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: 49
131
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Phage
 


You have no proof that the contrail powder is for aerial target practice


apart from the patent itself wher it says:


SUMMARY

The present invention is for a powder generator requiring no heat source to emit a "contrail" with sufficient visibility to aid in visual acquisition of an aircraft target vehicle and the like.


???



and you have no proof that it can't used for other purposes.


Of course it can be used for other purposes - the patent actually says so itself -


The present invention is also suitable for use in other aircraft vehicles to generate contrails or reflective screens for any desired purpose.




All of you have previously said that all contrails are all normal and putting powder or other particles would mess up the engine. Now who's the one really lying?


You. Still.




posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


It does have something to do with HAARP. It just doesn't explain the connection on the patent applications.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Phage
 


So then you admit they are spraying contrail powder ? In all your previous comments you say there is no proof they spray anything. Now once again your story changes to suit your position.


Stunning......just.....stunning!! You really do have reading comprehension difficulties!!


You are painting yourself into a corner here - I suggest you give up for the day, go have a good night's sleep, come back refreshed tomorrow, because this is just sad!

Honestly - I feel I'm watching a train crash in slow motion and it's not a good look sorry.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Thank you, you have just proved my point. They spray this contrail powder for other purposes. One of them being for it's reflective properties. Case closed.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Actually with all your double talk and lies you and your whole gang are the ones who painted yourselves into a corner. You wish I would quit because you're all making fools of yourselves. 3 against 1 and you still lose.

Edit: Wouldn't that be called a "chemtrail"

HAHAHAHAHAHa fools, thanks chump
edit on 9-3-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: add text



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Thank you, you have just proved my point.


I knew this would make you happy, because:

1/ you would seize upon it
2/ you would completely misunderstand it, and then
3/ you would say something stupid like this:


They spray this contrail powder for other purposes. One of them being for it's reflective properties. Case closed.


Where is the evidence they are using it for that? It certainly does not say so in the patent - it says it COULD be used for that.

If it was being used then I would expect to see the devices fitted to some aircraft somewhere. I am unaware of any evidence that they are - they are certainly not fitted to any aircraft inthis part of hte world, because I know all the inspectors who work for the regulatory authority that inspects civilian aircraft here, and so I can and do state that as a fact.

And yet we have persistant contrails.......

But imagine teh fun you would ahve had if you had actaully read the patent yourself.......waited for someone to say that it had no other purpose....then you could have sprung your revelation upon them......

you would still ahve been full of carp of course.....but you would have at least shown tat yuo do try to comprehend what you post, and you would ahve gotten an actual point in your favour.

Instead you are reliant upon those who think you deluded (at best) to be truthful even though you are not.


edit on 9-3-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


You have no evidence that I have seen so far that shows commercial airlines making persistent contrails.
You also seem to think that the equipment isn't easily installed and removed within a very short period.

Your statement means nothing and proves nothing.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Actually with all your double talk and lies


What lies have I posted?



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


You have no evidence that I have seen so far that shows commercial airlines making persistent contrails.


Are yuo saying they don't?


You also seem to think that the equipment isn't easily installed and removed within a very short period.


Can it be installed and removed quickly?

My knowledge doesn't rely upon how quickly it can be installed or removed - it has to be approved equipment in the first place, like everything else on the aircraft down to the panadol in the first aid kits. It has to have maintance and installation/removal information, it has to have approved materials used in it, it has to have people who do the installation and removal, it has to have wiring, and switches, and hardpoints.

I say all this so you might get some small comprehension about how things work in civil aviation in real life, rather than in your imagination.


Your statement means nothing and proves nothing.


So prove me wrong.
edit on 9-3-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: fix quote



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


It's called reverse psychology and it worked like a charm. I knew you couldn't resist trying to prove me wrong even if it meant proving yourself and your crew wrong in the process. Thanks, keep up the good work.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 





You have no proof that the contrail powder is for aerial target practice and you have no proof that it can't used for other purposes. All of you have previously said that all contrails are all normal and putting powder or other particles would mess up the engine. Now who's the one really lying?


How about you check this out before you say there is no proof of something...

www.scribd.com...

Also notice that contrail powder is dispersed by a generator located in a pod so that it doesn't go near the engine. How about a little research before posting,because it really helps.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


It's called reverse psychology and it worked like a charm. I knew you couldn't resist trying to prove me wrong even if it meant proving yourself and your crew wrong in the process.


Nice riposte - very sharp.........except I was agreeing with you on that point, not trying to prove you wrong!!

Did you not notice that??




Thanks, keep up the good work.


highlighting your incompetance needs no thanks - but thanks anyway!



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


I love how you keep mentioning civil aviation. What about military aviation. You're exposing more and more of your lies and cover-up techniques with every statement. Why don't you take a break get some rest and come back tomorrow. Maybe a good nights sleep will give you better judgement and your statements won't look so transparent.

hahahahaha



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


I love how you keep mentioning civil aviation. What about military aviation.



What about it?

Are you saying civil airliners do not make persistent contrails? I asked you that before and you haven't answered yet.

Have you got any evidence of the pods you "mentioned" being fitted to any military aircraft? Or anything else fitted to mlitary aircraft that might generate some sort of chemical trail that fits one of the chemtrail descriptions? (which version of chemtrails are you suggesting at this point in time??)


You're exposing more and more of your lies


what lies have I posted?


edit on 9-3-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: asking a question or 2



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Actually I already have all that information and I read it a long time ago. I have it included with all the other documents I keep stored in a folder available online.

How about you explain why you're all using patents to try and prove something when before you all said that patents prove nothing?
edit on 9-3-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 

You are the only one posting patents.
We are pointing out how wrong you are about what you think those patents contain.
And that you are lying about what is in them.


edit on 3/9/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 

How about you explain why you're all using patents to try and prove something when before you all said that patents prove nothing?


it is YOU claiming patents prove something - "we" are pointing out that the patents do not say what you CLAIM they do, and that you have linked 2 of them dishonestly.



edit on 9-3-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Mathias - do civil airliners leave persistant contrails?



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 





Actually I already have all that information and I read it a long time ago. I have it included with all the other documents I keep stored in a folder available online.


Well you may want to re read this then, because it seems you skipped over most of it.


As for this


How about you explain why you're all using patents to try and prove something when before you all said that patents prove nothing?


I think your answer has been handled by other members.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   
The ability of stratospheric sulfate aerosols to create a global dimming effect has made them a possible candidate for use in geoengineering projects[2] to limit the effect and impact of climate change due to rising levels of greenhouse gases.[3] Delivery of precursor sulfide gases such as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) by artillery, aircraft[1] and balloons has been proposed.[4]

link

Obviously it has been talked about. Everyone knows that Governments WOULD NEVER secretly commit to something that would APPEAR so foreign,as to Geoengineer the very planet we live on.


These are some of the findings of a two-year investigation by The Washington Post that discovered what amounts to an alternative geography of the United States, a Top Secret America hidden from public view and lacking in thorough oversight. After nine years of unprecedented spending and growth, the result is that the system put in place to keep the United States safe is so massive that its effectiveness is impossible to determine.

The investigation's other findings include:

* Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States.

* An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances.

* In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings - about 17 million square feet of space.

* Many security and intelligence agencies do the same work, creating redundancy and waste. For example, 51 federal organizations and military commands, operating in 15 U.S. cities, track the flow of money to and from terrorist networks.

Link

Ignorance is bliss!




top topics



 
131
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join