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.

 

chemtrails cloaking nibiru?

page: 6
9
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Hammaraxx
 


The problem in all of this is that no matter how overwhelming the evidence there is against some of these ideas, there are many people that are stalwart in keeping their eyes and ears closed. Their mind is in a trap where they won't allow the evidence. It is not east to learn. It takes effort. That's is what many hoaxers rely on. They know that many people won't try to learn and few apply critical thinking. There are many that treat these things as religion. They are going to go down in flames instead of correcting their understanding of things around them. The most important message to learn is that being wrong is okay. I do it all of the time. Being unwilling to make corrections is not okay.




posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hammaraxx
Are you not concerned by some of the things delusional people do?
Shootings, bombings etc


Are you claiming that people who believe in "chemtrails" are delusional?


Imagine if one of them shot down a civilian plane, even a military one for that matter?


A good part of the time, skeptics and so-called debunkers can't even post on forums like this without being accused of being shills, "sheeple" or "disinfo agents." It's happened to some extent in this thread. Do you think someone deluded enough to shoot at an aircraft for releasing "chemtrails," which is a claim utterly devoid of anything resembling sound evidence, would be convinced by a concerted public experiment to debunk the idea, particularly if a government or governments were involved? Or would such a person consider it just another attempt to deceive (again, a sentiment present in this very thread)?


If you had the ability and the finance to provide proof once and for all that the whole chemtrail thing is just ignorance and they were just harmless contrails, wouldn't you? To save one poor sole from the torment of their own mind, or one or more being killed for it?


No, I wouldn't, because I don't think a person crazy enough to shoot at a plane over a conspiracy theory that he probably learned about online is sane enough to objectively consider evidence that runs counter to his belief. If he were, I suspect he would not have reached the point of wanting to shoot in the first place.

Never mind that the precedent of elaborately humoring crackpot ideas out of fear comes bundled with its own share of intrinsic problems.

That said, the "proof once and for all" is already available to anyone willing to just think critically for a minute or two.


I dearly hope you'd say "yes!".


Sorry, but it's a resounding "no," because I think the backlash would be counterproductive even if the demonstration itself was scientifically and logically unassailable. Maybe it would make an entertaining episode of Mythbusters.
edit on 11-1-2011 by UndeadDinosaur because: punctuation



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 





If it's to educate us and prove that we're all just mistaking then...they are the wrong people to do the job.


Then who is good enough?

We have a resident, non-anonymous certified weather man who has authored numerous threads regarding chemtrails, and very patiently explains whats what. Why is he not good enough?

We have several resident commercial pilots, why are they not good enough?

NASA? Why are they not good enough?

Who are the right people to do the job?



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 





If I remember correctly you were talking about looking up and seeing that lattice work.


Please show me where I said anything about looking up and seeing lattice work trails? You seem to want to makeup things as you go along don't you? And when does it matter where a picture of what you call chemtrails is taken, because from what I have been reading in some of your other post's a chemtrail is a chemtrail no matter where it is seen?




Oh, please choose one of those rural photos. Out in the country.....away from any major airport in case you were inclined to go that route. Thanks!


So now it has to be near a major airport to one of your chemtrails,am I right? Then here you go, just ask and you shall receive....



It looks like there are more than six and it is over what seems to be town.Does the Hoover Dam count as a place that will work for you.



Now why don't you do the same and show us these chemtrails around an aiport if you would.

Anymore requests?



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Human_Alien
 





Please post a classic photo of the criss-crossed vapor trails (more than 6 trails in one picture) then please explain it again, to the audience what we're looking at.


So now a so called chemtrail has to be more than six trails to be considered a so called chemtrail? So you really do make this up as you go.


Not sure who your audience is, but I will bet most people on this thread know what a contrail is.I would have said chemtrail, but no one has been able to prove they exist, at least you have not or I would not be asking you to prove they exist.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by UndeadDinosaur
 
Thank you UndeadDinosaur,

Originally posted by UndeadDinosaur
Are you claiming that people who believe in "chemtrails" are delusional?
No, I don't think so, but if one is going to insist that chemtrail are indeed not true then I would not be surprised to find that one would also think some of those who do believe in them may be delusional. Do you think people who believe in chemtrails are delusional?


Do you think someone deluded enough to shoot at an aircraft for releasing "chemtrails," which is a claim utterly devoid of anything resembling sound evidence, would be convinced by a concerted public experiment to debunk the idea, particularly if a government or governments were involved? Or would such a person consider it just another attempt to deceive (again, a sentiment present in this very thread)?
Good information can open minds, not all minds, that's true, it may just change the mind of at least one who would have such thoughts at least.



