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 Debunkers....

page: 69
36
<< 66  67  68    70  71  72 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



LOOK!! IF YOU want to be "paranoid"? Do so to your heart's content!! The rest of us will just laugh at you....sorry, but this is the tragic truth.......already, we LAUGH and chuckle at these stupid claims. HENCE the few punking videos, to spool you up.....guess you aren't getting the "joke"......weeellllll....WE ARE!!! LOL!!!!


Actually Weed, you and others don't just sit back and laugh/chuckle..
In fact you spend an incredible amount of time trying to debunk something you consider childish and paranoid..

Now you'll sprout the bull that you merely do it because you care about others being fooled, but the way you communicate your views with insults and ridicule really makes me doubt your caring nature..




posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by zipcode80013
reply to post by Essan
 



Again, my brother was a B52 jet mechanic and he saw the turbine blades as early as the late 70's.


You were informing us in previous posts that he was repairing the 'afterburner/re-heat' on the B-52 engines. You do realise that the B-52 engines (turbojet and later turbofan) did not have it?

TJ



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

But not about B-52 engines apparently!!




But you've never had a camera taken off you! You do realise that is why it was confiscated? He had the photographic proof of the secret facility for B-52 engines. You know the one that installed the afterburners! Why do you think that they took the tail gunner out of the B-52. It got a bit toasty back there with those afterburners shooting flame out!


TJ
edit on 2-4-2011 by tommyjo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by coyotepoet
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


How about the Black Helicopters? They don't have markings and I have seen them up close and personal on several different occasions. A weak argument at best.


Really? You've checked all over the airframe have you? Are they really all coloured black or is it just an easy cop out? What type were these helicopters and where did you see them?

TJ



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by coyotepoet
 


If you believe in unmarked aircraft then how about this one? Do you believe from the evidence presented in the video that the plane is unmarked?



TJ



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Old footage from British Pathe News. Many chemtrail believers actually think that all this old footage has been manipulated. They actually believe that the contrails have been inserted?

World War II

www.britishpathe.com...

World War II

www.britishpathe.com...

World War II

www.britishpathe.com...

1949

www.britishpathe.com...

1941

www.britishpathe.com...

Late 1940s. I would say 1949 by the marks of aircraft.

www.britishpathe.com...

From

www.britishpathe.com...

Is there a similar US website? It might be worth reviewing the old footage.?

TJ

edit on 2-4-2011 by tommyjo because: Additional info added

edit on 2-4-2011 by tommyjo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


Interesting videos. Given that the planes aren't seen making the lines, this only proves that contrails lasted for the length of the short video segments and some time on either side, not that these lines lasted for hours and spread across the sky like the ones today. Interesting though. Thanks for sharing

As for your unmarked plane:




If you believe in unmarked aircraft then how about this one? Do you believe from the evidence presented in the video that the plane is unmarked?


The only unmarked flying things that I have actually seen and can confirm were unmarked were the helicopters i have seen. Hard to tell from the video the plane is not shown from all angles. And yes, the helicopters I saw were unmarked and flying low enough to the ground that I could see them. Not sure what type they were but they were definitely close enough that I could make out whether or not they had markings and that they were all black. And no, not a cop out and I resent the implication.


edit on 2-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: added quote

edit on 2-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: further response

edit on 2-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by coyotepoet

The only unmarked flying things that I have actually seen and can confirm were unmarked were the helicopters i have seen. Hard to tell from the video the plane is not shown from all angles. And yes, the helicopters I saw were unmarked and flying low enough to the ground that I could see them. Not sure what type they were but they were definitely close enough that I could make out whether or not they had markings and that they were all black. And no, not a cop out and I resent the implication.


edit on 2-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: added quote

edit on 2-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: further response

edit on 2-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: (no reason given)


Your description is no better than some of the You Tube videos presented as black helicopter evidence. Not all markings are clearly visible. Here in the UK the 'black helicopter' believers pounce on the Army Air Corps AH-64 Apaches. They all carry serials but are small and indistinct and blend in with the colour scheme. If the serials are small then obviously they are going to be hard to read. All you have been fooled by is indistinct serials on a dark coloured airframe.

UK AH-64 Apache.

www.airliners.net...

