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.

 

EXCLUSIVE "What in The World Are They Spraying" Chemist talks to ATS about Geoengineering.

page: 7
53
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Obviously then you are not here to debate..
Your opinion is already set and nothing will change that..

Not really sure why you are posting with such a closed mind...




posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

Yes.
I am not here to debate. I am here for clarifications. I am somewhat confused by the claims of the movie. I am here to ask how the conclusions concerning the soils and water tests in the movie were arrived at. I am here to find out why geoengineering is considered to be the most likely cause of the metals found. I am asking how the data can be interpreted to come to that conclusion.

I have done some simple comparisons of the data presented to other known data. It does not seem to me that the levels of metals found in the tests were high. I am trying to learn something.

edit on 3/4/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I have done some simple comparisons of the data presented to other known data. It does not seem to me that the levels of metals found in the tests were high. I am trying to learn something.


But you are comparing soil based samples to samples that were obviously taken in a way that represents air based samples?

Then you question why they didn't test for other elements??
Because they were concerned with these elements Phage..

If my Dr thinks I have Hepatitis then THAT'S what he tests for....

I just don't follow your whole line of questioning..
It seems your intent is to mislead IMO...



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Phage
 

Obviously then you are not here to debate..
Your opinion is already set and nothing will change that..

Not really sure why you are posting with such a closed mind...


yeah, i'm not sure how you can have any agenda, besides truth, especially when science hasn't really even properly researched this "phenomenon". to already have made your mind up on such a young and more or less unventured field means you have an agenda to stifle truth, even if your opinion turns out to be true. all your questions are clearly leading to hear something you want, not something that matters. dr. tyhme has made some really good points in the few posts he's answered with already that have pretty much fallen on deaf ears with you guys. i still think the most glaring piece of information is that the geoengineering conference proposed exactly what people have been describing for years now--to blanket the atmosphere with specific (very specific) metals in an attempt to control weather and "fight climate change".



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 11:22 PM
link   
I asked if Dr Thyme believes the levels of metals found in the tests were high. I asked him how he came to that conclusion.

He asked for alternative explanations for the metals found in the snow melt. I offered one. If he would like to discuss that further I am willing to do so.

If Dr. Thyme feels my inquires are out of line that is his prerogative but he was invited here to answer such questions. If this is just going to be another "chemtrail" thread full of poorly defined science and hand waving, what's the point?



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


If Dr. Thyme feels my inquires are out of line that is his prerogative but he was invited here to answer such questions. If this is just going to be another "chemtrail" thread full of poorly defined science and hand waving, what's the point?


Well I asked you what the normal concentration of aluminum is in the air..
Instead of answering you keep referring back to a 90 year old book relating to soil samples..

That's "poorly defined science" from my perspective...



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
in spite of the huge derailment hit this thread took, i'm honestly surprised how dead this thread is... >.>



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by shagreen heart
in spite of the huge derailment hit this thread took, i'm honestly surprised how dead this thread is... >.>


Yeah, well do you really blame the good doctor for not wanting to post??
Agendas were obvious from the start..Shame really...



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by shagreen heart
in spite of the huge derailment hit this thread took, i'm honestly surprised how dead this thread is... >.>


Yeah, well do you really blame the good doctor for not wanting to post??
Agendas were obvious from the start..Shame really...


as soon as i read there was going to be a pro in here to talk about chemtrails of all things, i instantly foresaw the worst s#storm, and it happened (started by retardo mods no less. seriously, i wish i had been part of the thread when it started, i would have loved to pick apart some of the stupid things that got posted early on).

i really look forward to the radio show, but more than anything i hope this sparks real research and more people to come forward and think about this subject. aluminum poisoning is serious. i mean imagine if we find out this is really happening? to conceive of it is outrageous, but for it to be true... i can't imagine how the people will react. www.detox-central.com...



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 12:10 AM
link   
What do you think of this as a way to sample air? Wouldn't you want to be behind the plane for a sample & away for another? If walking wouldn't that also be coming from the ground soil?