If you had the ability and the finance to provide proof once and for all that the whole chemtrail thing is just ignorance and they were just harmless contrails, wouldn't you? To save one poor sole from the torment of their own mind, or one or more being killed for it?
No, I wouldn't, because I don't think a person crazy enough to shoot at a plane over a conspiracy theory that he probably learned about online is sane enough to objectively consider evidence that runs counter to his belief. If he were, I suspect he would not have reached the point of wanting to shoot in the first place.
Have you seen The Planetary Population Protection & Atmospheric Air Purity Act by Congressman Ron Paul - which recommends shooting them down (ATS Thread)?
Even though there is a chance this could be a hoax it's now out in public with his name on it. I might be wrong, but hasn't a suggestion to shoot by a congress representative not lead to someone actually shooting before?


Never mind that the precedent of elaborately humoring crackpot ideas out of fear comes bundled with its own share of intrinsic problems.
non sequitor, I can't see 2012 from here but I do see the mess in the sky.


That said, the "proof once and for all" is already available to anyone willing to just think critically for a minute or two.
You are spot on! Remember this? technologyreview.com "How the Chinese plan to modify the weather in Beijing during the Olympics, using supercomputers and artillery"


I think the backlash would be counterproductive even if the demonstration itself was scientifically and logically unassailable. Maybe it would make an entertaining episode of Mythbusters.
What backlash are you talking about and how would unassailable evidence for anything be counterproductive?
I would love to see Jamie and Adam do that show!
edit on 12/1/2011 by Hammaraxx because: there is a chance the Ron Paul artical is a hoax and that point needed to be added into this post.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ZombieJesus
 
G'day ZombieJesus

Originally posted by ZombieJesus
We have a resident, non-anonymous certified weather man who has authored numerous threads regarding chemtrails, and very patiently explains whats what. Why is he not good enough?

We have several resident commercial pilots, why are they not good enough?

NASA? Why are they not good enough?

Who are the right people to do the job?


Not all pilots and weathermen agree. ATS Member SimonPeter said in this Thread "I'm a pilot and have been for 18 years... I know what contrails are and what forms them . As for seeing some apparent Chemtrails I have seen a couple of suspected chemtrails."
Google Search for "Weatherman chemtrails"
NASA could even be involved according to some. What exactly is their Global Aerosol Climatology Project ?



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hammaraxx
Do you think people who believe in chemtrails are delusional?


I think people who believe in so-called "chemtrails," but can't provide any evidence that such things exist as they describe, are at the very least severely lacking in the ability and/or willingness to think critically. I can't accurately comment on the mental health of any particular group, barring those that are grouped accordingly. I might call them colloquially "delusional," depending on the conversation, but I wouldn't want to formally defend such an assertion without sufficient evidence.


Good information can open minds, not all minds, that's true, it may just change the mind of at least one who would have such thoughts at least.


It might also change the minds of a few Nibiru and rotational pole shift doomsayers if we spend the $200,000 or so per person to get them each a PhD in astrophysics or geology. Pretty unrealistic expectation, however.


Have you seen The Planetary Population Protection & Atmospheric Air Purity Act by Congressman Ron Paul - which recommends shooting them down (ATS Thread)?
Even though there is a chance this could be a hoax it's now out in public with his name on it.


A chance? Why don't you find an original source (or admit you can't) and be done with it?

If it's a hoax (which it by all appearances is), all it's doing is perpetuating the myth. It certainly isn't helping the chemtrail proponents' cause, unless the implication is that they don't care about distinguishing what is true from what is false.


I might be wrong, but hasn't a suggestion to shoot by a congress representative not lead to someone actually shooting before?


Indeed it has. Are you comparing chemtrail believers to a murderer who was suspended from college in lieu of a mental evaluation (which he almost certainly would have failed)? You said, "Good information can open minds," yet you continually allude to conditions wherein the quality of information is unlikely to be relevant.


non sequitor, I can't see 2012 from here but I do see the mess in the sky.


Do you even know what "non sequitur" means? Perhaps you simply don't understand. Let me rephrase:

Damned if you do. Damned if you don't. Attempts by official entities to respond to crackpot claims tend, on average in my experience, to create more conspiracy claims than they pacify. Whether you agree with any comparison between 2012 believers and chemtrail believers (a comparison I did not make) is irrelevant to the point.

The "mess in the sky" as commonly referred to in this thread is exhaust and water vapor. The "mess in the sky" per the article you link below is silver iodide, dry ice and, on occasion, liquid nitrogen.

FYI: www.merriam-webster.com...


You are spot on! Remember this? technologyreview.com "How the Chinese plan to modify the weather in Beijing during the Olympics, using supercomputers and artillery"


Sigh.

