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.

 

Chemtrailers, I'm calling you out!

page: 4
21
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrunkNinja
reply to post by adeclerk
 

Would you want to sit behind this "Contrail" coming out of what you can tell are distinctly aerators ? How about swim in the purple black slick it leaves in the water ?

You are incorrect......This is oil dispersant being sprayed. The black slick in the water is from the Gulf oil spill.

""A C-130 Hercules from the Air Force Reserve Command's 910th Airlift Wing at Youngstown-Warren Air Reserve Station, Ohio, drops an oil-dispersing chemical into the Gulf of Mexico May 5, 2010, as part of the Deepwater Horizon Response effort. The 910th AW specializes in aerial spray and is the Department of Defense's only large-area, fixed-wing aerial spray unit. (U.S. Air Force photo/Tech. Sgt. Adrian Cadiz)""

In addition, yes, the blue spray is herbicide. As well, they spray Louisiana and Mississippi for mosquito abatement.
See here (look where they say it is applied around 100 feet from the ground.....
www.youngstown.afrc.af.mil...

Now spraying such things is not a secret. Low altitude spraying is in no way connected to the subject at hand...which is, high altitude spraying leaving lingering trails, all over the world, everyday.
How can you compare the two ?
Are you just playing a word game, saying "any spraying at all", proves widespread high altitude chemtrailing ?
....because that's what this debate is about.....whether or not lingering high altitude contrails are a secret gov't plan to alter something. You have not proved that at all.
In fact, you have let us doubt your other assertions, being that many of your facts are under-researched, and those assertions are just plain wrong.
If you grabbed this image from another website you trusted, then I understand your readiness to re-post it....but before posting anything...it's nice to double check, and find the original source for yourself. Ever play that school game in class, called "telephone" ?



edit on 29-5-2011 by EyeDontKnow because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-5-2011 by EyeDontKnow because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-5-2011 by EyeDontKnow because: spelling, added info

edit on 29-5-2011 by EyeDontKnow because: grammar




posted on May, 29 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by EyeDontKnow
 


I'm curios to know how you identified this bird? I'll be darned if I can viddy any sort of markings. Not yanking your chain here, I just don't get how you can ID the flight?


Never mind, I got it .
second
and one for luck
edit on 29-5-2011 by minkmouse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
So you're asking someone to fly up into the atmosphere, stick there hand out the window with a test tube, sntach and sample, then fly back down package it up, and send it to you.


Science fail much?

Wrong. They can take a soil air or water sample, all from the ground. If 'chemtrailing' is truly so widespread, something anamalous should show up in any one of those samples.

The samples would be sent to a lab, results posted here. I don't have the ability to test samples, so why would they send them to me?

No,it was a critical thinking fail on your part.


Wouldn't they need a sample from many years ago before airplanes to have a comparison? You are going to see different chemicals in the soil and water than there were before we were so technologically advanced. So taking a soil, water, or air sample really doesn't matter unless you have a control sample from the same area.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 01:37 AM
link   
Your right in that someone should produce a specimen but no one can go up and get samples... so take a different tack.

The chemtrailers say commercial aircraft are releasing chemicals into the atmosphere. Now ask them to show where huge storage areas are on the aircraft, where the outlets are, where they fill them in the open with no one noticing and why no single airport employee will ever come forward and produce evidence.... because there is none.

Forget getting up set over them, they are just nutters, leave them to it, it keeps them amused while they live in fear and are constantly looking over their shoulder in suspect of something or someone or whatever. They believ in aliens and evolution too both things invented to explain away the other things they can't.

Let them be in peace in their craziness.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 

That's my cue.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 




So you're asking someone to fly up into the atmosphere, stick there hand out the window with a test tube, sntach and sample, then fly back down package it up, and send it to you.


That's pretty much what needs to happen.

Here's who can do it:


Requests for access to research flight hours begin with the submission of an Initial Request for Aircraft Support (Word (35kb), PDF (30kb)) to the manager of the facility. Based on information provided on this form, a DOE-empowered advisory panel recommends to DOE an award of flight hours for the proposed use. Then the user completes a more detailed Research Aircraft Deployment Document (RADD: Word (180kb), PDF (85kb)) in coordination with the RAF manager. RAF users not associated with the DOE Atmospheric Science Program will need to work with the RAF manager on an estimate of the cost of offsite aircraft logistics such as 1) landing fees, 2) hangar rental, 3) ground support facilities, and 4) labor and expenses for a PNNL flight crew of two pilots and two scientific support personnel. During the preparation of RADD, schedules are confirmed and safety and environmental compliance requirements are addressed.

