A Challenge to Chemtrail Debunkers

page: 17
17
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 





Here's some documents on weather modification that I found


Where is it shown that this document has anything with weather modifications? This is a document discussing air quality in California where is the modification being suggested? Did you read this before posting? Another home run for you and your research.




posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Can you find anything other than that article or ones that look like they were cut from the same template to deride him? That was my point that the only thing the wiki cited was that one article.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by coyotepoet
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Can you find anything other than that article or ones that look like they were cut from the same template to deride him? That was my point that the only thing the wiki cited was that one article.


Mathias is his own worst enemy, his posting of articles that have nothing to do with chemtrails or even what he claims the articles are about, derides him more than anyone else can.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by firepilot

Originally posted by coyotepoet
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Can you find anything other than that article or ones that look like they were cut from the same template to deride him? That was my point that the only thing the wiki cited was that one article.


Mathias is his own worst enemy, his posting of articles that have nothing to do with chemtrails or even what he claims the articles are about, derides him more than anyone else can.



By him I meant weatherman Scott Stevens of weatherwars.info. By another article I meant other than the USA Today Article that the Wiki on Scott Stevens cites and TSurfer uses as well. I know you guys are used to picking on Mathias so I guess I should have specified my pronouns.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by coyotepoet
 


Here you go this should help..

www.foxnews.com...

Now I will address the video that Scott Stevens has on his site.


I know how all of the chemtrailers love this site so here is a little about this video..


Most of the supposed “chemtrail” videos out there are simply videos of persistent contrails that the video maker somehow has decided are part of a giant world-wide conspiracy involving spraying something for some purpose. But some videos are actually deliberate hoaxes, either by pranksters poking fun at the chemtrail community, or by people looking to promote the theory for one reason or another. The insider: chemtrails KC-10 sprayer air to air – The proof ====✈ The above video comes from TankerEnemy, an Italian chemtrail proponent. It very clearly shows aerodynamic contrails coming from the wings of a KC-10. The pilots on the cockpit are heard joking about it being “chemtrails”.
TankerEnemy, not being a native english speaker, misses this and thinks they are being serious. He then goes on to “analyze” the video, and points to the flap mechanisms as being nozzles.

The original video was posted by USAFFEKC1O as a joke. He later updated the description to read: USAFFEKC1O | July 17, 2010
It was fun playing with all the chemtrailers but you guys are way to gullible!!

And commented: You guys who keep saying “TOO LATE” need to think before you open your mouth…I don’t care that the videos are still out there and going viral. THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE PRANK!!!! …for all of you chemtrail idiots to get all excited as if these videos are the holy grail of chemtrail videos and for me and my friends to laugh at you while you spread them. The more passionate you guys are about this, the more entertaining it is for those of us who live in the real world. Keep on spreading!! The video has indeed “gone viral”, at least within the chemtrail community. This means TankerEnemy will continually be embarrassed by his own gullibility, and will unfortunately have no choice but to continue to assert that the video is real evidence of spraying, even though it’s painfully obvious that it is not.


contrailscience.com...

So now how do you believe someone who is promoting a hoax video as the real thing?



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 


Two types of chemtrails

Sulfur-hexa-flouride (SF6) is put into an aerosol generator and injected into the atmosphere from exterior nozzles on planes. It is an atmospheric tracer being used in many studies.

Sulfur hexafluoride—A powerful new atmospheric tracer : May 1996

Hygroscopic salts are used the same way but are intended for cloud seeding techniques.

Nucleation and scattering properties of ice cloud due to seeding of sodium chloride as aqueous solution and dust
edit on 22-4-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: edit



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Me:


Can you find anything other than that article or ones that look like they were cut from the same template to deride him?


Tsurfer:


Here you go this should help.. www.foxnews.com... Now I will address the video that Scott Stevens has on his site.


Okay. Now you just listed the second (of two) articles listed on the wiki page, written the day after the USA Today article using the same template. I was really hoping you would respond with an article other than the two listed on the wiki page. However, since you did, I will point out why it is not a valid second article and why "news" is often just cookie cutter writing:


USA Today: An Idaho weatherman says Japan's Yakuza mafia used a Russian-made electromagnetic generator to cause Hurricane Katrina in a bid to avenge itself for the Hiroshima atom bomb attack — and that this technology will soon be wielded again to hit another U.S. city.