We air samples on non-windy days, using a HEPA filter, then vacuuming the particulates from that filter into another pristine HEPA filter, which we then emptied into a sterile container. ..
this was from Arizona Sky Watch...

Ektar



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 12:38 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



I think that one problem is that many of you think that the sky is this big open area that aircraft can just freely roam at will with little to no oversight. Well, that’s just not the case, there are rules that all aircraft must follow. There are Visual Flight Rules, and Instrument Flight rules, airspace types, and restrictions.

VFR:
The only aircraft that are allowed to "roam at will" are aircraft flying under Visual Flight Rules. The stipulations for VFR flight include that they must remain below 18000 feet msl, all flights above 18000 feet msl MUST fly Instrument Flight Rules(IFR) and MUST file a flight plan, this INCLUDES military aircraft that are operating outside warning areas, military operations areas (MOAs), alert areas, and controlled firing areas (CFAs), and not under immediate emergency conditions (ie. intercepting an inbound enemy bomber).

Under VFR, ALL pilots must maintain a certain level of visibility to insure that they do not collide with other aircraft or ground obstacles. In order to achieve this, there are rules stipulating the distance that these aircraft can approach clouds. These are the US rules in regards to distances that must be maintained from cloud cover:

US Weather minima for VFR flight outside Controlled Airspace (within Class E Airspace)

At or above 10,000 ft. MSL
5 statute miles visibility, 1 statute mile horizontally from clouds, 1000ft above and below clouds

Below 10,000 ft. MSL
3 statute miles visibility, 2000 ft. horizontally from clouds, 1000ft above and 500 ft below clouds

US Weather minima for VFR flight in Class C and D airspace
3 statue miles visibility, 2000 ft. horizontally from clouds, 1000ft above and 500 ft below clouds

This means that VFR aircraft would not be able to spray any cloud forming elements, as they would be in direct violation of their visibility clearances from the cloud cover they were laying down while flying their supposed “grid”.

IFR:
Or Instrument Flight Rules are all other aircraft not flying VFR. All IFR aircraft are required to file a flight plan with flight operations at your departing airport, who pass it along to the appropriate ATC (Air Traffic Control) stations between your departing airport and arriving airport. The controllers then follow that plan as closely as traffic and weather allow. This includes exact times that it takes to fly each leg of that trip so ATC will know when to start looking for a downed aircraft. This ALSO APPLIES to all military traffic that is operating outside military operations areas, above 18000 feet msl, and not engaged in an immediate emergency operation. When a flight plan is filed, that aircraft is then tracked by ATC, and its route is publicly available information, hence that anyone can track them via sites such as flightracker.

I can go on and on about this for pages, going into airspace levels, other rules, etc. but this should be enough to give you an idea of how impossible that this conspiracy theory is.

Now, think about this:
In order for this theory to be true…..
All the ATC personnel would have to know about it.
All the Flight Ops people would have to know about it.
All the commercial pilots would have to know about it.
All the civilian pilots would have to know about it.
All the ramp service personnel would know about it.
All the people involved with making the chemicals would know about it.
All the people involved with distribution of the chemicals would know about it.
Anyone who can read flight plans or NOTAMs would know about it.

None of these people sign any sort of government nondisclosure agreements, none of them have to get DOD clearance, none of them are held to any level of secrecy….

And not a single one has ever come forward to agree that this is occurring…

Get it yet?
Hoax.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



None of these people sign any sort of government nondisclosure agreements, none of them have to get DOD clearance, none of them are held to any level of secrecy….
And not a single one has ever come forward to agree that this is occurring…
Get it yet?
Hoax.


And yet thanks to the FOIA and whistleblowers, it has been proven as FACT that the Government have sprayed dangerous chemicals on unsuspecting civilians..

Care to explain how they managed that with your theory Defcon.??????



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


You’re talking about low level VFR flights that would be similar to mosquito control flights or crop dusting. These types of flights do not make the “clouds” that the chemtrail crowd claim define chemtrails.

