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.

 

What Have You Done To Combat Chemtrails?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


that would depend on what they use wouldn't you think and who is to say that commercial airlines are being used i didn't but you posed a question and i answered with a plausible way in which you could add this system to a plane.
I'm not saying that it is factual in any way just the way i would do it if i was given the said task.
It is possible we have a case here in the coldwar when our government sprayed an area of the uk to see how a biological attack would effect us.
So really the fact of how it can be done is irrelevant as that experiment proves that they have the means to spray from an aircraft.




posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   


It would be wise to first familiarize yourself with the aviation industry before you assume that "they" can just add more and more weight to a flight, and that the only solution that would have to be explored is time releasing de icer into undefined chemicals causing them to act exactly like something with a completely different chemical makeup.

But don't worry I still like you, even if you don't take well to sarcasm.
edit on 20-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by GringoViejo
 


i have read about jet fuel i can post a link here if you think i haven't
www.csgnetwork.com...
also i would like to say again that i've never said that commercial flight where being used for this purpose so if you are not carrying passengers then weight would not really be an issue.
The fact is that it can be done and we have a proven case where it has been done here in the uk so it's pointless debating how it can be done when we have a proven case which show it can be done.
edit on 20-5-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 


that would depend on what they use wouldn't you think and who is to say that commercial airlines are being used i didn't but you posed a question and i answered with a plausible way in which you could add this system to a plane.
I'm not saying that it is factual in any way just the way i would do it if i was given the said task.
It is possible we have a case here in the coldwar when our government sprayed an area of the uk to see how a biological attack would effect us.
So really the fact of how it can be done is irrelevant as that experiment proves that they have the means to spray from an aircraft.


No the how is totally relevant. Just because you can theoretically spray something, does not negate the actual way something is being done. This is just a means to get away from having to show proof that it is being done, or to not have to show photos of spray planes.

Because if you thought you had a photo of a spray plane, you should sure as heck be showing it. But then it would be shown to be something else entirely too, as has happened every time with chemtrailers so far.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 


that would depend on what they use wouldn't you think and who is to say that commercial airlines are being used i didn't but you posed a question and i answered with a plausible way in which you could add this system to a plane.
I'm not saying that it is factual in any way just the way i would do it if i was given the said task.
It is possible we have a case here in the coldwar when our government sprayed an area of the uk to see how a biological attack would effect us.
So really the fact of how it can be done is irrelevant as that experiment proves that they have the means to spray from an aircraft.


Actually, how it can be done is very relevant (not to this thread, but I'll indulge)

Not a single picture exists of "chemtrails" other than pictures that are actually contrails.

This makes a few people in a few different industries wonder how it is being done, because the most common idea is that the contrails are "chemtrails." Lack of any evidence suggests this is false, so how(if) it is being accomplished is one of the most important issues at hand.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by GringoViejo
 


i have read about jet fuel i can post a link here if you think i haven't
www.csgnetwork.com...
also i would like to say again that i've never said that commercial flight where being used for this purpose so if you are not carrying passengers then weight would not really be an issue.
The fact is that it can be done and we have a proven case where it has been done here in the uk so it's pointless debating how it can be done when we have a proven case which show it can be done.
edit on 20-5-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)


Nor have I accused you of saying it was commercial flights.

However, passengers are not the only weight in a plane, and just because you don't have passengers does not mean you have "weight to work with" so to speak. Also, the de icer is an additive. from your own source:



Aviation fuel additives are compounds added to the fuel in very small quantities, usually measurable only in parts per million, to provide special or improved qualities. The quantity to be added and approval for its use in various grades of fuel is strictly controlled by the appropriate specifications.
www.csgnetwork.com...

Then we add in the fact we have no idea or cohesiveness in what planes are actually being used.

The real irrelevant part here is that "they" have sprayed chemicals in the past as it does not prove anything is currently going on. Which is further evidenced by the lack of any reliable source to support the claim that we are currently being sprayed.

edit on 20-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 


www.youtube.com...
there is a small clip of the show i watched on bbc 2 that reported the spraying by an aircraft on a village in the uk between 1953 and 1964.
It is no longer in the bbc archives which is strange.
this shows that is was possible in the 1950's we are now in 2011 and with the leaps we've made in the last 50 years i can't see why you question how could they do it.
edit on 20-5-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Of course it could be done. Stuff can be sprayed from planes. There are many methods of spraying aerosolized powder. It's not rocket science. Here's an example of a commercial spray powder applicator:



The question is : is there any evidence that it IS being done

And, look at my avatar. If it's a powder, then why is there a gap between the engine and the trail?
edit on 20-5-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by GringoViejo
 


i hate to copy and paste as a rule but in this case i think it is relevant
Sue Ellison, spokeswoman for Porton Down, said: 'Independent reports by eminent scientists have shown there was no danger to public health from these releases which were carried out to protect the public.