Fox:Sott Stevens, a meteorologist who for nine years has been forecasting the weather on KPVI-TV in Pocatello, says the Yakuza — the Japanese mafia — is using a Russian-made electromagnetic generator to launch terrific storms against the U.S. Mainland. The devastation of New Orleans was in revenge for the U.S. atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Stevens explains on his Web site. He says it will soon be used again against another major American city.


A little wordier, but same information. Next:


USA Today: especially if you're armed with the Cold War-era weapon said to have been made by the Russians in 1976. Stevens became convinced of the existence of the Russian device when he observed an unusual Montana cold front in 2004.

Fox: Rumors have long circulated of a secret Soviet weather weapon, but Stevens told the Idaho Falls Post Register he became convinced it existed after noticing strange patterns in a Montana cold front in 2004.


Pretty much word for word. Slightly restated.


USA Today: "I just got sick to my stomach because these clouds were unnatural and that meant they had (the machine) on all the time," Stevens said. "I was left trying to forecast the intent of some organization rather than the weather of this planet." Stevens said oddities in Hurricane Katrina storm patterns underpin his theory. And, according to his website, so does the fact that Katrina and Ivan — the name given to a destructive hurricane that hit Florida in September 2004 — both sound Russian. Scientists discount Stevens' claims as ludicrous and say they run contrary to the second law of thermodynamics, that energy can be neither created nor destroyed.

Fox: "I just got sick to my stomach because these clouds were unnatural and that meant they had [the machine] on all the time," Stevens told the newspaper. "I was left trying to forecast the intent of some organization, rather than the weather of this planet." Nor is it a coincidence that both Katrina and Ivan — the huge hurricane that hit Florida a year ago — are Russian names, Stevens says. At least one other scientist, however, thinks it's all a bunch of hooey.


Again restated. This time USA Today is a little wordier but the same info-same quote even.


USA Today: "I have been doing hurricane research for the better part of 20 years now, and there was nothing unusual to me about any of the satellite imagery of Katrina," said Rob Young, a hurricane expert at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee, N.C. "It's laughable to think it could have been manmade."

Fox: "I have been doing hurricane research for the better part of 20 years now, and there was nothing unusual to me about any of the satellite imagery of Katrina," Robert S. Young, an associate professor of geology at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee, N.C., told the newspaper. "It's laughable to think it could have been man-made."


Same derisive quote from the same expert. Oh, one difference-USA Today identifies him as Rob Young, hurricane expert at Western Carolina University, while Fox identifies him as Robert S Young associate professor of geology at Western Carolina University. Which one is he? It's obviously the same person plus he's a geologist apparently, not a meteorologist.


USA Today: Stevens' bosses at KPVI-TV say their employee can think and say what he wants — as long as he keeps the station out of the debate and acknowledges that his views are his own opinion. Bill Fouch, KPVI's general manager, compared Stevens' musings to political or religious beliefs that journalists suppress on the job. "He doesn't talk about it on his weathercast," Fouch said. "He's very knowledgeable about weather, and he's very popular."

Fox: His bosses at KPVI-TV don't mind his views, as long as he keeps them off the air."He doesn't talk about it on his weathercast," General Manager Bill Fouch told the newspaper. "He's very knowledgeable about weather, and he's very popular."



Again, USA Today is more expanded but the same thing. Here is what is different between the two articles:


USA Today: Meteorologist Scott Stevens, a nine-year veteran of KPVI-TV in Pocatello, said he was struggling to forecast weather patterns starting in 1998 when he discovered the theory on the Internet. It's now detailed on Stevens' website, www.weatherwars.info, the Idaho Falls Post Register reported. Stevens, who is among several people to offer alternative and generally discounted theories for the storm that flooded New Orleans, says a little-known oversight in physical laws makes it possible to create and control storms —

Fox: "A battle in the skies is waged daily. Some battles are won and others lost. We yet know not which," Stevens writes on the front page of his site. "For years this massive global project has been under way, but only now is it making it to the forefront of the consciousness of those with curious minds. Other hurricane experts explain that the spate of severe North Atlantic storms in recent years is part of a natural 25- to 30-year cycle. There was a wave of damaging hurricanes between 1935 and 1965, then a lull before the number of bad storms increased again around 1995. The U.S. government has apparently tried to influence hurricanes, but its Project Stormfury, which from 1962 to 1983 sought to weaken cyclones by seeding the storms' eyewalls with silver iodide, was a failure. Stevens is unperturbed by those who scoff at his findings. "I fully expect one more 'event' this year to impact the United States," he writes. "My gut feeling is that it will be an earthquake/volcanic event with intensity of at least 7.5 in magnitude resulting in insured losses to exceed $25 billion."