Cloud seeding is not proof of "chemtrails." Moreover, cloud seeding in practice seldom leaves behind anything that resembles a contrail, because the silver iodide and CO2 crystals are, as the name implies, dropped into clouds. Further, the process isn't always carried out by plane (as your own link explains), and the process isn't always even visible. Depends largely on the amount of material used and how it is delivered.

This is a far cry from the nefarious "chem cocktail" and implausible sky-masking proposals so frequently offered by "chemtrail" conspiracy proponents (both claims which have been offered in this thread). If you're willing to concede that the "chemtrail" phenomenon might be a combination of misidentified contrails and simple cloud seeding, then I think our discussion can be safely closed. If not, what relevance does it have? That chemicals can been dropped by aircraft is not in dispute and was, in fact, acknowledged a page or two back by weedwhacker. This doesn't support any of the claims made in this thread, unless you want to claim that cloud seeding happens. In that case, yes, it does.


What backlash are you talking about and how would unassailable evidence for anything be counterproductive?


I didn't say unassailable evidence would be counterproductive. I said (emphasis added), "...it's a resounding 'no,' because I think the backlash would be counterproductive even if the demonstration itself was scientifically and logically unassailable." The backlash I refer to is conspiracy proponents creating new conspiracies, using some official body's attempts to debunk the original conspiracy as a catalyst. I attempted to illustrate this point with the NASA 2012 example, which you erroneously dubbed a "[non sequitur]."

I am also not opposed to addressing bad science, bad logic, mistakes, hoaxes and general crackpottery. I'm here, aren't I? What I oppose is unduly humoring crank claims (via elaborate public pony shows, presidential speeches, etc.), as demanded, for example, by Human_Alien in this thread. Someone who is willing to accept a conspiracy theory at the behest of Internet writers, but then ignores rebuttals by the same and demands that his opponents provide "professionals in a reenactment scenario.....with scientists, a camera crew, an AP reporter and perhaps a statement from the POTUS," has, in my opinion, succumbed to a degree of cognitive dissonance that not even such grandiosity is likely to dent.


I would love to see Jamie and Adam do that show!


I was generous. It would probably be boring. There's not much to go on, other than baseless claims and obfuscation attempts (e.g. cloud seeding). Maybe it would be more fitting for Penn & Teller: B.S. Or maybe believers will eventually come to consider the dubious practicality of dropping chemicals on a population from cruising altitude, perhaps coupled with the understanding that Nibiru isn't real and therefore can't be hidden, and rest easier for it.

As Dr. Robert Carroll writes on SkepDic: "If you have a desire to poison your people, do it on a night when the wind isn't blowing and fly at low altitude, so you can have some control over where your poison lands. And use something that's invisible. Cobwebs and clouds dispersed in the troposphere might land more than a thousand miles from where you spew them out and would be visible to many people."


NASA could even be involved according to some. What exactly is their Global Aerosol Climatology Project ?


The project goal is stated on the website you linked to.

"The Global Aerosol Climatology Project (GACP) was established in 1998 in response to the recommendations of the 1997 Aerosol Workshop held at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) and the resulting call for a focused effort aimed at extracting an improved multi-decadal aerosol record from existing satellite measurements as outlined in the Aerosol Radiative Forcing NRA."

In other words, they're using satellite data to create a more accurate model of how aerosols affect Earth's climate.
edit on 12-1-2011 by UndeadDinosaur because: addition



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Hammaraxx
 


That's a rare event. In 18 years a pilot sees 2. Assume that the pilot did see a chem trail or 2 in 18 years, then they are incredibly rare aren't they?



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Hammaraxx
 



NASA could even be involved according to some. What exactly is their Global Aerosol Climatology Project ?




This is continually being raised....the term "aerosol".

It is a deep misunderstanding of the term.....and its place in the lexicon of atmospheric studies. It is "assumed" by many "chemtrail" believers to mean intentional "spraying" being conducted (they apparently equate the term to hair spray and spray paint cans....)....

In fact, it is a scientific definition of NATURAL processes of material that will become "aerosolized" in our atmosphere.

Dust, sea salts, and even man-made pollutants of all sorts too. Man-made pollutants of GROUND-BASED origins.

Read up on other sources and references to "aerosols" to get a better understanding of its meaning.....
edit on 12 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Sorry, I haven't read all the posts. My thoughts once on why the chem-trials.
Back in 1983 they said they first spotted the tenth planet. Around
1996 they started spraying the skies with chem-trails. Now people have said
the tenth planet would have a strong magnetic pull on all the planets at its
crossing. Chem-trials suppose to have Barium in them. Now Barium is a non
magnetic material. Therefore our earth would not be effected as much by its passing.
I know it is out of the box thinking, but then it did entered my mind.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by 19rn50
 


"Out-of-the-box" thinking...but, sorry, has no basis in facts and science:



Back in 1983 they said they first spotted the tenth planet.


