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.

 

Interview with DOE contractor about HAARP/Chemtrails!!! MUST HEAR!

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 
It doesn't take a genuis to figure out that NANO PARTICLES can be SPRAYED into the jet engine's vapors to acheive the desired effects of geo engineering. It doesn't require thousands of millions of pounds of payload. Maybe 10's of thousands of pounds. But that's it.




posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Defy the propagandists who spout their boxed, mindless idiocy, kiddos!

Keep to your common sense, and higher logical/intuitive skills than these fools can muster


Peace.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ReinkDuser
 


Not trolling, giving my opinion and backing up what I say when possible.
You cannot block me here, as you do on YouTube. It's part of the reason I've not been on YouTube for a while.

Back to your contention, what have you added to the post with your comment? Nothing. At least I have kept on topic. No one gets paid to do any of this.....your posts, threads, opinions and research do not matter.
Interesting way you put about your own "well-qualified person".



...would love to put you in a debate with someone who is actually qualified to debate this topic. (bold mine)

It could be taken as an affirmation that your person is not well-qualified after all. I brought up valid points; did you reconsider? Or do you think someone who is able to research and write about something automatically makes them an expert without study and experience?
It would explain a lot about the "proof" offered by so many "chemtrailers". They accept anything.
edit on 2-1-2011 by stars15k because: clarity



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ReinkDuser
 


Tens of thousands of pounds, in any size, still takes up a heck of a lot of space and still weighs enough it would need to be taken into consideration for fuel consumption. This is something that the crew would need to know. It cannot be hidden in secret compartments that no one knows about.
Anything mentioned in "chemtrail" lore would probably also need to be delivered in a fluid medium, which would add additional weight.
You didn't mention if it would be added before, during or after combustion, but really the point is moot. Anything that small (I avoid the use of "nano" unless it is in fact being used correctly--which I doubt) before or during combustion could foul the engine. Anything added after combustion without being obvious (because you cannot provide any proof of your hypothesis) would be delivered into the burn. In other words, it will burn up.
And nothing of the sort has ever been found anyway. Ever.
If I am wrong, please provide your proof, not just your opinion based on your observation, because you cannot tell what the chemical content of anything is just by looking.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by ReinkDuser
 


Really? This is possible how, exactly??:


....can be SPRAYED into the jet engine's vapors ...


Photos? Diagrams? Schematics of the apparatus?

As Stars and also firepilot pointed out (and you scoffed at the other pilot. Going to scoff at ME too? How many pilots have to tell you something, before you understand us??), ANY "substance" carried up has weight...which you acknowledge (but, you don't understand the implications, in airplane design and operation, because you aren't a pilot, I'm willing to wager??). And, of course...if it has weight, it has VOLUME. Takes up room. Needs t be stored somewhere, on board (where" Pictures??) and has to be plumbed somehow, through some sort of tubes usually (show pictures??) AND there needs to be a way to make it move around, from storage through tubes...so, pumps.

Pumps, how are they powered? Usually electrically, in airplanes. How are the wired? Where are the on/off switches? Circuit breakers? (EVERY electrical component on an airplane has a C/B. If you have an electrical fault of any kind (a "fault" is another word for a "short") you can have a fire start. Not good idea, on airplanes.

HOW can "all" of this "equipment" exist, without any of the pilots noticing?? The mechanics?? Ground handlers....THEY are trained, in case you didn't know, to be aware of each airplane they service, they know some details...and IF they see something unusual, they are supposed to tell someone. They may discover a broken something, and be a hero for the day!!

Back to the weights. Do you understand "Weight and Balance" in airplanes?? Know what the Center of Gravity is? EVERYTHING that is loaded into an airplane affects not only its weight, but its C/G too....unless what we're talking about is located right AT the C/G....except, the C/G can vary, slightly ---- within a certain range. BUT ONLY so much, or it's very dangerous.

Wanna see the insides of an airplane??



There....skin "peeled off"....now, the C/G? It's always close to the center of lift....that the wing provides. Everything with weight that is located away from the C/G for any distance, we call that an "arm"...like a lever. Multiply its weight, times its distance, and it has a "moment/arm" of force, acting to alter the balance. A few hundred pounds, on a large jet like that 757 up there, is not a major deal. 1,000 pounds? Depends on the moment/arm. 10,000?? BIG deal.

Well....the wings, outboard of the fuselage, and in the middle part there, that's where the fuel all goes....above the cabin floor is the passenger area, you know what that looks like inside. Below the cabin floor, the cargo and baggage areas, and some are dedicated to airplane equipment. NO "spare room" anywhere.....

....THIS is just part of the reason REAL pilots scoff and laugh at the "chemtrail" nonsense.....



