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.

 

Legislators confronted with chemtrail concerns

page: 10
12
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZombieJesus

"The only real clouds we have are the cum...cumulus L1 and L2"



And there's the danger of conspiracy beliefs. With no proper education to process information or even the most basic critical thinking skills, a lot of bad information gets in and takes hold. She knows a LOT about the lore involved in the chemtrail conspiracy movement but none about the basic of meteorology. Extremely sad.




posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by ZombieJesus

"The only real clouds we have are the cum...cumulus L1 and L2"



And there's the danger of conspiracy beliefs. With no proper education to process information or even the most basic critical thinking skills, a lot of bad information gets in and takes hold. She knows a LOT about the lore involved in the chemtrail conspiracy movement but none about the basic of meteorology. Extremely sad.


Very sad indeed.

Her remark about "altocumulus" clouds is beyond incorrect, and laughable.

The phrase was more than likely coined by Luke Howard, and has been in use since at least 1894.
merriam-webster



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by grahag
 


Welcome, Grahag. Nice to meet you. You are totally correct. Those that actually look at both sides, like you and me, will see that the comparison makes the "chemtrail" theory look rather silly. They don't do good science, they don't understand the science they present, and then they present themselves as "experts".
I learned with my first "chemtrail" research that the people who believe the "chemtrail" routinely do not understand the most basic points of weather or clouds.
you will be called close-minded, a sheeple, afraid, ignorant, a shill, a disinfo agent (for which people will claim you are being paid). All by people who keep insisting they can look at a cloud miles away and tell there lurks within some type of toxin (yesterday), geo-engineering attempt (today, or who knows what (tomorrow, because the reason keeps changing when they can no longer talk themselves out of the corner).
thank you for practicing critical thinking. It is not a well practiced trait on "chemtrail" threads.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 

Are you a scientist?
I will take your word for it, just be honest.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Human_Alien
One last thing.......


(Removed the Video for space concerns.....and really, it's rather stupid)


~~Happy 2011~~


This is exactly what I was referring to on the request for a citation, which has gone ignored as is usual.
Debunkers know the discernment of science, and expert is expected.
A self-described "TV weatherman" and "atmospheric researcher" is NOT a Meteorologist. He's not an expert, he took journalism and TV in college.
That's like asking a TV doctor to diagnose your illness......they are not experts, but they play an expert on TV.

Gee....this is really kind of funny. Thanks for the laugh and the further exposure of what passes as "proof" on your side.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Stewie
 


Hey Stewart,

Was curious about your thought on the report by NASA regarding Contrails impact on weather?

Here's a post to the link in case you missed it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Just more disinfo from "them" who we call "they"?



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by InfowarriorCarson
 




As for the science, you debunkers continue to claim there is no science to prove these things. They have run many tests of what is in these chem-trails and have found high levels of barium, aluminum, etc. Are we pretending these facts don't exist? What about there own public documentation covering the weather modification subject?


And have you ever read the reports of the testing done? They are not done in situ, they are usually done on ground collection, both air and water. They do not use a control, which would exclude all other possible sources of the elements found. Do I pretend these tests do not exist? No, I've read them and have seen the lack of good science method. When there is no good science there can be no good results.
As far as the weather modification, everything I've been presented from a "chemtrailer" or that I have found in my own research is that there are things being discussed, considered, being researched......all of which are not admissions of fact. They are only in the discussion phase. Nothing is being done, nothing can be done, and nothing will be done without further study and research. I know, the mere mention is accepted as confirmation by "chemtrailers", but it is not recognized that by the rest of the thinking world.

So, please produce a test that you believes that barium or aluminum comes from a visible plume behind a high-flying plane. I'll show you what I mean.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 04:50 PM
link   


As for the science, you debunkers continue to claim there is no science to prove these things. They have run many tests of what is in these chem-trails and have found high levels of barium, aluminum, etc. Are we pretending these facts don't exist? What about there own public documentation covering the weather modification subject?