TJ



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


Thanks for the picture. While I still don't know what type of helicopters they were (about 2 years ago it was a grouping of 3 a few months ago just 1), I can now confirm that they weren't Apaches. The Apaches are far too military looking for the ones that I saw.
edit on 2-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: last sentence



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 



They all carry serials but are small and indistinct and blend in with the colour scheme. If the serials are small then obviously they are going to be hard to read. All you have been fooled by is indistinct serials on a dark coloured airframe.


Looks to me like they do this on purpose..
What other explanation is there??



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


Are you kidding me TJ ?
What a complete waste of time. Why are you trying to post hoax videos?

Do you actually think those videos haven't been altered?

Do you really think people are that dumb?


Those videos are obvious fakes, the videos show short clips of "chemtrails" and then cut to old footage. There is no cohesion in the context of the video. The modern chemtrail footage had the color removed and was inserted through a very very poor cut job editing. Sound was removed in some cases.

Video 1 obvious fake - new images cut with old ones


IKE WITH KING - MEDAL CEREMONIES video newsreel film
Various shots bombers flying over, leaving vapour trail in sky
Unused / unissued material - dates and locations unknown or unclear.


Video 2 obvious fake - inserted images at beginning of video


KING INSPECTS TROOPS MEDALS video newsreel film
Unused / unissued material - dates and locations unknown or unclear.
NB: shots are same or similar to those in UN 946 B - see separate record for further details.


Video 3 obvious fake- more inserted images


(TANKS) video newsreel film
Shots of planes leaving vapour trails high in the skies above
Unissued / unused material - dates and location unclear or unknown.


Video 4 Prop. planes not jets (still questionable if authentic)


FIVE NATIONS JOIN IN GIANT AIR MANOEUVRES video newsreel film
LV Air to Air B-50s in flight. MV B-50 shot through hatchway, SV Observers tracking aircraft. LV Vapour trails over 'drome. MV Vapour trails over drome, showing interceptor trails. CU Observer Corps man looks up through binoculars. MV Vapour trails showing fighter trails as they intercept.


Video 5 contrails dissipate quickly (probably made by another prop. plane)


MEOPHAM (issue title - LOOKING AROUND) video newsreel film
L/S of vapour trails from fighting aircraft overhead


Video 6 contrails dissipate quickly, more prop. planes


OPERATION 'BULLDOG' video newsreel film
MS. Vapour trails of bomber formation in sky showing trails of interceptor fighters coming in at the side (5 shots). LS. Across aerodrome, of fading vapour trails. LS. Vapour trails. LS. Interceptor plane across vapour trails. LS.



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


I wouldn't be talking about posting a video that is a hoax when you have posted many hoax you tube videos. So you really have a hard time with the truth don't you? You are really scraping the bottom to find anything that you can post that will fit with your agenda about chemtrails no matter how much evidence is shown to that proves you are very clueless in your so called research.Here is just one of many subjects you have been shown to be false yet you can't comprehend the truth. Pinal Airpark and Evergreen Aviation.



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by coyotepoet
 


Good job you just tap danced around the question also. This is not a hard question to answer yet no one can answer the question. So why will nobody answer the question?



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


Did you read anything about this patent and its uses.

Here lets take a look shall we...
Now go back and read the description and uses of this patent and you will see that this soap is to keep jet fuel from being a fine mist and helps the fuel upon a tank rupture from becoming an instant flame up. Read page 2 on this patent.

www.wikipatents.com...

Also you should notice that this patent is from 1974 so this has been going on since the seventies yet the chemtrail reporting started in the 90's. So why weren't chemtrails studied after this patent was issued. They waited over twenty years to decide that aluminum soap used to help viscosity in jet fuels is a cause of chemtrails today. Good try but not good enough.


Viscosity is a measure of the resistance of a fluid which is being deformed by either shear stress or tensile stress. In everyday terms (and for fluids only), viscosity is "thickness" or "internal friction". Thus, water is "thin", having a lower viscosity, while honey is "thick", having a higher viscosity. Put simply, the less viscous the fluid is, the greater its ease of movement (fluidity).[1]


en.wikipedia.org...

Again you only post a part of the whole patent. Why don't you read things before you blindly post them, but that seems to be what your good at?



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


Just wondering why you didn't post the rest of the article that you chopped to try and back your theory up. Now the rest of what you missed..