'The results from these trials_ will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons.'

Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: 'It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research.'
taken from this source
www.guardian.co.uk...
here's another link to look at
www.nr23.net...
edit on 20-5-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 


Yes, and obviously that would apply to if they were doing something or not, otherwise you could figure it out by a process of elimination:

"are you experimenting with mind control"
"no"
"are you experimenting with tectonic weapons"
"no"
"are you experimenting with chemtrails"
"it is not our policy to discuss ongoing research"
"gotcha!!!"



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


www.nr23.net...
take a look at that and then tell me if you think that there is no need to worry about whether these experiment's wont be repeated .



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Uncinus
 


www.nr23.net...
take a look at that and then tell me if you think that there is no need to worry about whether these experiment's wont be repeated .

How does that letter relate to 'chemstuff'?

If chemtrails are happened, they are the most massive, expensive "experiment" in history. And also the most illusive, since there is no reliable evidence to support that they're occuring.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by Uncinus
 


www.nr23.net...
take a look at that and then tell me if you think that there is no need to worry about whether these experiment's wont be repeated .


You worry far more about something that happened in a single small test, that there is no evidence that it affected anyone, along with aircraft contrails, than you do about proven ground pollution that is around you. Do you have evidence, that this test is about to happen?

Speculation is worthless, without facts and evidence. Just because something happened in the past, does not mean it will happen again though

I could worry I suppose that the Trinity test in New Mexico in 1945, could mean a possibility that there will be above ground testing of nuclear weapons outside my city.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


you are laughable not only have i given links to you that prove that experiments have taken place involving aircrafts spraying substances but i also gave you a letter which states that should the mod decide to carry out further experiment's then they could and again we wouldn't be informed.
The fact that you question the idea that they could be spraying again when i look up and see it everyday makes you either a stupid man[i very much doubt it]or you have a vested interest in supporting a lie.
www.nr23.net...
small test be damned that one was carried out 20 years after the first one in 1953 so dose that not show that history can be repeated
edit on 20-5-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 


you are laughable not only have i given links to you that prove that experiments have taken place involving aircrafts spraying substances but i also gave you a letter which states that should the mod decide to carry out further experiment's then they could and again we wouldn't be informed.
The fact that you question the idea that they could be spraying again when i look up and see it everyday makes you either a stupid man[i very much doubt it]or you have a vested interest in supporting a lie.


They have indeed done experiments. Are there 'chemtrails' though? No. I think there would be some kind of air tests to prove that these experiments are occurring, but alas there is nothing.

Congratulations, you have shown that airborne experiments have occurred, something that no one here was denying.


Why are you ignoring the facts? What are you hiding? What are you trying to cover up!?
edit on 5/20/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Yes but the point you are overlooking is that it is happening we can see it when we look up so we have established that it is possible so most of your arguments you use to debunk us are no longer valid.
WHY DON'T YOU TRY ASKING YOURSELF THAT QUESTION WHEN YOU NEXT LOOK INTO A MIRROR









edit on 20-5-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
The fact that you question the idea that they could be spraying again when i look up and see it everyday makes you either a stupid man[i very much doubt it]or you have a vested interest in supporting a lie.


Where has anyone every said that they doubt that they could be spraying? Quote it.

People are just pointing out to you that there is no evidence that they are spraying anything other than aircraft exhaust in long white persisting trails high in the sky.

Are you unclear on the difference?



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by djcarlosa
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Yes but the point you are overlooking is that it is happening we can see it when we look up so we have established that it is possible so most of your arguments you use to debunk us are no longer valid.


At the risk of going round in circles.....

How can you tell the difference between a chemtrail and a persistent spreading contrail?



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 



...you are laughable not only have i given links to you that prove that experiments have taken place involving aircrafts spraying substances....


Those were specific MOD tests, carried out using airplanes at LOW altitudes, and the sprayed material wasn't even visible. Or dispersed and diluted so rapidly, as to be undetectable, except by using the equipment designed for that purpose.

Also, the tests used, in various programs, lorries and vans on the streets, and ships just off the coast.

All of it, designed to examine the ways that an enemy might use to attack, with airborne biological agents, or other such tactics.

It is quite clear, in the links, if you read them carefully, and understand the purpose.

Nothing released at the typical cruising altitudes of commercial passenger jets, of 29,000 feet and higher, is ever going to settle down directly beneath, to reach the ground. The various winds, up and down drafts and currents in the atmosphere see to that.....



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


whichever label you wish to put on what i see is up to you but where i live there where NO such contrail's last summer none zero nadda so thats the difference i see when i look up therefore i can state that they are not normal!!!!!!!!!



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join