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.

 

Some More Chemtrail/Contrail/Cloud Pics?

page: 14
84
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
Nice dodge, but your entire premise appeared to be based on that claim. Contrails do exist. They are not theory. Chemtrails are. Until you can provide evidence, all you will have is our appeal to emotion.


You are still arguing from a fallacy.

Do you know what a logical fallacy is, first of all?




posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by adeclerk

"You cannot tell the composition of some white trails in the sky, and therefore some might be'chemtrails', despite the lack of evidence indicating that they are anything but water"

Is that a bit more spot on? Just as fallacious, can you tell?


That's closer to the mark, but you are still making a fallacy in insinuating that something is proven in the lack of any evidence to the contrary. That is not how you prove something, by no one being able to prove you wrong. Again, go read your own links about fallacies for a change.



Originally posted by bsbray11
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.


Compare both of your posts and tell me what the issue is.

ETA: Now compare with this:

Originally posted by bsbray11
I am claiming that you can't tell the difference,


Can you see the cognitive disconnect?
edit on 5/31/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk
Compare both of your posts and tell me what the issue is.


The issue is your reading comprehension.

If there is actually a discrepancy can you actually point out where it is please?



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
I am claiming that you can't tell the difference,


A claim you make with zero evidence. The difference between what exactly? Be specific.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

No, I clearly said that you wouldn't know to be able to tell the difference..


and how do yo know that, since none of the atmospheric stuff in that chart is actually happening for you to have seen what it looks like?

come one - I've asked you this simple question several times on several threads and you don't answer it - what is the problem?

you have stated it as a categorical certainty - so how do you know that??
edit on 31-5-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus

Originally posted by bsbray11
I am claiming that you can't tell the difference,


A claim you make with zero evidence. The difference between what exactly? Be specific.


The difference between a normal contrail and a chemtrail.

You don't even believe chemtrails exist, so what do they look like?




Same to you, Aloysius.
edit on 31-5-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Uncinus

Originally posted by bsbray11
I am claiming that you can't tell the difference,


A claim you make with zero evidence. The difference between what exactly? Be specific.


The difference between a normal contrail and a chemtrail.

You don't even believe chemtrails exist, so what do they look like?


If you don't know what they look like, then how do you know I can't tell the difference?

What you are saying is that if chemtrails look exactly like contrails then I won't be able to tell the difference?

Okay, so show me something that looks exactly like a contrail, but is not.

Pictures, or it didn't happen.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
The difference between a normal contrail and a chemtrail.

You don't even believe chemtrails exist, so what do they look like?


so how can you know they look hte same?




Same to you, Aloysius


my question wasn't about chemtrails tho - it was about the SRM techniques on the list you posted that you said "we" would not be able to identify as being differnet from contrails.

Stop evading the queation - How do you know they won't be different?



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus
If you don't know what they look like, then how do you know I can't tell the difference?


I said you wouldn't know what they look like, not me. Though if you have to ask, neither of us would be able to tell the difference. That's my whole point. Unless you have pictures so we can compare.



reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Again, same to you.


The bottom line is you guys are not going to be able to prove that every white trail behind a plane is a contrail.


This position you keep trying to push is impossible to prove.


So sit and think about that for a while instead of constantly foaming at the mouth asking basic questions about the simplicity of this and ignoring your blatant fallacies in every post. And stop trying to put words in my mouth just to get one up on me!

edit on 31-5-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   

[reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Again, same to you.


The bottom line is you guys are not going to be able to prove that every white trail behind a plane is a contrail.


Stop dodging the question - how do you know that atmospheric dust or soot is going to be a white trail behind an aircraft? (now that you seem to be identifying that as the common factor....)




edit on 31-5-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


You confirmed this by giving me an answer based on a "probably," ie nothing but your opinionated garbage.

As opposed to your opinionated garbage I suppose.


Didn't you say that "chemtrail" spraying would look different from other types of spraying. And show that chart?

No, I clearly said that you wouldn't know to be able to tell the difference.


You said this:



Originally posted by Phage
Farmers. Cloud seeders. Fire fighters. Defoliators. Oil slick busters. Mosquito killers. All kinds of stuff.
None of the stuff they spray gets denser over time. None of it spreads out very much.


And none of those are what this is about.


