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: 5
21
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrunkNinja

Here's a still image of a plane at high altitude spraying

Seriously why cant you use google and youtube ? It's really really easy, I found everything I put in this thread in under 5 minutes



Also how does a group of university educated scientists employed in the field making a video not count as a scientifically based video ?
edit on 28-5-2011 by DrunkNinja because: (no reason given)


Want to explain to everyone here why the Dutch would be using a 747 passenger liner for spraying? Or is it just a KLM airliner that is making contrails, and you are trying to spread false information to promote the chemtrail religion?

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




posted on May, 29 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by XtraTL

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.



Now that is funny, a chemtrailer claiming something had 4,610,000 parts per million. You are right, they have no idea what they are reading, they are just blinding reposting what other chemtrailers post. Of course, no chemtrailer would consider that to be disinformation, as long as it promotes chemtrial then its fine.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by adeclerk
 


I guess you did not see the news when they tested that lady's backyard water, that was in a tub (not a bathtub), and found very high levels of barium? Prove that was wrong and I'll go get another!



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I'm not a taker. I'm a giver. Take this and educate yourself:
www.geoengineeringwatch.org...



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   
The only proof i need to provide is to my self, by sitting out in my backyard for a few hours under a direct flight path to my local international airport and watch as the "contrails" from the planes turn a perfectly bright clear blue sky into a murky hazy white sky, with not a cloud in sight. But what do I know? I guess my eyes are just lying to me and I'm really just a lunatic fringe nutter...

I do not need to "prove" a damn thing to you.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by adeclerk
 


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

The answer is a resounding 'YES'...

I've heard that but I need a source.


Originally posted by backinblack
The only question is, are they still doing it ??

The evidence points to 'no'.


Originally posted by backinblack
We know they have the capability..

How do you know that? Source? Link?


Originally posted by backinblack
We know they don't care about our well being..

If they don't care about our well being, who will pay the taxes that they need to operate?



Originally posted by backinblack
We know there's enough black ops funds to cover it..

You've just made your entire post full of claims unfalsifiable, can you tell me why unfalsifiable claims fail in terms of critical thinking?



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRealMrX
I'm not a taker. I'm a giver. Take this and educate yourself:
www.geoengineeringwatch.org...


sure, so which of those did you find alarming? What would typical levels be, and how was any of it traced to aircraft?

Are you yet another person who insists that aluminum and barium compounds are not found naturally?



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by dadgad
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!

No one is denying geo-engineering, it is a well established science (that is still mostly theoretical, the only real application so far is with cloud seeding). Are 'chemtrails' geo-engineering? No, they are just contrails.


Originally posted by dadgad
I know its comfortable to deny things. Just like denying the fact that the US is officially a near completed dictatorship.

Source? Why haven't we had a "dictator" for more than 8 years? I sure am glad we live in a country where people can share these crazy opinions, seems like its the opposite of a dictatorship, no?



Originally posted by dadgad
Still the majority of the Americans are sitting on their butt!! What a despicable travesty.

I agree, why are you not out there trying to stop 'chemtrailing'!? It's going to harm us all.



Originally posted by dadgad
Just waiting to be deported to the fema camps, just loving it.

You show your ignorance by talking about the already debunked "fema camps".

Continue living in fear, just make sure your next house isn't on a plot of land that has barium or aluminum in the soil.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Komodo
i'm not coming out because you don't want to notice the data.

Please, I will look at any data you give me!


Originally posted by Komodo
nor anthing anyone has to say either by experts or doing your own research.

The experts and my own research indicate there is nothing in the sky but contrails.


Originally posted by Komodo
I did my research and saw my own eyes they are cloud-seeding by the use of chemicals below 5000ft

Congratulations, you have witnessed geo-engineering that has been around for roughly 70 years. Something no one is denying. A well established fact.
How does this relate in any way to 'chemtrails'? (Hint: Chemtrails don't occur at or below 5,000 feet, explain that!)




posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 



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


Do YOU have any experience with jets? Turbines?? At all???

Or, just your Cessna or Piper? With a carburetored engine....with a throttle and mixture control?? I'm sure you've been taught all about leaning the mixture, on the engine.....as you change altitudes, etc.

Turbine engines do NOT work like that. You should learn, before you make yourself look foolish.