I have to check, do you mean "Eris"? Roughly a bit larger size as Pluto (another planetoid, or "dwarf" planet). In a very, very distant orbit....and NOT on an orbital path that will come any where near the inner Solar System.
_______

Around 1996 they started spraying the skies with chem-trails.


Nope. NO such activity, no such thing as "chemtrails". People who don't know any better are confusing normal contrails.....
______

....the tenth planet would have a strong magnetic pull on all the planets at its
crossing.


First, as mentioned....it is NOT going to "cross". But, in any event....planets are NOT "magnetic"...you may be thinking of its gravitational influence.

______

Chem-trials suppose to have Barium in them.


Nope. As noted, this is utter nonsense.
______

Now Barium is a non magnetic material. Therefore our earth would not be effected as much by its passing.


Think about this....even IF "magnetism" of a planet were true (it's not)....there is simply NOT ENOUGH Barium in existence on this planet for that concept to come remotely close to working....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Speaking of "tenth planet"....one found in 2005 yet unnamed, per this article (which may be referring to "Eris", as it was named later): science.nasa.gov...
edit on 12 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by 19rn50
 



Back in 1983 they said they first spotted the tenth planet.

That's incorrect. The statement back in 1983 was that IRAS had detected something interesting and its nature was completely unknown. Even its position was unknown. It was suggested to be anything from a new planet to a new type of galaxy. Guess what? It was the latter. The person that made the statement of discovery was able to determine that the objects were a new type of galaxy that was so shrouded in dust that it was only visible in IR. That's pretty interesting.

The new planet claim continues to circulate due to the poor wording of the Washington post article written after the announcement of the interesting data from IRAS. if you read the article you will see that the Post never says it is a tenth planet only that it was one of the possibilities that the researchers would investigate.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by 19rn50
 


I should also mention that there are 2 ways to look for a new large mass in the solar system. One is to see how gravity affects the motions of other known objects. The other way is to look out into space in whole sky surveys. These methods show that no new planet can be with 320AU. That's 320 times the distance form the Earth to the Sun. Furthermore, they show that the orbit of any new planet could not enter the orbits of the known planets.

Eris falls below the size of a planet. A scan of space beyond Pluto is being completed. It shows that there are no planets within the Kuiper belt which is even farther out than 320AU.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   
for those that believe 2012 is the end of the world - educate urselfs plz:






posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   
The guy in the video is the same guy who presented them photos with the 3 strange objects in them yeah? A blue, a red and an unexplained object



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:41 AM
link   
I haven't seen any suspect contrails that look like they'd been sprayed deliberately in the sky down here for a couple of weeks now. We do get periods of none then typically a week of lots of them.

BTW: I live pretty close to an international airport with a flight path right over my house and I don't recall having seen any of these planes leave what I would call a chemtrail before. I've only noticed them being left behind by planes that fly right over from horizon to horizon that didn't even use that airport, strangely, straight over top of the airport even.

One of the suggestions about when they spray is in the week leading up to a Full Moon, well that's this coming Wednesday. I'll keep an eye on the sky and take pictures of any if I see them and let you know.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hammaraxx
BTW: I live pretty close to an international airport with a flight path right over my house and I don't recall having seen any of these planes leave what I would call a chemtrail before.


If you live close to an airport, depending on what you mean by "close," odds are you won't see any contrails from those aircraft.


I've only noticed them being left behind by planes that fly right over from horizon to horizon that didn't even use that airport, strangely, straight over top of the airport even.


In other words, you've noticed contrails behind aircraft that are already at altitude and more likely to produce them.
edit on 15-1-2011 by UndeadDinosaur because: typo



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Mayura
 


You should watch the new Dr Who Cybermen series, or the "Wraith" from stargate and how the natives of each planet are forced to cooperate with the Wraith in order to provide a quota of living bodies (they harvest our life force) for their harvests. Basically, first conversion and then absorption into a hive mind for easy processing. I feel that the aliens come here to harvest us, the lightside tries to prevent us from being deceived and the darkside (the more traditional Earth-based villains) simply laugh at the dark irony of the whole situation...
edit on 14-2-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2011 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by SystemResistor
 


Wow...

Want to know who's really running things? Reptillian Nordic Hybrids that look just like Wraiths. I've dealt with them and they do indeed suck the life force. Look at all the Nordic gods throughout history... From what I've heard, they go directly to hive minds.

George Kavassilas has talked a lot about this, get in touch with his information it is fantastic.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join