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.

 

Are They Spraying Anything?

page: 26
50
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2011 @ 06:51 AM
link   
reply to post by sandesh
 






Nice try.





posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
Just a note:
They haven't been spraying over central Texas lately, like the last three weeks or so, nothing. It is like the pilots decided to change their routes and lay persistent contrails elsewhere. Leads me to believe that commercial aircraft are not involved, just military.
Something to think about.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Stewie
 


But, of course.....the weather never enters you mind as a likely coincidence, huh??

Did you even try to research it? The conditions, at altitude?

You have been shown the tools, repeatedly. Too bad, this is such nonsense....what a waste.....



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by OleMB
Haters gonna hate: dis·in·for·ma·tion



I never really paid any attention to this topic...

But that video...




posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 

That is exactly how it is done. They pollute the skies in a hurry, and then they leave for a while, apparently confident that whatever it is they sprayed will hang around for the intended amount of time for whatever they are trying to accomplish.
That video is exactly what people are questioning.
This is not weather.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


Huh??

That UTube video...nine minutes and fifty-nine seconds of normal contrails??

It is why this is so sad.....people unable to understand the rather simple science, and facts. Why is it so difficult to educate people?



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 

Yes, normal atmospheric spraying in a world gone ape #.
Welcome to hell, Weed.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 11:30 PM
link   
sorry, wong thread.

carry on
edit on 19-5-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


I just saw this exact same UTube video....yesterday, or Wednesday.

Was it in this thread?

Did you post it?

As I replied to it, previously....'nine minutes and fifty-nine seconds of normal contrails'.

There is nothing in that video, besides a person wasting his/her time, and the viewers' (unless you enjoy spending time looking at contrails in time-lapse....fascinating, I suppose....for about 30 seconds).



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Jezus
 

I just saw this exact same UTube video....yesterday, or Wednesday.
Was it in this thread?
Did you post it?
As I replied to it, previously....'nine minutes and fifty-nine seconds of normal contrails'.
There is nothing in that video, besides a person wasting his/her time, and the viewers' (unless you enjoy spending time looking at contrails in time-lapse....fascinating, I suppose....for about 30 seconds).


Obviously you checked the times and dates of these trails, then checked the atmospheric conditions to show that the weather was conducive to contrails.
You also checked the airlines to see that these were in fact scheduled flights at the relevant altitudes to produce contrails..

Could you please show us your research then??
I'm interested.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Presumably you have all that data and samples of them to prove that they are not what they look like?



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by backinblack
 


Presumably you have all that data and samples of them to prove that they are not what they look like?


They look like trails to me..
What's in them is not for me to say but isn't it obvious that making sure the conditions at that time were conducive to contrails is relevant?

You can't just say yep, they're contrails if the conditions were not correct..



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


No - but I can say - "they look and behave exactly like contrails, so what makes you think they are not?"



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by backinblack
 


No - but I can say - "they look and behave exactly like contrails, so what makes you think they are not?"


I'm not big on this subject but wouldn't chemtrails also behave the same?
They would simply be a trail produced by a plane and would be subject to winds etc just like a contrail..

It seems practical, because it's easy, to show that the conditions at the time were conducive to contrails and that there were scheduled flights at that altitude and time..

What's wrong with that reasoning?????



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by backinblack
 


No - but I can say - "they look and behave exactly like contrails, so what makes you think they are not?"


I'm not big on this subject but wouldn't chemtrails also behave the same?


Why?

The point has been raised before - and it boils down to asking how you can tell a "chemtrail" from a contrail if it looks the same and behaves the same.

We know how contrails look and behave. No-one has ever positively identified a chemtrail so that it's look and behaviour can be established.

Lots of YT videos say they show chemtrails - but how do ehy know they are chemtrails if they look and behave EXACTLY like contrails??



They would simply be a trail produced by a plane and would be subject to winds etc just like a contrail..

It seems practical, because it's easy, to show that the conditions at the time were conducive to contrails and that there were scheduled flights at that altitude and time..


The claim is made that things that look like contrails are not contrails - so the evidence is required to support the claim.

there ARE multiple scientific studies of contrails, there ARE occasional informal studies of contrails too - comparing contrail start/ends with cirrus clouds for example, or sometimes there is a nearby atmospheric sounding station that can provide data in the general area. WE KNOW contrails exist, and why.

We don't have any verifiable evidence that chemtrails exist at all - let alone how they might manage to look and behave exactly like contrails despite being different from them.


What's wrong with that reasoning?????


As a thought exercise it is fine.

But it is not evidence for chemtrails existing.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


The point has been raised before - and it boils down to asking how you can tell a "chemtrail" from a contrail if it looks the same and behaves the same.
We know how contrails look and behave. No-one has ever positively identified a chemtrail so that it's look and behaviour can be established.
Lots of YT videos say they show chemtrails - but how do ehy know they are chemtrails if they look and behave EXACTLY like contrails??


Ah so if it looks like a contrail then it MUST be a contrail?
That's your reasoning?

I'm just ignorant for suggesting that maybe checking conditions to see if contrails can in fact be formed at that particular time and area?

Nice logic.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


The point has been raised before - and it boils down to asking how you can tell a "chemtrail" from a contrail if it looks the same and behaves the same.
We know how contrails look and behave. No-one has ever positively identified a chemtrail so that it's look and behaviour can be established.
Lots of YT videos say they show chemtrails - but how do ehy know they are chemtrails if they look and behave EXACTLY like contrails??


Ah so if it looks like a contrail then it MUST be a contrail?
That's your reasoning?

I'm just ignorant for suggesting that maybe checking conditions to see if contrails can in fact be formed at that particular time and area?

Nice logic.


The point, I believe, was that If it looks and behaves like a contrail, and zero evidence exists to show that it is anything other than a contrail, evidence must be provided when someone claims that they are or possibly are "chemtrails" by the people making those claims.

Heres a thread on critical thinking regarding chemtrails by adeclerk
www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 20-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by GringoViejo
 



The point, I believe, was that If it looks and behaves like a contrail, and zero evidence exists to show that it is anything other than a contrail, evidence must be provided when someone claims that they are or possibly are "chemtrails" by the people making those claims.

Heres a thread on critical thinking regarding chemtrails by adeclerk
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Checking atmospheric conditions is obviously the easiest thing to do..
A few debunkers here including Phage, Chadwicks and others actually agreed and at times even did the checking..

Now it's suddenly not accepted??



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GringoViejo
 



The point, I believe, was that If it looks and behaves like a contrail, and zero evidence exists to show that it is anything other than a contrail, evidence must be provided when someone claims that they are or possibly are "chemtrails" by the people making those claims.

Heres a thread on critical thinking regarding chemtrails by adeclerk
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Checking atmospheric conditions is obviously the easiest thing to do..
A few debunkers here including Phage, Chadwicks and others actually agreed and at times even did the checking..

Now it's suddenly not accepted??


I never said that.

If you want to know so bad, go ahead and do a little research for once. We aren't claiming they are true, your demand for evidence of any kind from us is illogical www.abovetopsecret.com... whether or not you or others have been humored before.
edit on 20-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
50
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join