Some More Chemtrail/Contrail/Cloud Pics?

reply to post by wcitizen

It is not semantics. If you wish to conduct research you use the null hypothesis to prove (or at least validate) your subject. But actually in this case you're lucky, there is a way to indisputably prove your hypothesis. Not all scientists are fortunate enough to be able to do so with theirs.

The null hypothesis, H0, is an essential part of any research design, and is always tested, even indirectly.

www.experiment-resources.com...

The rest is down to opinion and interpretation of available evidence, nothing more.

It sounds like you are not really interested in validating the "chemtrail" hypothesis. Not interested in taking a balanced look at it.

Originally posted by Phage
None of the pictures ever shown look different from contrails. None of the videos show anything different from contrails. None of the contrails I've seen look different from contrails. There is no evidence that "sprayed" materials would have the same appearance as contrails.

Your circular reasoning is more and more reminding me of a religious zealot.


You don't know what chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere would look like, and they could (and probably would) look the exact same as a normal contrail. So you say everything looks like a contrail to you and therefore they are all contrails?


What do you think this stuff sprayed into the upper atmosphere would look like?:





And again, right there is your means and motive for chemtrails.

reply to post by bsbray11


Why are you spamming this picture across multiple threads??

Chem trails are very real indeed. Please take the fact they try so hard to dubunk it as all the proof you need.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Why are you spamming this picture across multiple threads??

I'm not spamming. The reason I'm posting is because it provides a means and motive for chemtrails, and just stops short of admitting that it's already been done.


Let me guess, if they dumped all those chemicals into the atmosphere, you'd say they were contrails too, huh?

reply to post by gunner50cal


Well, Good Samaritans hardly ever get proper acknowledgement. Especially when they choose to blow the whistle on a scam, a con a Ponzi scheme.......and, those who are heavily invested INTO the hoax don't like it.

SO, their only recourse is to (attempt) to discredit the truth.....usually, at terrible failing effort, though. As illustrated.

Vague, unreferenced assertions....*blind faith*??

Compared to cold, hard science and facts.....

Originally posted by bsbray11
What do you think this stuff sprayed into the upper atmosphere would look like?:

Where does it say anything is being sprayed?

Originally posted by bsbray11

Space Mirrors: Not visible from the ground. Not deployed using planes.

Stratospheric Dust: Cloud like, if even visible. Not sprayed from planes.

Stratospheric Bubbles: Like many balloons, if even visible. Not sprayed from planes.

Low Stratospheric Dust: Like a dust cloud. No evidence of it's existence.

Low Stratospheric Soot: Like haze. Airplane engines are more efficient, so not being deployed.

Ocean Biomass Stimulation: Lots of phytoplankton in the ocean. Good option, not being deployed.

CFC Removal: Visible laser beams, not being deployed.

Originally posted by bsbray11
And again, right there is your means and motive for chemtrails.

I guess I missed it because only one of those options involved aircraft (and not even 'chemtrails'), and not a single one of those methods has ever been deployed.

Had you checked the footnotes for the Soot (the only one involving aircraft):

These options cause or alter chemical reactions in the atmosphere and should not be implemented without careful assessment of their direct and indirect consequences.

So again, there is no evidence that this assessment has taken place, no research has been done into it, and no spraying of dust is occurring.

Are you ever going to come too a 'chemtrail' thread with any tangible, credible, independently verifiable evidence? Or is it all going to be evidence you have taken to support 'chemstuff' without doing the reading and research into the topics discussed?

Originally posted by bsbray11
And again, right there is your means and motive for chemtrails.

Nope.

reply to post by adeclerk


Your scrambling to "debunk" each method on there is ridiculous. It doesn't even say what kind of "dust" would be sprayed into the atmosphere yet you automatically claim it wouldn't be a chemtrail. What kind of garbage is that? Do you think they are talking about paying for flights to throw out literal dust into the air? Hell no. They would come up with whatever did the best job at reflecting sunlight.

I see you're already going into total denial mode. No use trying to even reason with someone who has just shut down all logical functions in their brain. Just sleep on it for a few months, or I can wait until you stop getting checks in the mail.

reply to post by bsbray11

You don't know what chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere would look like, and they could (and probably would) look the exact same as a normal contrail. So you say everything looks like a contrail to you and therefore they are all contrails?

They probably do not look like contrails.

I do know what chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere look like. I've seen crop dusters. I've seen videos and photos of other types of spraying (enough so that I could recognize that an Air Tractor was not cloud seeding). None of them look like contrails. I can see the difference.

reply to post by bsbray11

So how do you know that these would all look exactly like contrails?

Originally posted by Phage
They probably do not look like contrails.

Ah, so now your positions rests on a "probably."

And that "probably" stems from nothing but your own biased pre-conceptions, of course.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
So how do you know that these would all look exactly like contrails?

I don't know that they would, and neither do you. That's my whole point. You get on here to bark at everyone that everything in the air is a contrail but you have no idea what you are talking about.

Originally posted by HenryPatrick
Chemtrails from two days ago in Las Vegas. X marks death. The fact that there are so many disinfo agents dedicated to debunking chemtrails only speaks to how much the government is trying to suppress knowledge of their existence. The government apparently has more dedicated agents for chemtrails than for 9/11. To even deny that they exist is an insult to everyone whose eyes are functioning properly.