A few paragraphs? Not much considering that the rest of the article was almost word for word. Point for point. So, any other articles that weren't published a day apart and don't fit the same template?

www.foxnews.com... Wed Sept 21, 2005
www.usatoday.com... Tue Sept 20, 2005


edit on 22-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: Added my quote



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 





Sulfur-hexa-flouride (SF6) is put into an aerosol generator and injected into the atmosphere from exterior nozzles on planes. It is an atmospheric tracer being used in many studies.


Have a link for us to check it out for ourselves?

Show a pic of these exterior nozzles on planes...



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by coyotepoet
 


Here's another one this one is from The Seattle Times Sept 23, 2005

seattletimes.nwsource.com...


Stevens believes a little-known oversight in physical laws makes it possible to create and control storms using a Cold War-era weapon allegedly made by the Russians in 1976. The nine-year KPVI weatherman said he's received 120,000 hits on his Web site in two days, now gets about 100 e-mails a day and has 15 radio bookings in the next five days. "I needed more time to do everything that's been put in front of me," said Stevens, 39. "I have not been able to dedicate the 40 hours a week to this place."

Earlier this week, scientists told the Idaho Falls Post Register the theory was bogus. "It's laughable to think it (Hurricane Katrina) could have been manmade," said Rob Young, a hurricane expert at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee, N.C.


There again is the reference to "scientists"-plural- saying the theory was bogus. And yet they only quote one scientist. Who? Of course, our favorite Mr. Rob Young "hurricane expert" at Western Carolina University. You'd think if it was scientists plural they'd come up with another guy to list in their articles. He must be THE go to hurricane expert associate professor geologist.

Here's something from Oct 5, 2005


POCATELLO - To be clear, weatherman Scott Stevens of Pocatello says he never claimed the Japanese Mafia actually created Hurricane Katrina as revenge for the World War II atomic bombings. He said they could have. "I believe they have the technology, as do the Russians and the Americans. As for who actually did it, that's a hard call," Stevens told Local 2 News.


At least they quote a different "expert"


Talking with Scott Stevens is to buckle up for a bumpy ride. He speaks passionately about a war waged for economic and geopolitical purposes by nations and groups who manipulate the weather through an electromagnetic global grid. And, yes, he's aware many meteorologists think he's a kook. But he insists people, not nature, have been controlling the weather for the past 30 years. Tim Barker with the National Weather Service thinks the idea is absolutely implausible. "Well, the weather is actually caused by the sun," Barker told Local 2 News, "and that's a lot of energy, and we humans don't really have the power to put that much energy in the atmosphere."


www.soompi.com...

But it's interesting how Stevens said that it is done through electromagnetic means. Isn't that what HAARP does?


HAARP will zap the upper atmosphere with a focused and steerable electromagnetic beam. It is an advanced model of an "ionospheric heater." (The ionosphere is the electrically-charged sphere surrounding Earth's upper atmosphere. It ranges between 40 to 60 miles above the surface of the Earth.) Put simply, the apparatus for HAARP is a reversal of a radio telescope; antenna send out signals instead of receiving. HAARP is the test run for a super-powerful radiowave-beaming technology that lifts areas of the ionosphere by focusing a beam and heating those areas. Electromagnetic waves then bounce back onto earth and penetrate everything -- living and dead.


haarp.net...

Yup. And that's a capability to "put that much energy in the atmosphere" to boot.

Here's another interesting tidbit from the same article:


With cameras mounted on his house, he continues to monitor the weather, looking for odd-shaped clouds and contrails of aircraft which he says are dropping barium and aluminum in the atmosphere to alter weather patterns.


This barium and aluminum factor is oft repeated by "chemmies" So what is it? Is he looking for Barium and Aluminum or electromagnetics?

Well...


Which is the best conductor of electricity in its liquid state? Barium Fluoride is the best.


answers.yahoo.com...