One obstacle for using the aluminum particles as a fuel additive is the protective aluminum-oxide coating that forms on the surface which eliminates the material's ability to react with the environment and dampens the energy output of the additive. To overcome this problem, Doctor Bunker's team created a synthetic coating and process for applying it to each particle. This coating mimics fuel, enabling the particles to remain dissolved in the fuel and available to burn. It also makes the air-stable particles useful as a fuel source. Though the aluminum particles are stable in air, they are still able to react with water and produce hydrogen gas. This gas makes an excellent fuel source and Dr. Bunker's team tested it by designing a cylinder to trap the hydrogen gas, which is then fed through an off-the-shelf fuel cell that powers a cell phone. "A one-gram sample of the aluminum nano-particles produces more than 300 pounds per square inch of hydrogen pressure," Dr. Bunker said. "It's enough to power a cell phone for a few minutes. If we can pelletize and compress the material into a disk, it would be a much lighter emergency fuel source than the 40-pounds of batteries the average battlefield Airman carries." Dr. Bunker imagines a scenario where a downed Airman needs to run emergency equipment and pops a few nano-aluminum pellets into a specially-designed fuel cell, adding water and calling for help or illuminating a map without being encumbered with heavy batteries. The technology developed by Air Force Research Lab's nano-technology researches may make the emergency situations Airmen encounter more survivable. Just add water.


So this research is being done to help stranded airmen to power certain devices that they may need when their plane goes down and they don't have to carry heavy batteries wit them.This is a study of how to help downed airmen not adding aluminum to fuel to spray over the population. The reason they are using jet fuel to test this is because what does an airmen have in vast quantity as he is flying? That's right jet fuel.



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Whats the question I'm supposedly tap dancing around? Do I believe that there are sometimes unmarked planes flying around doing these things. Sure I believe that. When we are talking about the CIA for instance the rules are whatever they say they are.

Just ask that guy in Pakistan the US paid 2 million for to get him off the hook for murder who was a CIA asset, or the CIA involvement in drug running. If they are capable of that without getting in trouble they are capable of anything without getting in trouble.



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by coyotepoet
 





Whats the question I'm supposedly tap dancing around?


This is the question I had asked...


how do unmarked planes fly around busy airports without having flight plans or even markings that would show any identifying numbers?


What does the CIA and drug running have to do with the question above? My question is fairly simple and should be able to answer by any person who wants to do so. Simple enough....



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


And the reason I didn't answer that question directly is because I don't know how. I am not a pilot, nor have I had experience with filing flight plans. My response was simply that if certain sets of people wanted to break the rules and get away with it they could (thus my reference to CIA drug running.)



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Proof that aluminum can be put in jet fuel. Don't try to change your story or play word game semantics.

You completely lied and pretended to be the ultimate authority, while you insulted people again from the start.

You can take credit for being my inspiration to investigate this topic.

oai.dtic.mil...

Aluminum soap demisting agent in jet fuel
www.patentstorm.us...


Aluminum nano particles for jet fuel
www.airmanonline.af.mil...


The research team recently produced aluminum nano-particles in the laboratory to test the material's ability to boost the energy content of aircraft fuel. Because the surface area of the aluminum dominates on the nano scale, the material is very reactive to air and water. The particles theoretically would boost the energy density of JP-8 jet fuel by 10 percent and increase its stability at higher temperatures.


Didn't you even read my post ? What did I misrepresent? Why are you trying to lie about what I said?

I never said the nano particles were for any evil purpose, the nano particles might explain the persistent contrails of some planes though.

The main reason I posted that was to prove that weedwhacker was lying when he said it was impossible to put aluminum in jet fuel. Now you're lying about it too.



posted on Apr, 3 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by tommyjo
 



They all carry serials but are small and indistinct and blend in with the colour scheme. If the serials are small then obviously they are going to be hard to read. All you have been fooled by is indistinct serials on a dark coloured airframe.


Looks to me like they do this on purpose..
What other explanation is there??


Of course some military forces use low visibility tactical markings on their equipment. They do it on purpose as part of the tactical camouflage.

www.ukserials.com...

For example black coloured markings on a green background.

www.airliners.net...

This results in conspiracy people filming routine helicopter movements and claiming that they are 'unmarked'. You Tube is full of them.

Link to video.

www.youtube.com...

TJ




top topics



 
36
<< 66  67  68    70  71  72 >>

log in

join