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.

 

Is ATS Supporting Ignorance Concerning Chemtrails? I think so.

page: 35
131
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by AllSeeingI
 


Thank you very much and I absolutely agree. This topic was actually not even that high on my radar until i noticed the exact same thing you just stated.




posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 04:59 AM
link   
downloads.globalchange.gov...

Field Experiments to Study Clouds in the Global
Climate System. Marine boundary layer clouds are
particularly important in the global climate system,
not only as passive modulators of solar energy, but
as interactive systems that influence and modulate
sea surface temperature and the strength of the
trade winds on seasonal to interannual timescales.
Their microphysical properties are important,
strongly sensitive to manmade aerosol, and poorly
understood, especially over remote oceans. From
May 2009 through December 2010 the DOE ARM
(Atmospheric Radiation Measurement) Mobile
Facility conducted intensive field observations near
the Portuguese Azorean island of Graciosa in support
of the Clouds, Aerosol, and Precipitation in the
Marine Boundary Layer (CAP-MBL) field campaign.
10
The goal of the campaign is to study processes
controlling the radiative properties and microphysics
of marine boundary layer clouds, a high-priority
science question


In a five-month field campaign centered at the
DOE’s ARM Southern Great Plains site in Oklahoma,
improved analysis techniques were applied to a
variety of airborne measurements in a study to
determine how aerosols affect cloud formation
and the energy balance from the sun. Significantly
improved techniques were used in the analysis
of Raman lidar data to enhance the accuracy of
interpretation of aerosol observations, which will
reduce scientific uncertainties in computer models
used to simulate climate change.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:25 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:50 AM
link   
On this page...www.climatescience.gov...


Structure and Production of the Report
Relationship to the CCSP Strategic Plan
Legal Requirement Established in 1990
A Broader Audience
Who Issues Our Changing Planet?
Which Agencies and Offices Contribute to Our Changing Planet?
Who Transmits Our Changing Planet to the President and to Congress?
Availability of Our Changing Planet & the Strategic Plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program
Funding for Global Change Research under the CCSP and USGCRP, Fiscal Years 1989 - 2009 (updated August 2008)
Since 1989, the annual report, Our Changing Planet, has been submitted to Congress by the Federal agencies charged with coordinated research on global environmental change. The report is required under the provisions of the Global Change Research Act of 1990 and summarizes recent achievements, near term plans, and progress in implementing long term goals. It also provides an overview of recent and near-term expenditures and of requested funding. The report is issued by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), which incorporates the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and the President’s Climate Change Research Initiative (CCRI). The Administration has charged the CCSP with responsibility for compliance with the 1990 act.

 

Mod Edit: External Source Tags Please Review This Link.
edit on 3-3-2011 by Ahabstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 



Any questions comments ? Got any explanations ?

Can I get an amen....Testify to the truth now brothers as you have witnesed it with your own eyes


You have proven that the government didn't even start studying the effect of aerosols on the atmosphere until 1989, and that the budget for these studies maxed out at a mere two billion dollars. This seems to indicate that the state of knowledge is far too meager to permit any applications, and the budget too paltry to equip every commercial jet in the world with a device for aerosol spraying. Given that "chemtrail" believers claim that the "spraying" started in 1980, I congratulate you on driving the final nail in the coffin. Or didn't you actually read what you posted?



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Well here's a study from 1971..

Science 9 July 1971:
Vol. 173 no. 3992 pp. 138-141
DOI: 10.1126/science.173.3992.138
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate

1. S. I. Rasool and
2. S. H. Schneider

www.sciencemag.org...



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:10 AM
link   
downloads.globalchange.gov...