Show us where someone went up and did sampling of a contrail and found all of this...Or are you just repeating chemmie lore that it has happened.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by ZombieJesus
 

I find this statement very telling, from your source.
"During the same period, warming occurred in many other areas where cirrus coverage decreased or remained steady," he added.
Thanks for the link.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 

Are you a scientist?
You can be honest, I will trust you.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stewie
reply to post by stars15k
 

Are you a scientist?
You can be honest, I will trust you.



I work in science. In fact, I work in the chemical analysis of aircraft engine fuels and oils. Does that carry any weight?



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by RelentlessLurker
 


What you are seeing is the atmosphere's many different layers and pockets of differing conditions. Where the humidity is high enough, a contrail will form. Where the air is drier, they won't. You can tell by the clouds sometimes as well. When a jet is flying through or by cirrus clouds, it will most likely leave a contrail. Where there are is an open area of sky in a large bank of cirrus clouds, the contrails will usually not form. And if you are really patient, you can see cirrus clouds blowing into the clear area and dissipating. I've tried to capture it on video, but don't have a good enough lens to do it justice. The clear/cloud dissipating area is where there is a pocket of air too dry to support a cloud, therefore a contrail. It really takes observing more than just looking. I have a bad neck and a nice hammock and have watched clouds for long periods of time.

The ability to judge a planes altitude and distance is something that requires lots of specialized study and practice. Given the perspective problems of looking at curved space, planes that appear to be close can and usually are quite far apart. Chase one sometime. The closer you get, the more apparent the differences will be. I've done that, too.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 

Yes, actually.
You get a cookie.



Someone here always says people run away when confronted...
edit on 31-12-2010 by Stewie because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ZombieJesus
 


I've had that on my favorites for a while. No clouds but cumulus and the occasional rain cloud ever were in Hawaiian skies until about 10 years ago, when they started spraying all the fake clouds. Really.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by stars15k
reply to post by InfowarriorCarson
 




As for the science, you debunkers continue to claim there is no science to prove these things. They have run many tests of what is in these chem-trails and have found high levels of barium, aluminum, etc. Are we pretending these facts don't exist? What about there own public documentation covering the weather modification subject?


And have you ever read the reports of the testing done? They are not done in situ, they are usually done on ground collection, both air and water. They do not use a control, which would exclude all other possible sources of the elements found. Do I pretend these tests do not exist? No, I've read them and have seen the lack of good science method. When there is no good science there can be no good results.
As far as the weather modification, everything I've been presented from a "chemtrailer" or that I have found in my own research is that there are things being discussed, considered, being researched......all of which are not admissions of fact. They are only in the discussion phase. Nothing is being done, nothing can be done, and nothing will be done without further study and research. I know, the mere mention is accepted as confirmation by "chemtrailers", but it is not recognized that by the rest of the thinking world.

So, please produce a test that you believes that barium or aluminum comes from a visible plume behind a high-flying plane. I'll show you what I mean.


Did you see the ridiculous study that Arizona Skywatch did, claiming their air has 39000 ppm of Aluminum? now if that is not disinfo, I do not know what is



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Stewie
 


No, I am not a scientist. I think like a scientist or engineer. I chose the hardest job in the world, and became a stay-at-home mother instead of continuing in school. It is also the most important, and the best job in the world. During my time as a mother, and now a grandmother, I have continued to learn about many things, meteorolgy among them. I'm an advanced reader, and an avid researcher both on the internet and off.
I've never passed myself off as a scientist, either. I read science, and can understand what I read. I look to experts for answers. I know they know a lot more than I do.
Any problems with that?
I've been bashed by someone already in this thread for that reason and my religion. Are you going to join him?



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 

Hey, don't worry Stars, even the scientists don't always know ALL of the "science"...all of the answers if you will, in fact, they never do. Seems strange perhaps, that you cannot rely on science, or scientists or other professionals to alert you to the fact that something is going on that they recognize is not normal. But, to do so requires, first that they are able to, and second that they want to, and third that they have a method of delivering this information that is above reproach, beyond the hand of corporate profits.
But, unfortunately, it is ALL about corporate profits, so, Stars, YOU and I are guinea pigs. Oink. Oink.
See, I can do it. Can you? Oink....