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 
NANO tube design. How do you think cloud seeding planes are set up? Same principle, different poison.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ReinkDuser
 


Oh, wait a minute!!

Forgive me while I cough......nano-TUBES???

You are aware, are you not, what "nano" means?


Nano- (symbol n) is a prefix in the metric system denoting a factor of 10−9. It is frequently encountered in science and electronics for prefixing units of time and length, like 30 nanoseconds (symbol ns), 100 nanometres (nm) or in the case of electrical capacitance, 100 nanofarads (nF).


Do you realize what size you get, if you take one meter, and divide it by a 1....that is preceded by eight zeroes?? (If you've forgotten your exponential numbers....10 to the minus 9, is a 1, with nine decimals places to the LEFT. 0.000000001

So, your claim of "nano-tubes" is ludicrous.....they would be invisible to the naked eye, sure.......and NOT able to "spray" anything. Well, maybe in some fashion someday, in medical applications....where they may deliver extremely TINY amounts of something, some medicine perhaps.

Of course, on Star Trek the "Borg" have "nano" tubules....big enough to see (since it only works in visual entertainment like TV and movies if the audience can SEE them)......maybe you think the airplanes have been assimilated by Borg??


And, you still haven't done your other maths....to think this all the way through.

You aren't thinking properly about the WEIGHTS, but also not about the AREA....really, not just area, but VOLUME. You have to think in three dimensions, for volume....not just two dimensions, for area.

Say you have enough "stuff" to cover one square yard (using American units). That is equal to nine square feet, right? How many cubic feet is that, though....if you go in the next dimension, for volume? Does it "double"? Nope. It is 27 cubic feet. Now, you still have to "reach the ground", for this airborne "spraying" concept, at high altitudes, to work (if that's what you're allege is the "purpose").

How much will this material get diluted, on the way "down"? WILL it even GO down?? (Unlikely.....very light material, fine particles? Will disperse, spread and dissipate....can't "target" it).

Also, pay attention to any time-lapse of clouds...available on YouTube. You NEVER see any of the high-altitude clouds "dropping down" to the surface of the Earth.


Here, someone filmed in a slow time-lapse, some high clouds. NATURAL clouds, as you don't see any contrails being formed. Watch them pass by....oh, and also? This is a good example of the illusion of "height", when you are looking off in the distance. The Earth is curved, you know....and clouds, up high, but far away near the horizon? It's an illusion when they "look" low. You can see t hem all moving together, as a group here...so they are all at roughly the same height the entire time:



Next, a combination of some "natural" cirrus, with a few contrails thrown in...see how the contrails linger, and change...soon, they too look like cirrus. The FACT that there are already conditions for "normal" cirrus to form, means that contrails will LINGER too! And, nothing "falls down" either:




Relaxing music, huh? Stroll around in YouTube, and see some more......



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReinkDuser
reply to post by weedwhacker
 
NANO tube design. How do you think cloud seeding planes are set up? Same principle, different poison.



Tell us how cloud seeding planes are set up.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by ReinkDuser
 


See...these are the subjects I want Assange to expose, that is if he is a legitimate whistleblower and not some kind of disinfo agent for a compartmentalized branch of MI5.

I couldn't care less about information cables between the Angola Consulate and the Lybian Ambassador fixing oil prices in the Faulkland Islands in which he took a bribe from Desmund TuTu because Achmed Jubanji Muhamed was bribing Desmund Tutu.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


"Oh, but the particles or tubes are so small they can't weigh anything."


Pretty much a picture of the grasp of standard science of any "chemtrailer".



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ReinkDuser
 


Uh, wrong.
Perhaps you should look up "cloud seeding" as done by professionals, not the stuff of "chemtrail" legend you might find on a "chemtrail" site.
Anytime a "chemtrailer" brings up cloud-seeding, it is near the end of their functional knowledge about anything in the atmosphere.
You really would benefit from studying a weather guide at the very least. The one put out in partnership with the Smithsonian is a really good start. Lots of pictures and illustrations. Covers pretty much everything I've ever looked up; those things I wanted to understand better I use my weather text book, "Weather Studies, Introduction to Atmospheric Science.". It's put out by the American Meteorological Society as the textbook for an online weather class, a college level course. Unfortunately, the course is not offered as independent study outside of being enrolled at a college. I was totally bummed out by that.



posted on Jan, 4 2011 @ 09:59 PM
link   
We seem to have forgotten the HAARP part of this post. This same guy is predicting an earthquake on the New Madrid fault due to HAARP. Apparently the same "well-qualified" person help him figure it all out. It has something to do with how the DOE sets up their antennas.
So if the earth rumbles in the US midwest, Mike called it first!
Yeah, right.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join