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.

 

Implanted memories of Blue Skies

page: 19
24
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


why is the sky blue?? boy the shill question that is --why dont you tell me why a rainbow has different colors and you will have your answer---i am laughing so hard i think i might pee my pants--
HOW ABOUT THIS--SHOW ME 1 PICTURE OF A CHEM TRAIL THAT GOES FROM HORIZON TO HORIZON THAT WAS TAKEN BEFORE 1990!!! and post it here!!
Hears another good one---We all notice chem-trails in the newer movies and tv shows when they shoot outside, so to all the shills and dis-info agents out there- SHOW me, or tell me of a movie or tv show with outside location shoot which shows a chem-trail that goes from horizon to horizon shot before 1990???? YOU CANT!!-
A good example on my side is the KOOL-AID comercials from last summer, and the opening of the tv show PAWN STARS--CLEARLY THEY SHOW CHEM-TRAILS ACROSS THE WHOLE SKY!!!
NOW SHOW ME A COMERCIAL, MOVIE, OR TV SHOW MADE BEFORE 1990 with a chem-smear in it--YOU CANT-which proves to all you are dis-info agents




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by itsawild1
 

Contrails, 1965;
The Outer Limits, about half a minute into it.



Twilight Zone 1985, at 8:56 and 13:13.


Does this mean I'm not a disinfo agent now?
edit on 5/16/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by itsawild1
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


why is the sky blue?? boy the shill question that is --why dont you tell me why a rainbow has different colors and you will have your answer---i am laughing so hard i think i might pee my pants--
HOW ABOUT THIS--SHOW ME 1 PICTURE OF A CHEM TRAIL THAT GOES FROM HORIZON TO HORIZON THAT WAS TAKEN BEFORE 1990!!! and post it here!!
Hears another good one---We all notice chem-trails in the newer movies and tv shows when they shoot outside, so to all the shills and dis-info agents out there- SHOW me, or tell me of a movie or tv show with outside location shoot which shows a chem-trail that goes from horizon to horizon shot before 1990???? YOU CANT!!-
A good example on my side is the KOOL-AID comercials from last summer, and the opening of the tv show PAWN STARS--CLEARLY THEY SHOW CHEM-TRAILS ACROSS THE WHOLE SKY!!!
NOW SHOW ME A COMERCIAL, MOVIE, OR TV SHOW MADE BEFORE 1990 with a chem-smear in it--YOU CANT-which proves to all you are dis-info agents


I could if "chemtrails" actually existed.

I have plenty of pictures of contrails before 1990 if you want to see them and attempt to refute them.

I see you have no evidence either, too bad. I thought someone was going to give a little credibility to the "chemtrail" hoax.

Oh, and please act like an adult. Shouting (i.e. all caps) is rather immature, and really discredits you and those that ascribe to your theory

edit on 16-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Does WW2 count?



How about Armed Forces Day at Edwards AFB, May 17 1959 - look at he sky in the background - there are even "X"'s & "#"'s going on up there....




There’s a contrail in the 1969 movie “Battle of Britain” – www.imdb.com... says it is “At the beginning of the final battle sequence…”

Contrail in "Patton" - img706.imageshack.us...

- neither of which are actually out of place 'cos pf course there were plenty of contrails in WW2!!!!!!!

edit on 16-5-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by itsawild1
 


I was asking a sincere question in the hope that you might be interested in learning something new..

It was clearly evident from the content and structure of your posts that you are misinformed about some really, basic fundamental science.

I purposefully went out of my way to try and open a dialogue in a way that would allow you to retain some dignity while still learning the flaw of your premise.

Because your attitude is so poor, I'm not interested in helping you now.

Go do your own research or, better yet, spend the rest of your life in terror that the clouds over your head are poisoning you because a youtube video trying to sell a dvd told said it was the truth and you didn't have the middle school science education necessary to know it was bunk.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Welcome to Schizophrenia, my friend.

If I didn't have a journal, who knows what metaphorical memories would be overtaking my mind.

Every day is a battle.

Technology only brings you closer to my world.

It's a beautiful world, but you can't forget who you are, or where you're from.