The RAF does not cover the cost of engineering studies and airframe modifications needed for custom installation of project-specific equipment and instrumentation. Such costs must be budgeted separately through a contract with PNNL or Battelle. When requested, RAF staff will assist users in estimating these costs.
*



Gulfstream-1 Research Aircraft

The G-1 is a large twin turboprop with performance characteristics of contemporary production aircraft. It is capable of measurements to altitudes approaching 30,000 feet over ranges of 1500 nautical miles, and can be operated at speeds that enable both relatively slow sampling and rapid deployment to field sites throughout the world. The aircraft is configured for versatile research applications. It accommodates a variety of external probes for aerosol, radiation, and turbulence measurements and internal sampling systems for a wide range of measurements. The G-1 has sufficient cabin volume, electrical power and payload capabilities, and flight characteristics to accommodate a variety of instrument systems and experimental equipment configurations. Internal instrumentation is mounted in removable racks to enable rapid reconfiguration as necessary. Data from most systems are acquired on a central computer that is tailored to airborne research data acquisition. In addition to acquiring the various analog and digital input signals, it can be configured to communicate with and/or control other systems onboard, and to provide time synchronization to other computers.
*




Science fail much?


No fail at all, here look, here's more science fail!

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by EyeDontKnow
 


No i was answering to the myriad of people that say no spraying exists and that the technology isn't available. The 901 st also sprays radar reducing sprays at 30 000 ft does that count as high altitude ? Are chemicals that can confuse radar more than likely harmful to human ingestion ? Would you consider the spray itself a trail of chemicals ? Would that spray eventually reach human populations and crops ? I love those of you that take one tidbit of what is presented and use it to repaint the picture I was painting. I will start doing the same to the so called debunker's that didn't take the time to realize that the purple tinge on the oil is the dispersant. The oil is black and orange but I'm sure that's of no consequence as it isn't high altitude enough and therefore not a chemical trail of dispersant on the water.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by User8911
I don't even know why there a section on the forum for chemtrails...

Debunkers just wont shut up about it.
There's plenty information on the net about this, don't believe? Who cares?
I really don't care if you don't

If you want to know what I think about that subject, check the posts I already posted.


edit on 28-5-2011 by User8911 because: (no reason given)

Plenty information! You mean chemtrailers requoting each other ad nauseum. Some making very decent looking sites but the core information is the same ASSUMPTION. As substantial as a cloud.........



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by miniatus
there is a HUGE glaring problem with this logic that I always mention and I never get a good response to ... let us not forget that the chemicals allegedly being sprayed into the air by the evil ones.. is all breathed by the pilots flying, the pilots families... the government... the armed services... we share the air..

So the logic of this accusation is just insanely flawed.. it's sort of like being the executioner in a gas chamber, while you're inside the chamber
edit on 28-5-2011 by miniatus because: (no reason given)

Magic, somebody else applying logic. You won't get any response because logical thinking is beyond the grasp of a lot of people.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Jinglelord
 


"IF".....please, describe how a jet turbine engine's fuel/air "mixture" can be "tweaked":


....if you simply tweaked with a jet's air/fuel mixture ....


Perhaps you are confusing a turbine engine, with a piston-powered internal combustion engine with a carburetor.



Are you really an ex pilot Weed??
I seriously can't believe you posted that BS...



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Have Government ever sprayed dangerous chemicals deliberately on unsuspecting civilians??

The answer is a resounding 'YES'...

The only question is, are they still doing it ??

We know they have the capability..
We know they don't care about our well being..
We know there's enough black ops funds to cover it..



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk
Alright 'chemtrail' believers, I'm getting sick of the fantastic, unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' claims. I am hereby issuing a challenge. I challenge any chemtrailer to get an air or water sample to prove that something nefarious is occuring, since you have come up short on 'evidence' thus far. I'm sure you will be willing to spend a little money so that we can get this whole 'chemtrail' conspiracy out in the open for the good of future generations.


Any takers?
edit on 5/28/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)


i'm not coming out because you don't want to notice the data.. nor anthing anyone has to say either by experts or doing your own research.. so..

keep calling but i'm not biting .. I did my research and saw my own eyes they are cloud-seeding by the use of chemicals below 5000ft .. so yea.. keep calling and TTYL.. have fun jousting ~!!!



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:46 AM
link   
Yawn. I am so tired.

The same old story. I am with you op, weed and the gang. I have read 6 or 7 pages of the same old arguement. What was I thinking.


I am critical thinking my way out of the chemmy debate. So long here.

S&F



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrunkNinja

No i was answering to the myriad of people that say no spraying exists and that the technology isn't available.

Who ever said spraying technology was not available ???? Can you quote anybody who said the technology is not available ?...because if they did, I'd say they were living in the 1920's.
I could rig a system from the available parts at the local hardware store.....nothing special there....spray anything you like, including whipped cream.
The technology is easily available...simple tanks, pressure, and nozzles.


