it looks familiar to you.
The only people who think a contrail cannot persist, that you can somehow "see" a difference in "chem-" vs. con-, that planes are flying in "patterns" spraying "something", and that two planes cannot produce different size/persistence/density contrails are the people who get their vast "chemtrail" knowledge on "chemtrail" internet sites and YouTube videos.
You seem to believe all of the above, and are not bothered by the lack of valid testing to find that elusive "chem-" needed to make your claims anything more than a silly, paranoid theory.
I believe the knowledge behind the decades of research done be experts.
Prove the experts are somehow wrong.
Or decide you would rather 'believe' than know.
I choose denying ignorance, not embracing it.

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in