Barium combines with several metals, including aluminium, zinc, lead and tin, forming intermetallic compounds and alloys

en.wikipedia.org...


Aluminium is a good thermal and electrical conductor, having 62% the conductivity of copper.


en.wikipedia.org...


9. Increasing the conductivity of the atmosphere increases the efficacy of HAARP. (Eastlund HAARP Patent, HAARP Executive Summary, Barium Clouds & Electromagnetic radiation )


www.bariumblues.com...


Not much else I could find outside of forums and rehash. Then, this article from March 15, 2010:

www.free-press-release.com...


Stevens has predicted a major man-made earthquake In Greece or Spain March 21-April 10. This prediction was made on the Antimatter Radio Show, 3-1-10. Stevens' reasons for the prediction were his assertion that previous earthquakes were clandestine government creations (Haiti, etc.), and this prediction fit a certain pattern Stevens was has been tracking, and which is based on looking at the "controlled earthquakes" in the recent past.


Hey. Isn't that what HAARP is supposed to do too? Yup.

Mind you the above prediction was made on March 1, 2010 for a date range of 3/21-4/10/10. What happened?


M6 shallow earthquake near Crete, Greece (now classed deeper) Last update: April 1, 2011 at 6:04 pm by By James Daniell 9 Comments A M6 earthquake with depth 10km has hit Crete, Greece. This has now been changed to a M6.2 and 64km depth.


earthquake-report.com...

There is lots of data on the internet about HAARP and 10km depth earthquakes.

So that was Crete, Greece within the predicted _ How about Spain?


A strong earthquake struck near the Spanish city of Granada early Monday, but at a depth that made damage to the medieval Moorish capital unlikely, the U.S. Geological Survey reported. The magnitude 6.2 earthquake struck at 12:08 a.m. local time Monday (6:08 p.m. Sunday ET), the USGS reported.


This was reported by CNN, on Apr 11, 2010. Just a day outside of his _ And another 6.2 magnitude? Just like Greece a few weeks prior

articles.cnn.com...:WORLD

You could write it off to coincidence, but he did predict an earthquake in both areas in which one occurred within or very close to the window he predicted, weeks before they happened based on his research. The mainstream media and Rob Young, hurricane expert geologist, state that his theories are bunk. But theories that are able to predict things say otherwise.
edit on 22-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: spelling and cleaning
edit on 22-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: adding barium and aluminium info
edit on 22-4-2011 by coyotepoet because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


SF6 is used as an electrical insulant in high voltage switchgear and is a greenhouse gas. It gets in the atmosphere mainly by leaking out of or being released from electrical switchgear, and stays in the upper atmosphere for a long long time. It is bad news for the planet.
CALIFORNIA LIMITS SF6, WORLD'S MOST POTENT GREENHOUSE GAS
Link

I worked in aviation and I never saw any facilities on the ground for the storage or dispensing of anything other than aviation fuels, so how are the chemtrail planes getting loaded and how are the chemtrail chemicals dispersed? Do you have the N numbers of the planes doing chemtrailing? I'm sure the FAA and other authorities want to know because passenger aircraft are not permitted to carry hazardous cargo. Report them!
Airline fined

Aircraft cannot be fitted with the equipment to chemtrail without that modification being approved and certificated for each type and variant of plane, and that info would be all over the public domain and MSM.
Also, if chemicals were released at 35,000 ft over, say, Manhattan, they could come down to earth anywhere from Greenland to Portugal.

Has anyone manged to catch the chemicals falling from the sky and get them analysed? What were they?

There is no smoke without fire, but I just don't understand why so many people are so convinced that jetliners are intentionally dropping chemicals on our heads. Chemicals as a by-product of burning jet fuel possibly, but not as a deliberate act? Mankind can do enough stoopid things already.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 11:53 PM
link   
i get tired of this #.

my first clear point is that aspartame is certainly, with absolutely zero alternative, added to the food supply via mainly soft drinks, to poison and damage the population. Causing decreased life span and also mulitple other things.