Everyone should use a journal.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   
sorry if somebody already suggested this (I haven't yet had time to go through all the comments) ... but

couldn't this theory be applied likewise to those who claim that chemtrails/persistent contrails have 'always been there'?? given the nature of the conspiracy, propaganda, etc, I'd say it's more likely that we're subliminally made to believe that chemtrails are and have always been a normal phenomena.

also.. has anybody else noticed in recent years, what appears to be deliberate placement of chemtrails in TV, commercials, and movies? I know I've noticed it. even billboards.

debunkers can question our memory and nobody can prove anything... but if somebody had a lot of time on their hands they could try to take random excerpts of movies, tv shows and commercials from the previous two decades and compare them with those of the last 5 or ten years. I'd bet a whole lot of money that you'd find them way more, if not exclusively, in the examples from the last 5 or ten years.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by bacci0909


couldn't this theory be applied likewise to those who claim that chemtrails/persistent contrails have 'always been there'?? given the nature of the conspiracy, propaganda, etc, I'd say it's more likely that we're subliminally made to believe that chemtrails are and have always been a normal phenomena.


No. Maybe you should have read the thread but here it is again.

Persistent contrails have been around for a long time. There is photographic evidence, there are first hand reports, there are scientific studies. Oh, and there are movies (see above).
From 1919:

The second German sighting occurred on May 9, 1919, when a pilot flying over Berlin at about 26,000 feet noticed the generation of a cloud stream that extended for about forty miles behind his plane. This stream eventually spread out to form a cloud layer that was about 3,000 feet thick. The pilot saw a similar phenomenon two days later.
www.accessmylibrary.com...

From 1940:

A few months later I witnessed the Battle of Britain taking place over my head in the July, August and September 1940. Being in SE London we had a grandstand view of the titanic struggle going on day aftr day with the intricate patterns of the contrails the most evident witness to the dog fights taking place.
www.bbc.co.uk... Short contrails do not produce intricate patterns.

1944:

So an airplane at great heights leaves behind it, stretching for endless miles, a visible "wake" composed of ice particles so tiny that they do not fall as snow but remain suspended in the air.
Source

From 1947:

Photo taken by Jerry Cole, combat aerialphotographer in the 390th Bomb Group at Framlingham Air Base in England. He is looking for a print from the original negative he shot around January 1944 or before. It shows contrails of P-47's crossing each other in the background and a B-17 in the foreground.


scoutbird.tripod.com...


From 1968:

Daily, for example, hundreds of jet planes crisscross the nation or great parts of it, often leaving fluffy contrails of water vapor, manmade clouds, as a signature of their passage.

Some contrails soon dissapate. Others turn into or are soon followed by high cirruse clouds that can and do influence the earth's heat balance with the sun.

news.google.com...,2068835&dq=contrails+cirrus&hl=en





From 1970:

The spreading out of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight. Often, when persistent conditions exist from 25,000 to 40,000ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge into an almost solid interlaced sheet.

journals.ametsoc.org...


Henry Wadsworth Hinkle, hired man down on the farm with Uncle Clarence and Aunt Martha, looked skyward a few days ago and was awed by the multiplicity of "vapor trails," as he called them. That's the old name. Now they are called contrails-short for condensation trails-resulting from the condensation of heat flowing from high-flying jet engines.

Source


A 43-year-old novice sailor said today that he followed jet contrails over the Atlantic to help him navigate after his sextant was smashed six days out of Pymouth, England.
Source He didn't follow jets, he followed contrails. You can't follow a short contrail.

1972:

Then there is the matter of cloudiness. The familiar contrails often left by high-flying planes might persist for a long time under some conditions.
Source


From 1973:

Often, after several clear days, high flying jets begin leaving condensation trails in the sky. These "contrails" are the result of the condensation of water vapor that accompanies engine combustion at high altitudes.
Source


He occasionally looked out the window at the earth and noted geographical locations. "We're coming over Europe and I've never seen so many jet plane contrails in my life," he reported
Source


Shore was no naïf; he recognized the irony of many of his images. One of the cleverest is "U.S. 97, South of Klamath Falls, Oregon, July 21, 1973," which depicts a desolate spot of road where a billboard displays a snowcapped-mountain scene — against actual mountains in the distance. The billboard image seems to emerge from the land itself. Along with a cattle gate and a sky with blown-out contrails, the billboard is a tired and shabby advertisement for America itself.
www.pitch.com... Contrails have to be around for a while to be "blown-out".


edit on 5/17/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

No. Maybe you should have read the thread but here it is again.



I read the OP and responded accordingly. My post wasn't a response to any comment of yours



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by bacci0909
 

Obviously.

It's considered good form to at least follow a conversation for a while before jumping in.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Look, I am almost 50 years old. I am an outdoor girl. I am outside as much as possible as soon as spring breaks until the coldest fall day.