If you cannot comprehend what I just wrote, that is okay. I blame myself. But, in any case, have a happy new year nonetheless. (It is going to be a tough one. You can cut and paste and remind me of what I post at any time, Stars, I will be here next year.)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


I'd highly recommend watching the movie 'WHAT IN THE WORLD ARE THEY SPRAYING?'.
All of your questions are quite accurate. However, I could pose those same questions to anyone that believes in Aliens. Why hasn't anyone said anything OFFICIAL about them? Why is it that only the craziest people in society ever see UFO's?
Why, on some nights is there nothing in the sky, and other nights you can actually see things that could be UFO's?

All your questions are so vague. Next time, try and THINK before you post.

Cheers.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by moondoggy2
 


Yeah....after this:


I'd highly recommend watching the movie 'WHAT IN THE WORLD ARE THEY SPRAYING?'.


Then, you might want to get the real story, and see WHY that movie is a load of......cow patties.

contrailscience.com...



The basic premise of the film is:

  • Normal Contrails fade away quickly
  • Scientists have talked about geoengineering using aluminum sprayed from planes
  • Since 1999, trails have been observed to persist for a long time
  • Tests in various locations at ground level have found different levels of aluminum
  • Monsanto has genetically engineered aluminum resistent crops
  • The government denies any spraying or geoengineering is going on
  • THEREFORE: The trails are aluminum being sprayed as part of a secret government geoengineering project.



  • "Normal" contrails behave in many different ways, including lasting and persisting, at times.

  • LOTS of "talk" about many things, but no, not using "aluminum sprayed from planes".

  • Since 1999 and BEFORE 1999, too. Contrails have persisted. Look up contrails, WWII.

  • Aluminum contamination DOES occur, but it's due to ground-based pollution sources.

  • Monsanto? Yes....because of the above.

  • Government "denies" it, because it isn't happening.

  • "THEREFORE", it is a video chock full of crap.......

    edit on 2 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



  • posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 02:04 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by moondoggy2
    reply to post by network dude
     


    I'd highly recommend watching the movie 'WHAT IN THE WORLD ARE THEY SPRAYING?'.
    All of your questions are quite accurate. However, I could pose those same questions to anyone that believes in Aliens. Why hasn't anyone said anything OFFICIAL about them? Why is it that only the craziest people in society ever see UFO's?
    Why, on some nights is there nothing in the sky, and other nights you can actually see things that could be UFO's?

    All your questions are so vague. Next time, try and THINK before you post.

    Cheers.



    Not only is their an apparent, blatant and conspicuous agenda going on in our skies, there's one going on right here in this forum.
    Some of these people, whom which many have grown to love-to-hate, have their own agenda too.

    You see, while we're bickering back and forth with all our "yes there is" and "no there's isn't" pointless posts, we aren't really addressing the real problem. So these people are a distraction to the cause.

    We're past this 'con' verses 'chem' trail debate. Seriously. We know what's going on (only we really don't) so let's not waste anymore time defending our common sense.

    What needs to happen is, figuring out what to do about this situation.
    Because honestly, coming on this forum provides little relief (as far as getting it off my chest) but I get so incensed and angry when I see this (like today....all damn morning and still, NOW) and I feel absolutely helpless.

    I don't want to become hopeless too.

    Something NEEDS to be done and seeing this is bigger than all of us put together, the least we can do is expose it to every one we see.

    I was snapping photos earlier today (only I don't have a UBS to share them but....it doesn't matter anyway for I don't need to 'prove' the obvious anymore) and it garnered some attention.
    So I pointed to the sky and they were like zombies. I mean, had I NOT pointed it out, they wouldn't have noticed it???? I mean, what the hell is going on here? Are some of these chemicals (in conjunction with perhaps, HAARP?) effecting some people's brain waves? I often wonder if that isn't a portion of the goal.

    Oh well. Let's not get dissuaded and sidetrack by some of these obvious 'proxies'. I suggest no one waste their intelligence let alone time, posting back and forth with these people. It's counterproductive to the cause.

    Let's stick (and stand up) together. We wouldn't want to play with them in our FEMA camps anyway



    new topics

    top topics



     
    12
    << 7  8  9    11  12 >>

    log in

    join