so why on earth would the same people who have the motivation to damage the population, not want to add somethign to the skies? other compounds are in our water supplies, deliberately, to cause negative effect. wouldnt it seem logical to add something to the breathable atmosphere, to additionally damage or if there happens to be some careful and intelligent human who has done their utmost to eliminate the contaminated water and food products and ofcourse medications and injectiosn from their bodily intake, to contaminate the water, which they would be hard stretched to avoid breathing. without perhaps wearing a gas mask and lookign like a freak

secondly. just have a look up? if you think that what comes out of one plane and another at the same altitude in the same proximity, which creates on one hand, a vapour trail that vanishes within at least 30 minutes, usually 5 or under, and another which lasts for over 6 hours in most cases, is the same thing? then you are either an idiot, or in such massive denial at the world state, that this eventuality can be a possibility, or you are a paid shill to discredit those perpetuating the truth. Either way, chem trails are clearly a reality. and i see absolutely NO POINT in debating with ANYONE who says otherwise. It is a complete waste of time

that is all ill say on the subject.



posted on Apr, 23 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by predisposed
i get tired of this #.

my first clear point is that aspartame is certainly, with absolutely zero alternative, added to the food supply via mainly soft drinks, to poison and damage the population. Causing decreased life span and also mulitple other things.



So what you are claiming is that the soft drink companies, are trying to kill off their customers, the people who buy their products?

Thats a really great business model! Must not be working so great though, the way the life span increases.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by predisposed
i get tired of this #.

my first clear point is that aspartame is certainly, with absolutely zero alternative, added to the food supply via mainly soft drinks, to poison and damage the population. Causing decreased life span and also mulitple other things.
.


so it's a complete failure then, since lifespans continue to increase.

Shame - such a link would be proveable with fairly simple science.......it'd be a real coup for conspiracies in general to be able to objectively show it to be true.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I'm willing to concede any point, if there is solid proof. Pictures are not proof. Many fuel dumps, tests involving water to test freezing and condensation, etc., are posted as "proof" of chemtrails. They are not proof. Proof would be tests on the ground to prove the stuff fell to the earth.

If the purpose is to drop enough so that it has an ill-effect on humans, then there would be proof in water and soil. Yet, when tests are done on groundwater and on soil, nothing is found. Certainly nothing in the amounts that would be present from such prolific dumping - it be easily traceable. Yet dozens of companies who daily perform tests on soil and in water are not finding these mystery chemicals.

Where are they then? No one has been able to satisfactorily explain why there is no proof on the ground from all this spraying. There would be. There isn't. Explain if you can.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 




so it's a complete failure then, since lifespans continue to increase.


Now you're using that for aspartame too? Good lord! I guess you might as well get all the mileage you can out of that life span thing. It's also a fact that aspartame related illnesses continue to increase too. I'm not too concerned about that for myself as I learned long ago that it breaks down into formaldahyde in your body (maybe that's a reason for the increased life span-people are pickling themselves.)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by coyotepoet
 


I'll use it for anything where someone says anything is designed to lower lifespans, for as long as lifespans are increasing.

What is the problem with saying so?

do you think that increasing lifespans show that the asparmatine programme to kill us all is a success??

And since asparmatine use has increased it should not be any great surprise if anything linked to it has increased too - that would be a fairly logical thing to happen - why would you expect anything else??


And why did the person I replied to bring asparmatine into Geo-engineering in the first place??
edit on 25-4-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 





And why did the person I replied to bring asparmatine into Geo-engineering in the first place??


The point was that TPTB are using chemtrails to get to the people who are conscious of their health and avoid food additives like that but can't avoid breathing.



posted on Apr, 25 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by coyotepoet
 


so it should be blindingly obvious what it is that is being sprayed then - you should be able to take an air sample right in front of you and find something extra-ordinary and prove the case!!

Arizona Sky Watch claim they do.......but they screw up their reporting - they filter dust out of the air (which is fine), then analyse the dust (which is also fine), then they say that the amountof "stuff" in the dust is that amount in the air - which is NOT fine.

If you sample 100 cubic meters of air to get 100 grams of dust, and the dust is 100,000 ppm aluminium, then the Air is NOT 100,000ppm of aluminium!!

100,000ppm of 100 grams is 10 grams - so the Air is 0.1 grams/cubic meter of air. (quantities just made up to illustrate the point)

AZSW dont' say how much air they sample to get their quantities - like pretty much every other attempt to prove there's something from "chemtrails" in the atmosphere they fail miserably at 5th form science (that's about yr 11 for those who use such liberal measures)

so by all means test the atmosphere to show some support for this new theory - but FFS please do it right!!





new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join