Our skies ARE being sprayed. I have watched the progression over many years & have noticed in the last year, they are spraying the grid tighter & tighter all the time. I don't care what anyone says, our skies were a DEEP blue, especially in the summer.

Clouds were bright white, there wasn't a haze in the sky continually, even during the 60's & 70's when air pollution was at an all time high. Clouds we see now are generally a thin "film", that creates a haze that meets the ground at the horizon & some days, it almost looks like a mist, (yes, like a mist). Most of the puffy "clouds" we see now are brown in color.

There is also a haze around the sun that causes a horrible glare & some days, depending on just how much has been sprayed, the sun creates strange shadows & the glow from the sun is completely different.

On days of heavy spraying, I find it hard to breath & depending on how intense & how long the duration, I will get a cough. Last year, I had a cough that lasted 6 weeks. The doctor couldn't figure out why.

I have been a gardner all my life. Over the past 3 years, especially the last 2, it is getting really hard to grow vegetables. I believe it has to do with the sun being blocked from the chemicals & when the chemicals settle on the earth, the plants are having difficulty growing from the chemical changes to the soil.

Yes, Virginia, our government would do this to us.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   
There are still blue skies here and it's not an optical illusion.



posted on May, 17 2011 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by jenlt
Look, I am almost 50 years old. I am an outdoor girl. I am outside as much as possible as soon as spring breaks until the coldest fall day.

Our skies ARE being sprayed. I have watched the progression over many years & have noticed in the last year, they are spraying the grid tighter & tighter all the time. I don't care what anyone says, our skies were a DEEP blue, especially in the summer.

Clouds were bright white, there wasn't a haze in the sky continually, even during the 60's & 70's when air pollution was at an all time high. Clouds we see now are generally a thin "film", that creates a haze that meets the ground at the horizon & some days, it almost looks like a mist, (yes, like a mist). Most of the puffy "clouds" we see now are brown in color.

There is also a haze around the sun that causes a horrible glare & some days, depending on just how much has been sprayed, the sun creates strange shadows & the glow from the sun is completely different.

On days of heavy spraying, I find it hard to breath & depending on how intense & how long the duration, I will get a cough. Last year, I had a cough that lasted 6 weeks. The doctor couldn't figure out why.

I have been a gardner all my life. Over the past 3 years, especially the last 2, it is getting really hard to grow vegetables. I believe it has to do with the sun being blocked from the chemicals & when the chemicals settle on the earth, the plants are having difficulty growing from the chemical changes to the soil.

Yes, Virginia, our government would do this to us.


Your opinions are great.

But do you have any evidence?

Thanks




posted on May, 17 2011 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by bacci0909
sorry if somebody already suggested this (I haven't yet had time to go through all the comments) ... but

couldn't this theory be applied likewise to those who claim that chemtrails/persistent contrails have 'always been there'?? given the nature of the conspiracy, propaganda, etc, I'd say it's more likely that we're subliminally made to believe that chemtrails are and have always been a normal phenomena.

also.. has anybody else noticed in recent years, what appears to be deliberate placement of chemtrails in TV, commercials, and movies? I know I've noticed it. even billboards.

debunkers can question our memory and nobody can prove anything... but if somebody had a lot of time on their hands they could try to take random excerpts of movies, tv shows and commercials from the previous two decades and compare them with those of the last 5 or ten years. I'd bet a whole lot of money that you'd find them way more, if not exclusively, in the examples from the last 5 or ten years.


it would be more likely that the phenomenon occurred naturally as opposed to someone "using" this technique against the general public. I think the OP used the wrong word when they said "implanted" that leads one to believe that there is an implanter when false memories can occur naturally. I find it easier to believe that false memories of no persistent contrails have naturally formed in the minds of those most worried about "chemtrails" than to believe that some group is manipulating ALL mass media in order to hypnotize us into thinking the "spraying" is acceptable.

how exactly does one determine whether or not persistent contrails are "deliberately" placed in films and shows and ads? let's pretend that you were directing a t.v. ad. let's say you didn't know/care about the chemtrail phenomenon, and you didn't really care about how the t.v. ad turned out because you secretly wished you were directing movies. the shot you're filming was planned months in advance, filming permits procured and paid for, cast and crew assembled and ready to film; do you cancel the whole day of shooting because of some jet trails in your shot? or do you just film it and get it over with? give these people in this industry the benefit of the doubt, and you'll find that it's entirely possible that the trails make it into the films either by accident, or just because the people producing it don't care one way or the other.

the prevalence of contrails in film over the past decade only proves that there are more trails in the sky. it proves, nor does it suggest, anything further. and certainly nothing sinister.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Roughly 11am summer of 2010 the sky was completely blue, I live in 'big sky country' Saskatchewan. I can go days without seeing clouds.