I know!And the way they use 'facts' and 'science' with detailed explanations of weather conditions and atmospheric pressure. Those HAVE to be made up terms, right? Whoever heard of 'atmospheric pressure"?
Just a bunch of government-stooges here makin up funny words and calling it "science" to cover up the mountains of evidence you have that those lines you see in the sky are not just water vapor, but chock full o chemcals that are making me type this right now!

These pics from Vegas are after a few weeks of no trails. Like all of a sudden the atmospheric conditions just happened to be perfect while all these planes are simultaneously flying X patterns and perfectly parallel and perpendicular lines in the sky. Seriously, same old debunkers, stop insulting our intelligence.

Wow! Weather changed just like that? We all know weather doesnt change, and a clear sky means its just as warm hundreds of feet in the air as it is on your back porch! Whoever says weather changes is just a paid government shill trying to keep people from noticing that you dont need "science" to prove your theories, because the existence of people disproving your theories with 'science' is proof your theories are true! IF your theories werent true, then people wouldn't feel the need to disprove them with made up fancy science'!

reply to post by bsbray11

No.

That was in response your statement.

and they could (and probably would) look the exact same as a normal contrail.

And that "probably" stems from nothing but your own biased pre-conceptions, of course.

No. It's based on my personal observations (incl videos and pics) of what it looks like when chemicals are sprayed from aircraft.

reply to post by bsbray11


Face it.....the post, just above yours, tears you apart.

The very *list* that YOU, yourself, posted belies your entire "argument".

Futility. Thy name is "chem"-trail believer.....

Originally posted by bsbray11
Your scrambling to "debunk" each method on there is ridiculous.

Not as ridiculous as you posting it as 'evidence' of 'chemtrailing' or 'spraying'.

Originally posted by bsbray11
It doesn't even say what kind of "dust" would be sprayed into the atmosphere yet you automatically claim it wouldn't be a chemtrail.

It never said sprayed, how do you know it wouldn't be dumped? At any rate it is just as far fetched as the space mirrors, I suppose you believe in those too?

Originally posted by bsbray11
What kind of garbage is that?

Not sure, you posted it.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Do you think they are talking about paying for flights to throw out literal dust into the air? Hell no. They would come up with whatever did the best job at reflecting sunlight.

An assumption on your part. They actually didn't speak of the logistics of any of those fantastical (hypothetical) methods. Did you read it?

Originally posted by bsbray11
I see you're already going into total denial mode.

How? I ask for evidence, and a chemie has yet to provide any solid, independently verifiable, fact or evidence that supports 'chemtrailing'.

Originally posted by bsbray11
No use trying to even reason with someone who has just shut down all logical functions in their brain.

I already explained how to use logic in terms of 'chemtrails', you are the one who can't accept it. It is like arguing with any other unfalsifiable claim (god, creation, invisible unicorns, etc).

Originally posted by bsbray11
Just sleep on it for a few months, or I can wait until you stop getting checks in the mail.

Is that what you did? That would explain the cognitive disconnect, you clearly haven't given this topic enough thought at all.

I stopped getting checks after the Reagan administration.

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
Just a bunch of government-stooges here makin up funny words and calling it "science" to cover up the mountains of evidence you have that those lines you see in the sky are not just water vapor, but chock full o chemcals that are making me type this right now!

What's ironic is that you have no evidence that they are water vapor either.

Just because the phenomena exists doesn't mean that every single white trail behind a plane is a contrail. You can't just look at these things and say, "Eureka! My eyeballs have deduced that the white trail behind that plane is pure water vapor!"

Wow! Weather changed just like that? We all know weather doesnt change

Yeah, just like we all know that "it's impossible to manipulate the weather with chemtrails."

Man wasn't it great when you guys could deny cloud seeding too? Made it a hell of a lot easier on you to mock people I bet.

reply to post by adeclerk


Let me know when you actually have proof that every white trail behind a plane is just a contrail.

Until then I don't have any need or desire to get into a pissing match with you over nonsense you make up in a vacuum of real data.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by bsbray11

 

Face it.....the post, just above yours, tears you apart.

The very *list* that YOU, yourself, posted belies your entire "argument".

Futility. Thy name is "chem"-trail believer.....

Just wait until you see the post above his next one. I will be surprised if he even responds.

Could we get a 'chemtrail', contrail and a cloud pic side by side in this thread for some valid comparison?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Face it.....the post, just above yours, tears you apart.

The very *list* that YOU, yourself, posted belies your entire "argument".

Futility. Thy name is "chem"-trail believer.....

Are you going to bother to explain, or is this just part of some smear campaign?

Originally posted by bsbray11

So how do you know that these would all look exactly like contrails?

I don't know that they would, and neither do you. That's my whole point. You get on here to bark at everyone that everything in the air is a contrail but you have no idea what you are talking about.

but those are not actually in the air at all - they are not happening, and you have said several times that we positively can NOT differentiate them from contrails - how do you know that we won't be able to if they are ever actually used?

And why would we need to sicne they are self evidently quite public in nature?