January 2011,
Members of Congress:
On behalf of the National Science and Technology Council, I am transmitting a copy of Our
Changing Planet: The U.S. Global Change Research Program for Fiscal Year 2011. The report describes
the activities and plans of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) established under
the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990. The USGCRP coordinates and integrates scientific
research on climate and global change and is supported by 13 participating departments and
agencies of the U.S. government. This Fiscal Year 2011 edition of Our Changing Planet highlights
recent advances and progress made by participating agencies and includes budget information on
each agency’s contribution.
This report describes a program in transition. In accordance with the GCRA, the USGCRP agencies
requested guidance from the National Research Council on how to best meet the changing needs of
the nation to understand climate change and respond to its impacts, and the NRC responded with
a 2009 report entitled “Restructuring Federal Climate Research to Meet the Challenges of Climate
Change”. In accord with that report’s recommendations, the USGCRP is undergoing a strategic
realignment that will ensure that the science produced is maximally useful for decision makers at
all scales.
As described in the new edition of Our Changing Planet, the program going forward will place
greater emphasis on impacts, vulnerabilities, and on understanding the options for adapting to
the changing climate. The program will also continue its long-standing support for activities that
contribute to a better understanding of the Earth system, including observations, research, and
predictive modeling. All of these focuses will be reflected in the USGCRP’s new strategic plan and
its National Climate Assessment.
The USGCRP is committed to its mission to build a knowledge base that informs human responses
to global change through coordinated and integrated federal programs of research, education,
communication, and decision support. I appreciate the close cooperation of the participating
agencies, and I look forward to working with the Congress in the continued development and
implementation of this essential national program.
Sincerely,
John P. Holdren
Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



Well here's a study from 1971..

Science 9 July 1971:
Vol. 173 no. 3992 pp. 138-141
DOI: 10.1126/science.173.3992.138
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate

1. S. I. Rasool and
2. S. H. Schneider


www.sciencemag.org...


Does that sound like a blueprint for world domination? Scientists are still arguing whether aerosols increase or decrease global warming. Someone just quoted several pages describing an environmental research initiative and seems to feel it proves the "chemtrail" conspiracy theory. Does it? Do you believe the paper you cited provides enough information to commit the secret world government to alter the global climate intentionally? Do you think two billion dollars a year is enough to do it?



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


I never set out to prove every claim made by every "chemmie" as you call it.

I never said that they equip every commercial airliner either...Didn't you read what is written in the links i I posted

You ignorant SOB .



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


You go ahead
TRY TO DEBUNK THIS


A mere 2 billion dollars for a program that doesn't exist
That 2 billion was only for 1 year




Does that sound like a blueprint for world domination? Scientists are still arguing whether aerosols increase or decrease global warming. Someone just quoted several pages describing an environmental research initiative and seems to feel it proves the "chemtrail" conspiracy theory. Does it? Do you believe the paper you cited provides enough information to commit the secret world government to alter the global climate intentionally? Do you think two billion dollars a year is enough to do it?


This is soooo funny ...Now that the contrail con artists have been debunked . You want me to try and prove a plan fpr world domination.
Actually, that was never my theory about chemtrails but if you like I can supply evidence of that plan if you like..

edit on 2-3-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Mate, all I did was show you they WERE looking into the effects of aerosols well before the 1980 you stated..
How much they spent of what they found is irrelevant..

I do know they banned many aerosols here in Australia and CFC products...
So they must have found something...



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 



never set out to prove every claim made by every "chemmie" as you call it.

I never said that they equip every commercial airliner either...Didn't you read what is written in the links i I posted

You ignorant SOB .


And I never used the expression "chemmie." Scientists have been studying the effects of CO2 and aerosols on the atmosphere for decades. It's called "research," a word used frequently in the report you are quoting. The previous US administration refused even to believe that global warming was occurring. Excuse me if I am misinterpreting why you are posting this, but you seem to think that this research in some way supports the belief in the existence of "chemtrails." Am I wrong in that conclusion?



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by laterallateral
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Proof and evidence aren't to be confused. A picture of something flying that cannot be identified is
(Get this) EVIDENCE OF SOMETHING FLYING THAT CANNOT BE IDENTIFIED.