A plane flew over blasting a huge trail behind it. I took a look with binoculars and could visibly see this Silver plane with 4 jets shooting something out.

Was one of the thickest trails I have ever seen which persisted and spread out. By 3pm it was covering the entire view from my perspective. I'm only guessing here, but I'd say 50 miles across in width. It just kept spreading West to East. The plane was flying South, and for the rest of the day it became cloudy and bland, not much shape to the clouds, just a sheet.

Anyway it was wild and what really got me in to trails. Some people have seen them doing circles here, creating numerous 'Olympic' logos in our skies (photos on Saskatchewan Chemtrail Watch fb group).
.
If I can find the photos I snapped I'll post them but I'm on an entirely new PC after my suite was freakishly struck by lightening and fried basically all my equipment, thankfully my cat and I were safe.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpaceStation
Roughly 11am summer of 2010 the sky was completely blue, I live in 'big sky country' Saskatchewan. I can go days without seeing clouds.

A plane flew over blasting a huge trail behind it. I took a look with binoculars and could visibly see this Silver plane with 4 jets shooting something out.

Was one of the thickest trails I have ever seen which persisted and spread out. By 3pm it was covering the entire view from my perspective. I'm only guessing here, but I'd say 50 miles across in width. It just kept spreading West to East. The plane was flying South, and for the rest of the day it became cloudy and bland, not much shape to the clouds, just a sheet.

Anyway it was wild and what really got me in to trails. Some people have seen them doing circles here, creating numerous 'Olympic' logos in our skies (photos on Saskatchewan Chemtrail Watch fb group).
.
If I can find the photos I snapped I'll post them but I'm on an entirely new PC after my suite was freakishly struck by lightening and fried basically all my equipment, thankfully my cat and I were safe.


If you could upload them, that would be great.

Otherwise there is nothing in your description that would point to anything but contrails.

Maybe I am not "seeing" what you are "seeing," which is why pictures would be helpful.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpaceStation
Was one of the thickest trails I have ever seen which persisted and spread out. By 3pm it was covering the entire view from my perspective. I'm only guessing here, but I'd say 50 miles across in width. It just kept spreading West to East. The plane was flying South, and for the rest of the day it became cloudy and bland, not much shape to the clouds, just a sheet.


This happens occasionally. It always has. It just depends on the weather. 1940:


The German on the ground knows us by the pearly white scarf which every plane flying at high altitude trails behind like a bridal veil. The disturbance created by our meteoric flight crystallizes the watery vapor in the atmosphere. We unwind behind us a cirrus of icicles. If the atmospheric conditions are favorable to the formation of clouds, our wake will thicken bit by bit and become an evening cloud over the countryside.


Ex Source



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


You're argument's seem to vary first you say it's our memories that are failing and untrustworthy then you post a photo of an optical illusion to prove to us that our eyes don't work right. It seems like you're making strong accusations that our personal experiences aren't they way we see them, but what proof is that. This was posted in the geo-engineering fourm but there's no scientific evidence related to geo-engineering, only an old study and talk of philosophy. It seems clear that questioning the perception of a memory isn't related to physically proving or disproving chemtrails(i.e. geo-engeneering).

I think that debating the possibilities of chem-trails is one thing, but to use arguments pertaining to an individuals human experience just to prove a point about chemtrails, seems off to me. Even at that the study seemed to be biased towards proving memory implantation. Also a study that tests the function of memory recollection involving a 'tester' telling a fake story involves far more dynamics than remembering a memory that is real.
edit on 19-5-2011 by MallardDuck because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by MallardDuck
 


I was trying to make a point about the standard of evidence, and specifically people's recollections of contrails and blue skies. Now that in itself does not say anything directly about chemtrails, however those recollections are pretty much the only evidence that chemtrailers have presented that has not been fully debunked. People trust their memories, when clearly they should not. They should seek verification - especially if their memories are contradicted by other evidence.

The optical illusions were to reply to people who brought up "I trust my eyes". It's a related topic.



posted on May, 19 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   
an interesting point i would like to make here is that an optical illusion is designed to trick your eyes hence the name and just because some people may have been tricked by it dose not mean that everything you see can not be trusted if that was the case then eye witness statements wouldn't be admissible in court.




top topics



 
24
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join