Originally posted by DrunkNinja
The 901 st also sprays radar reducing sprays at 30 000 ft does that count as high altitude ? Are chemicals that can confuse radar more than likely harmful to human ingestion ? Would you consider the spray itself a trail of chemicals ? Would that spray eventually reach human populations and crops ?

Are you claiming that all the trails we see in the sky (I see them too), are radar chaff ? Please show some widespread evidence of this...otherwise it's a case of, "well they can do it occasionally, so they must be doing it all the time."
Again, because aircraft CAN spray chaff (but not from a can, lol), but what evidence do you have that such measures are being deployed all over the world, and that resemble contrails ?...and what reason would any nation want to or need to become radar invisible....especially within our own borders, every day ?
That does not make any sense whatsoever.

[



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrunkNinja
reply to post by EyeDontKnow
 


6 I love those of you that take one tidbit of what is presented and use it to repaint the picture I was painting. I will start doing the same to the so called debunker's that didn't take the time to realize that the purple tinge on the oil is the dispersant. The oil is black and orange but I'm sure that's of no consequence as it isn't high altitude enough and therefore not a chemical trail of dispersant on the water.

What are you talking about ?? The "purple tinge" on the water IS the oil. The plane is spreading (spraying) the dispersant onto the ocean-containing oil.
What is "black and orange" ?? are we seeing the same photo ?



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Chemtrail deniers are so sickenly naive. I mean seriously, they are openly admitting it in your face. Geo-engineering. Read what that means and you will discover that that is exactly what they have been doing since DECADES!

I know its comfortable to deny things. Just like denying the fact that the US is officially a near completed dictatorship. Still the majority of the Americans are sitting on their butt!! What a despicable travesty. Just waiting to be deported to the fema camps, just loving it.

edit on 29-5-2011 by dadgad because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 08:29 AM
link   
lmao
someone are getting angry that the believers won't back down.

rofl

oh offtopic




posted on May, 29 2011 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by mkkkay
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Does this help
By the way i myself just don't know



Lab tests show chemtrails contain aluminum!

In 2008, samples around California's Lake Shasta and the Pit River Arm tributary were tested in a State Certified Lab following weeks of fly-overs and chemtrails. The results of the water samples showed 4,610,000 parts per million of aluminum -- 4610 times the maximum contaminant level! [6]

At another pond, filled with filtered water and confirmed to contain "0" aluminum, test revealed 375,000 parts per million of aluminum (375 times the maximum contaminant level) after only 18 months exposure to the aerial spraying.

The usually pristine snow pack from the Ski Bowl area of Mt. Shasta showed 61,000 parts per million of aluminum!


www.viewzone2.com...


Ah, you fell for it. 4,610,000 parts per million is not possible by definition. There are only 1,000,000 parts per million to be had.

This is information posted to attempt to flush out idiots who are willing to repeat anything they read on the net uncritically. By seeing where this pops up, organisations can track networks of uncritically thinking individuals. They will believe anything, including chemtrail conspiracies.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrunkNinja
reply to post by EyeDontKnow
 


No i was answering to the myriad of people that say no spraying exists and that the technology isn't available. The 901 st also sprays radar reducing sprays at 30 000 ft does that count as high altitude ? Are chemicals that can confuse radar more than likely harmful to human ingestion ? Would you consider the spray itself a trail of chemicals ? Would that spray eventually reach human populations and crops ? I love those of you that take one tidbit of what is presented and use it to repaint the picture I was painting. I will start doing the same to the so called debunker's that didn't take the time to realize that the purple tinge on the oil is the dispersant. The oil is black and orange but I'm sure that's of no consequence as it isn't high altitude enough and therefore not a chemical trail of dispersant on the water.


Okay, give us proof of this radar reducing spray that they use?



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by User8911
I don't even know why there a section on the forum for chemtrails...

Debunkers just wont shut up about it.
There's plenty information on the net about this, don't believe? Who cares?
I really don't care if you don't

If you want to know what I think about that subject, check the posts I already posted.


edit on 28-5-2011 by User8911 because: (no reason given)


Debunker's of Chemtrails wont shut up about it because there is no critical thinking going on whatsoever by the Chemtrail believers. There is no evidence of Chemtrails whatsoever yet they continue to believe in it. There is not 'plenty of information' about chemtrails.....opinions and wild speculation do not qualify as 'information'....that's just rumor and heresay with no basis in anything real.We care what others believe about it because we actually care about a serious lack of logical thinking skills we see in our Society and we are simply trying to make the chemtrail believers out there understand their faulty reasoning......we're trying to help you yet you wont even acknowledge the myriads of problems with believing in something like chemtrails, and the countless ways in which the chemtrail theories have been debunked over and over again.....and many suggest anyone who debunks anything is part of the conspiracy.....That's honestly sad.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join