When you add more fuel, into a turbine...it just BURNS more fuel, gets hotter, and makes more power. It gets its air from the environment.....it will SUCK in whatever air it needs, from the freely available surroundings....

If you try to force TOO MUCH fuel into a jet turbine engine, (above what it can gulp air, to mix with) then it will just get TOO HOT, and if this continues, will destroy itself.

Go back to school.....



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by adeclerk
 


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

The answer is a resounding 'YES'...

I've heard that but I need a source.



www.guardian.co.uk...



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by 5thDimensionalBeing
The only proof i need to provide is to my self, by sitting out in my backyard for a few hours under a direct flight path to my local international airport and watch as the "contrails" from the planes turn a perfectly bright clear blue sky into a murky hazy white sky, with not a cloud in sight. But what do I know? I guess my eyes are just lying to me and I'm really just a lunatic fringe nutter...

I do not need to "prove" a damn thing to you.


Yes, we know contrails under certain circumstances can persist and spread. Thats been seen for decades and decades. But do you think it is actually new, because its not.

You got taken by chemtrail sites that say that contrails cant persist, and that is a bald faced lie by those who spread that in order to make money. They told you this can only happen from chemtrails, and thats not true, because it was seen during WW2, and even before that.
edit on 29-5-2011 by firepilot because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

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...


Well what would happen if I moved the mixture lever on the turboprop that I fly?



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 


Yeah, and I'm sure there was an absolute TON of jet air planes flying around during and BEFORE!? (hahahaha) WW2.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by 5thDimensionalBeing
 


You keep bringing up that ridiculous example, from the UK?????

That was NOT done by jets, at over 30,000 feet altitude!!!

Really.....the lack of intellectual capacity, here, makes me sad .... and, I despair for the future of the Human race, if this continues.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by 5thDimensionalBeing
reply to post by firepilot
 


Yeah, and I'm sure there was an absolute TON of jet air planes flying around during and BEFORE!? (hahahaha) WW2.


Whether its piston or jet, they can still make contrails, and they can still persist. And yes, there were persistent contrails noted back then. Both types of engines result in hot exhaust air and water as byproducts of combustion.

Just because you do not want to think that there were, does not chance reality. Contrails have been noted to persist since the 1930s, or even 1920s. Its nothing new, just your chemtrail sites told you that.

Would be really interesting if you chemtrailers would ask two simple questions to people that promote chemtrails.
Ask them this..

When were contrails first seen to persist?
What is the average amount of aluminum in soil?


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



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by 5thDimensionalBeing
 


You keep bringing up that ridiculous example, from the UK?????

That was NOT done by jets, at over 30,000 feet altitude!!!

Really.....the lack of intellectual capacity, here, makes me sad .... and, I despair for the future of the Human race, if this continues.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I find it pretty funny how you can just sling insults and spew your vitriole when I was simply responding to his inquiry about whether the population was sprayed with chemicals or other germanic compounds by our goverments. But if you want to thats your choice, it doesen't offend or hurt me in the least, but dont expect to be listened to.



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by 5thDimensionalBeing
 


In other words, no.

Significantly, this experiment produced chemtrails in the same way my dog produces diamonds every time it burps. And was as dangerous to people in Britain as a cabbage white butterfly*.


* actualy that's a lie. the cabbage white butterfly is way more deadly


Edit: in any case, by definition chemtrails are visible. So this is a rather silly straw man. You do know that?


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



posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by firepilot
 



Well what would happen if I moved the mixture lever on the turboprop that I fly?


I've never flown the Cheyenne.....so, looked at some photos of the throttle quadrant.

Looks, to me, that Piper (in their "infinite wisdom") decided to make the quadrant 'familiar' to pilots experienced with piston engines? Along with thrust levers, and prop controls.....the (red) "mixture" levers, in the same configuration as would be seen in piston airplanes...they are simply fuel cutoffs, though, I would presume??? ON....OFF.

Of course, that's the PT-6 engine, too......I flew mostly in the Swearingen (my turbo-prop experience)....(SA-226) with the Garrets.....direct-drive props, different set-up than the Pratts. So, controls different too.

At a previous company, we had some Cessna 402s, converted to Allisons.....they are reverse-flow, like the PT-6. And, no "mixture" controls on that, either. Like jets, separate fuel ON-OFF switches.











edit on Sun 29 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join