Maybe I should clarify. Did I misunderstand when you said that my comparison to other types of spraying was invalid? That's why I asked you why. What is so different about "chemtrails" that would make them have such a different appearance from other forms of spraying? Why do you think they would look less like them and more like contrails?
edit on 5/31/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
The bottom line is you guys are not going to be able to prove that every white trail behind a plane is a contrail.
This position you keep trying to push is impossible to prove.

The bottom line is I can't prove that those white lines in the sky are contrails, 'chemtrails', a jesus, or skittles.

What you can't seem to understand is that the evidence suggests that there are only contrails. Let's try some logic, AGAIN.

1. You can't prove that all white trails in the sky are contrails (implicating that some aren't).
2. There has never been a single shred of evidence that suggests the white trails are anything but contrails.
3. Therefore, all white trails in the sky are contrails.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
As opposed to your opinionated garbage I suppose.


You wouldn't know anything about my opinions because I haven't given you the pleasure of hearing them.

I'll still be here whenever you actually have proof that every white trail behind a plane is a contrail.

And you should know better than to think no evidence to the contrary is somehow automatically proof of the opposite. So you are intentionally being obtuse.




Originally posted by adeclerk
The bottom line is I can't prove that those white lines in the sky are contrails, 'chemtrails', a jesus, or skittles.


Exactly.

Stop trying to move the argument onto other points just because you're pissed about that. You've said all I wanted to point out to you.
edit on 31-5-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Phage
Farmers. Cloud seeders. Fire fighters. Defoliators. Oil slick busters. Mosquito killers. All kinds of stuff.
None of the stuff they spray gets denser over time. None of it spreads out very much.


And none of those are what this is about.



Why not - they can all be white clouds behind aircraft, and apparently we can't tell that they are not contrails......



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


You wouldn't know anything about my opinions because I haven't given you the pleasure of hearing them.


But you have, haven't you. It is not your opinion that "chemtrails" are probably visually indistinguishable from contrails? I've asked you your reasons for that opinion.


edit on 5/31/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Uncinus
If you don't know what they look like, then how do you know I can't tell the difference?


I said you wouldn't know what they look like, not me. Though if you have to ask, neither of us would be able to tell the difference. That's my whole point. Unless you have pictures so we can compare.


Very funny.

Your entire argument is a pointless tautology. Even a child knows you can't tell the difference between things that look identical. A child knows that if you don't know what something looks like, then it might look like something else, so you might not be able to tell the difference. Those are childish arguments. They mean nothing in this situation.

You know what the situation is here. Evidence very strongly points towards the trails being contrails. If you've got some evidence to suggest otherwise then present it. That's all.

You are obviously just running this nonsense argument in circles until people get angry at you, and you can declare victory. I think that anyone with any sense, should they actually take the time to read your nonsense, will be able to see that. Unless you actually want to discuss the evidence, I shall no longer entertain your game, and I suggest others do likewise. My time is more productively spent playing with my cat, whom I am 99.999% sure is real, and not a robot.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
But you have, haven't you. It is not your opinion that "chemtrails" are probably visually indistinguishable from contrails? I've asked you your reasons for that opinion.


No, no and no. The last time you asked me for my "reasons for that opinion," I told you straight up that you are trying to put words in my mouth.

It's your own damned position that hinges on the word "probably." I am making no such claims.


You can either prove that every single white trail behind a plane is a contrail, or you are grasping desperately at words that aren't even there.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


Corruption Exposed,
I didn't read all of the posts, just skimmed through. But I do have some interesting photo's to share. By the way, thanks for this thread. You get a S&F from me.














edit on 31-5-2011 by pagan_night because: One of the pics didn't take....



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by pagan_night
 


I see:

Oh, dear...you added more....OK, then....in the SECOND from the top, that photo I see......:

ONE middle-aged
contrail. Some time has passed since the airplane flew by.

SOME high, scattered clouds.....cirrocumulus clouds.

ONE antenna.


Contrail = normal

Clouds = normal

Antenna = THAT scares me...make it STOP!!!!



edit on Tue 31 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
You can either prove that every single white trail behind a plane is a contrail, or you are grasping desperately at words that aren't even there.


How do you know these proposed SRM techniques will be white trails?

(gotta be the 15th time I've asked :@@



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join