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.

 

Chemtrail Madness: Eastern Shore, MD

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Northwarden
 


"exoticwarfare.com"??

You buy into that crap?



What a load of malarkey, as I read through it....it is paranoid ramblings form a mentally delusional individual/group.

I mean, some of the potential basics of ideas, nanos and such are certainly existing...but NOT to that level!! I mean, you're looking at a possible movie script, there....for a futuristic thriller perhaps.

I've tried all forms of logic, to break through the mindsets that y'all have, as you've been brainwashed by the hoax.

Here's one, and you really need to think HARD on this. Using this very thing you posted, as ridiculous as it is....why not YOU sit there and start to calculate the amounts of materials they would need....even in "nanotech" size. After all, a container of nanoparticles big enough, packed all together (picture a container of flour) will have weight, right?

Now....is this stuff very "effective", do you suppose? I mean, IF deployed from seven or eight miles over your head....what kind of accuracy should they expect, then? Will winds affect it? Will it blow around? (I mean...it's NANO, right?? Dontcha think the winds might have some effects???)

OK...so, allowing for all that, they would have to "over do" it, just to be safe, correct? Oh, and how expensive is this stuff, do you suppose? How hard to manufacture, and how much is there, in total?

Are you beginning to see my point, yet?

OK...one more thing. YOU (and so many others....the hoaxers, those....charlatans) and they, make these claims....EACH TIME you see the contrails, YOU (and they) call them "chem"-trails. BIG, GIGANTIC aren't they? SO, again....HOW MUCH MATERIAL would you need, to make them THAT big and THAT visible??

Multiplied by, oh....thousands and thousands of flights. Along those lines, while you chew on it....look at the relative sizes of the 'trails. Try this:

Say, for instance, only one 'trail is one mile long. (5,280 feet). Only ONE....and, let's say it's how wide? Is ten feet about right? Too small? Good, let's stay conservative. Ten feet wide.....but, it's sorta round, at first.....so let's call it ten feet thick, too. Now, that's a square, not a column, but i AM being conservative, so this works.

OK...still there? We have 5,280 feet by 10 feet by 10 feet....a piddling size "trail"....jets fly at about 8 miles per minute, so you see that a one mile-long "trail" would only take about seven seconds....7 1/2, really.

Right...so, that horizontal "column" is equal to a volume of....528,000 cubic feet!!

"OH!", you say, "But it's all spread out!" Well....yes, but it is also VERY visible, right? SO, there is some density there, else it would be INvisible. Try to do some more math, and think REAL HARD about it....say, in parts per million density, in order to make it visible. THEN, multiply it substantially, by minutes and hours and numbers of engines, etc....so that it resembles the CONTRAILS (water ice clouds) that you see, and mistake for some imaginary "nano-particles"....




posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 




What a load of malarkey, as I read through it....it is paranoid ramblings form a mentally delusional individual/group.

I mean, some of the potential basics of ideas, nanos and such are certainly existing...but NOT to that level!! I mean, you're looking at a possible movie script, there....for a futuristic thriller perhaps.


Even from a speculative standpoint, a "movie thriller" perspective, where minds get carried away by the possibilities and become disassociative from reality, there remains a strong density of information that people draw upon to arrive at their conclusions. Let's sort through all the site says and examine each idea - the research construct is already in place to consider the bs factor - and some of us enjoy seeing the dots people have connected. There are a great many details you care not to entertain, it seems to me. I don't see how your stream-lined perspective can actually counter the points made in many of those articles, when it's hell-bent to disclude our minds from incorporating them outright, and based on a sweeping gesture over entire sites jam-packed with information. Or perhaps you're hoping I'm too barium-suppressed and sedate to answer you?


I've tried all forms of logic, to break through the mindsets that y'all have, as you've been brainwashed by the hoax.


As you always do, but no matter how you dress it up as "benign" and "self-apparent with a little explanation and some violent nudges", it's entertaining how you still can't hide all the bulges behind your smoke-show. Why do you make anything at all about contrails? Contrails are already acknowledged, respected as fact, and we've even stretched our "tiny little minds" to incorporate the differences modern jet engines produce vapor emissions at, compared to those of twenty years ago. I choose to look past your multi-flagged object-lessons to us, and look instead to the beast we are actually studying : chem-trails, with measurable effects, which may or may not be evidenced by the many photos people present. No one asked for you to give us endless "Contrail 101" information and hear your resume! That's your own, ah, "service" to the community.


Here's one, and you really need to think HARD on this. Using this very thing you posted, as ridiculous as it is....why not YOU sit there and start to calculate the amounts of materials they would need....even in "nanotech" size. After all, a container of nanoparticles big enough, packed all together (picture a container of flour) will have weight, right?

Now....is this stuff very "effective", do you suppose? I mean, IF deployed from seven or eight miles over your head....what kind of accuracy should they expect, then? Will winds affect it? Will it blow around? (I mean...it's NANO, right?? Dontcha think the winds might have some effects???)

OK...so, allowing for all that, they would have to "over do" it, just to be safe, correct? Oh, and how expensive is this stuff, do you suppose? How hard to manufacture, and how much is there, in total?