Edit to add:
These things were also done on a very limited scale, nowhere near that claimed with chemtrails.
edit on 3/5/2011 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by backinblack
 


You’re talking about low level VFR flights that would be similar to mosquito control flights or crop dusting. These types of flights do not make the “clouds” that the chemtrail crowd claim define chemtrails.

Edit to add:
These things were also done on a very limited scale, nowhere near that claimed with chemtrails.
edit on 3/5/2011 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)


No mate..Some of it was quite large scale..
But it shows the Government is capable..
Your argument then is merely to what scale...



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


My argument is that your comparing apples to oranges. The type of spraying that you are talking about does not look anything like supposed “chemtrails”, and was done under 18000 feet msl, meaning it was done under VFR flight rules, and probably done even lower then that under 5000 feet msl. The stuff that you all claim to call chemtrails is done at higher altitudes, looks nothing like what you’re talking about, and is done over the entire world on a daily basis.

No one denies that there are aerial spray applications preformed for many things including pest control, the argument is that these types of real spraying have nothing to do with those lines in the sky you all call chemtrails.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 01:38 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



No one denies that there are aerial spray applications preformed for many things including pest control, the argument is that these types of real spraying have nothing to do with those lines in the sky you all call chemtrails.


Odd.
..I've said countless times I've never seen a persistent con/chemtrail..

I just find your argument against them full of holes...

And I also know the Government have proven themselves more than capable...

BTW, your talk of altitudes is mere speculation on your part..



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by shagreen heart

Originally posted by backinblack
Yeah, well do you really blame the good doctor for not wanting to post??
Agendas were obvious from the start..Shame really...

as soon as i read there was going to be a pro in here to talk about chemtrails of all things, i instantly foresaw the worst s#storm, and it happened (started by retardo mods no less. seriously, i wish i had been part of the thread when it started, i would have loved to pick apart some of the stupid things that got posted early on).


Actually, you are quite incorrect.
If you go back and read the thread the original post by myself was quite on the topic of the threads video, was cordial, and polite. The first attacks in this thread came from your friend there, Backinblack with this post here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In which he decided that he did not like a mod, whom he knows is an opponent of chemtrails, chiming in, so he decided to try and play moderator himself and take a potshot at me. I chose to ignore that remark as well as the rest of the personal attacks against me up until here, 7 pages later. The fact that almost none of these personal attacks have been actioned should speak volumes for the fact that there is no agenda here by any moderators to block anything.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

edit on 3/5/2011 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



Actually, you are quite incorrect.
If you go back and read the thread the original post by myself was quite on the topic of the threads video, was cordial, and polite. The first attacks in this thread came from your friend there, Backinblack with this post here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In which he decided that he did not like a mod, whom he knows is an opponent of chemtrails, chiming in, so he decided to try and play moderator himself and take a potshot at me. I chose to ignore that remark as well as the rest of the personal attacks against me up until here, 7 pages later. The fact that almost none of these personal attacks have been actioned should speak volumes for the fact that there is no agenda here by any moderators to block anything.


BS...Your FIRST post was off topic because you asked questions that were not relevant to the video in question..
You later admitted you didn't even watch all of the video..
Get off your high horse and stop blaming me or others for your biased attitude.!!!!!!!!



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Perhaps we could get back to my as yet unanswered question, if Dr Thyme is still around?

The hypothesis that large scale spraying of aluminium (or indeed any other substance) in the air - chemtrails - predicts that if such substances can be detected on the ground in one locality then similar quantities should be detected all over the planet. If such is found to be the case, it strongly supports if not confirms the hypothesis. If such is not found to be the case it falsifies the hypothesis and some other explanation for the increased quantities found at the one specific location must be sought. This is the scientific method. Let's apply it.

So, have similar quanties of aluminium been found in widespread locations all over the planet? Yes or no?



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 



So, have similar quanties of aluminium been found in widespread locations all over the planet? Yes or no?


Considering aluminum is one of the most common elements in the planets crust I'd say yes.
The question is, what concentrations are in the air, not the soil...



new topics

top topics



 
53
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join