It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


interesting video lecture

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 11 2011 @ 01:45 AM
an interesting talk
either side of the fence

i still am unclear
as to where i reside


Mod Note: Starting A New Thread

Mod Note (This Appears On Every New Thread/Post Reply Page):
Please make sure every post matters.
Refrain from 1-line or very-minimal responses.
Edit-down your quoted posts to the important part.
Don't use "txting" shorthand in posts.
Use snippets and links for external content.
Provide meaningful comments for links, pictures, and videos.

edit on 12/5/11 by argentus because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 01:57 AM
care to give SOME kind of detail on what the lecture is about????

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 02:23 AM
reply to post by Watts

It is, like so many other printed online citations and sources shown here on ATS, a lecture on the current (just in the last year or so) scientific thinking on what possible technologies and programs might be put in to place, to accomplish a geo-engineering strategy, IF and when it is ever deemed necessary.

The description in the YouTube page says the "last ten minutes" are most "interesting" that segment, some know-nothing "chemmie" from the audience pesters the scientists....with all the same crap about the MOCKumentary "What in the World...." and the equally deluded woman from 'californiaskywatch', Rosalind Peterson. All he does is cite the same debunked claims, by both Ms. Peterson, and the 'film' ( maker of that movie, 'Michael J. Murphy', was a guest on ATS Live some weeks back...he did not behave well. Shouting down others, and even the host.... and unable to listen to rational replies, and reason. These guys behind that film are just plain wrong....

This guy displays the typical misconception (not sure if it's willful ignorance to SHILL for the "chem"-crowd) about those "findings" in the film....and recites the same tired and FALSE mantra, from "chemmies", about contrails not ever being persistent. In fact, blatant ignorance @ about 1:24:00, regarding the atmospheric temperatures for contrail formation, with his attempt to ridicule "normal" using the same mistaken claim that it's "102° in Shasta, how can contrails form if it needs to be -47°!?"

Anyone who still thinks he knows what he's talking about after hearing that bit of nonsense is just in denial, hugging the "chem"-tail meme and hoax too tightly......

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 02:52 AM
I watch this, i get the message and i like it. But still, need description in the 1st post of topic. For other ppls.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 03:38 AM
i never stated i think contrails persist
nor do i shill for one side
you seem to jump
from thread to thread
calling names


i never said i believe planes spray
anything to alter weather
a side from vietnam

at a hour
fourteen minutes in
the talker on the views right

people are already doing this
under an umbrella organization

scientific research
intended operation
but going on

geo engineering
in what ever form
is happening

this is not me stating this
this is the educated in the video

but again
attack the messenger

ignorance seems to run deep
in a select few here

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:20 AM
reply to post by Truther9111776

I have noticed
a pattern

with your posts
and I am curious as
to the reason

why you seem
to do it.

You claim you didn't say
you believe in chemtrails

but you chastise
anyone who is pro science

as if
you are
on the chemtrail

why is

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 11:56 AM
i post
how i post

and the only side i take
is reason and logic

but when one attacks another
for a belief

i feel the need
to speak up

i am pro science
i am also pro courtesy

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 03:29 PM
reply to post by Truther9111776

Show me. Where did I reply to you (in this thread, prior to THIS post)? And, where did I call an ATS member names? (Those in public eye who are displaying their ignorance, I point them out....what else do you call it??): seem to jump
from thread to thread
calling names


edit on 11 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 05:01 PM

Originally posted by Truther9111776
i never stated i think contrails persist
nor do i shill for one side

geo engineering
in what ever form
is happening

Indeed - did you bother to consider what forms of geo-engineering are definitely happening?

things such as cool roofs, carbon sequestration and reforrestation?

Why mention it in a chemtrail forum unless you are subtly saying you think chemtrails exist?

I also see you proclaiming "neutrality", but you never seem to berate dplum (whmmie) like you berate Firepilot (debunker), and dplum is far more abusive than FP - why is that?
edit on 11-5-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 05:47 PM
the forum title
describes also geo engineering]

i was under the impression
this meant all forms

the video i linked
talks about different types

i take sides with those who act
with respect to others

chemtrailers seems to be the name
some here like to use

like [SNIP]
sad when discussing things with others
a label is needed to argue your point

knowledge and fact does not care
about peoples groupings and titles

edit on 12/5/11 by argentus because: removed unsavory label

posted on May, 21 2011 @ 08:55 AM
How is "chemtrailer" possibly be derogatory or berating, when "chemtrails" is a term that many of you use. Its certainly milder than the constant cries of "shill" or "disinfo agents", and a lot worse that come from the chemtrail crowd. I was even recently accused of being a KKK member by Dplum, but then the mods got after him again, but thats not the first time they have had to take action against him

And its not that word that makes many of you look silly, its the beliefs that some of you espouse, with zero evidence and that is treated like a religion.

Some of the chemtrailers, yes i just used that, are so wrapped up in it and identify so much with the chemtrail conspiracy, that to "disrespect" their conspiracy by bringing facts, makes them feel disrespected. I only started using that term because some of them felt slighted by the term "chemmie".

new topics

top topics


log in