Steady spraying by unmarked military jets over thirty years as part of secretive government projects to exact military dominion and revolutionize warfare is not such an outlandish sceme to consider in a very technologically-advanced world, ruled by over-decadent satanist overlords who thirst constantly for power and control. You must love statements like that eh Weedwhacker? It makes us sound pretty looneytoons I bet you're hoping! Don't worry, I'm not the one who belongs on the psycho charts. I just read all about the ones who are.


Are you beginning to see my point, yet?


I believe it's an immensely expensive and time-consuming process. Neither of these factors makes it impossible, or even improbable. The motives behind the agenda, as described, are certainly right on, and smart dust coating the world, linking to a global brain, to control future military interests and accelerate conventional proxy warfare that does not rely on nuclear "assets" seems of keen and ongoing interest. Do you recall the facts about past military spraying programs? Are you prepared to go up against all the evidence again, ala Goethes crusade on chemtrails, or others? Or will you persist in sheer obstinancy and continue to badger the msn-induced points of mediocracy to their conclusionist settlements in peoples minds once more?

Military fibers from the sky, thinner than hair, already outlined as assault plans against opposing civilian populations. Fibers that closely resemble pre-Morgellons fibers. It's an interesting article Weedwhacker, maybe you should check it out.
edit on 5-2-2011 by Northwarden because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by fredgbear
...As for a chemtrail suddenly stopping mid flight, there are electronic devices called on/off switches.

But contrails can stop mid-flight too (without on/off switches), so the intermittent characteristic of a trail does not necessarily signify "chemtrail" -- it could just be a contrail.



posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 09:22 AM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 


@ OP (and anyone else who happens to be in the DelMarVa area (Delaware/Maryland/Virgina):

Did you notice the sky, this morning? (6 February, 2011),

Perfectly clear and blue, nary a cloud anywhere...not low levels, not high altitudes. Ever wonder why that is?

Remember just the last couple of days? Low clouds, drizzle....fortunately, remained above freezing, so no snow, just wet. Low stratus combinations, various altitudes, and came and went a bit.

Today (at least the AM) very very clear. I noted last night, about midnight (as "ATS Live") wrapped up) how the skies had cleared up, just a few stragglers, stratus fragments floating about.

BTW....the airline schedules?? Unchanged, same as any other Sunday schedule, week after week (subject to periodical seasonal changes, as is common in the industry). Any quick glance at www.flightaware.com... will show this to be the case.


Now, let's look at what's going on, with the weather balloon (radiosonde) readings:

weather.uwyo.edu...

Going to WAL (Wallops Island, Va), because it's handy and nearby...and on the coast....AND the IAD data was incomplete above about 450 Mb (ballon may have failed, or someting):
weather.uwyo.edu...


Let's see...relevant heights, selected and posted here:


371.0 7706 -31.1 -67.1 2
301.6 9144 -41.8 -73.0 2
300.0 9180 -42.1 -73.1 2
279.0 9670 -43.5 -72.5 3
250.0 10400 -48.7 -74.7 3
245.0 10533 -49.1 -76.1 3
240.0 10668 -48.8 -76.6 3


SEE what we have, there? Reading left to right -- Mb, then altitude in meters. Temperature/dewpoint, degres Celsius.

LAST column?? Relative Humidity!!! TWO, and THREE percent!

NO WONDER there are no contrails!!!!

Does everyone get it, yet??



posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 





Here's one, and you really need to think HARD on this. Using this very thing you posted, as ridiculous as it is....why not YOU sit there and start to calculate the amounts of materials they would need....even in "nanotech" size.


What a ridiculous argument and you know it is. YOU obviously didn't think to HARD before posting that tripe. Nobody has suggested that chemtrail planes are loaded with thousands of supersize bags full of nanoparticles. As you have admitted in a previous thread, you are well aware that chemicals are dispersed from planes in smoke burnt from flares, dry ice and in compressed gas (aerosol). All of these methods of dispersal ensure the chemicals continue to spread and cover a large area once released with a relatively small load. In the case of hygroscopic particles they will actually increase in size when in contact with water vapour.

So you can sit there and do all the calculations you like, it won't change the fact that your argument is as you say - Malarkey.



posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Seagle
 


Yup....all of those examples you cited occur at lower altitudes, usually ABOVE, UNDER or INSIDE clouds. (**)

MY POINT WAS....show the physics and proofs of a material (in this case the alleged "nano-particles") that could be dispersed in sufficient quanitites to exactly resemble the thousands of contrails seen (and misidentified by the uneducated/gullible as "chem"-trails) every day.

The hygroscopic particles, as you mentioned....again, they are suited for that one specific purpose, to act as condensation nuclei, to (hopefully, doesn't always work) produce precipitation.

DO you really think that IF they were released outside of a cloud, as a "demonstration", that they wold last long, as we see contrails do? You don't think they will disperse VERY rapidly, and dilute to the point that they quickly become "invisible", to the dispersion?


(**)HERE: THIS is cloud seeding (the kid shows off for the first two minutes, in his crap Commanche...nerd!!... LOL!)



edit on 6 February 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)




top topics
 
14
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join