Radar data of something in the sky that cannot be accounted for is again, evidence of something unaccounted for.
Catch my drift?

We compile evidence to form theories. With enough evidence we can prove a theory.

Where is the evidence in support of a "chemtrail" theory?

- There are persistent contrails in the sky.
- Recently there has been more of them.


Well said, I was going to point this out as well -- you see a flying saucer, and there is no common explanation for it -- you form a theory that this could be aliens, or it's a weird optical effect etc. Fair game!.

On the other hand, we do know that contrails exist and are visible from great distances. Saying these are something else is like saying the Moon is made of cheese. It's not. You can see the Moon and randomly say it's made of cheese. Stupid.

People have already said in this thread that massive "gassing" of the planet would be impossible to keep under wraps for long because of a large number of people invovled. I would add that there are thousands more working in geo, climate and environmental sciences that measure the composition of the atmosphere daily, for living. Sorry I just can't believe these are under non-disclosure agreements.

And for the folks who say "I saw a chemtrail above my house and got a bad cold" -- you guys are something. Whatever vapor is released 40,000 ft above the ground (it's water, of course, but let's assume it's a deadly agent) will end up a thousand miles from your location because of altitude and winds. If you assume a "chemtrail" above your house caused your sinus infection you are being an ignorant fool.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



Mate, all I did was show you they WERE looking into the effects of aerosols well before the 1980 you stated..
How much they spent of what they found is irrelevant..

I do know they banned many aerosols here in Australia and CFC products...
So they must have found something...


As far as I can tell, we're in agreement, and yet you're making it seem adversarial. My original comment was directed at the poster who seems to think that the document he is citing has something to do with "chemtrails." My statement was clearly intended as a reducto ad absurdum, that the evidence he presented contradicted the point he was trying to prove. That's why I limited it to what the article itself said, rather than trying to pull in outside information. Sheesh, you wonder why people get short tempered with you!
edit on 2-3-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct formatting.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:35 AM
link   




edit on 2-3-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 



Sheesh, you wonder why people get short tempered with you!


My god, you sound like my grade 3 english teacher..
Not even sure what I said to deserve that..I merely stated facts..

Oh, I didn't read that members posts..
Long copy/paste jobs don't deserve to be read..

BTW, I've always stated I've never seen a chemtrail..
But I know what the Government has done in the past and frankly, nothing they do would surprise me..
I also tend to question topics that so many debunkers tend to defend so much..
Usually, where there's smoke, there's fire..



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Wrong aerosols in regards to CFC's.

Not the spray cans, the aerosols being discussed are particulates in the air.

It's quite broad really, when you breathe out, you are creating aerosols.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 



You go ahead TRY TO DEBUNK THIS

A mere 2 billion dollars for a program that doesn't exist That 2 billion was only for 1 year



Does that sound like a blueprint for world domination? Scientists are still arguing whether aerosols increase or decrease global warming. Someone just quoted several pages describing an environmental research initiative and seems to feel it proves the "chemtrail" conspiracy theory. Does it? Do you believe the paper you cited provides enough information to commit the secret world government to alter the global climate intentionally? Do you think two billion dollars a year is enough to do it?



This is soooo funny ...Now that the contrail con artists have been debunked . You want me to try and prove a plan fpr world domination. Actually, that was never my theory about chemtrails but if you like I can supply evidence of that plan if you like..


Where did I ever say that The U.S. Global Change Research Program doesn't exist? Of course it exists, it's a research program. What does that have to do with "chemtrails?" What exactly is your theory? I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make.



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:41 AM
link   
I see chemtrails all the time. We saw them even more when the drought was on. When they do it, it effects my Asthma?



posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Didn't we ban CFC's etc for the ozone hole.??

Pretty much everything is banned in Australia..
Did you see that thread on plants being banned Chad.??



new topics

top topics



 
131
<< 32  33  34    36  37  38 >>

log in

join