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: 6
84
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
OMG pictures of contrails.
edit on 31-5-2011 by TheLogicalist because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 31 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen
Nice try at twisting this, but no, I am not missing any important point here. It is simply YOUR OPINION that the evidence all points to them being contrails..


Let's list the evidence:

1) Planes make persisting spreading contrails.
2) "Chemtrails" look like existing photos of contrails.
3) No good evidence has been offered of them being anything else

As far as I know, that's just accepted science and history and fact. It's not my opinion. If you think that's wrong, then explain why.

Do planes NOT make persisting spreading contrails?
Do the "chemtrails" not look like existing photos of contrails?
Has any evidence been offered of them being anything else?



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


Ummmmwhat ELSE do you call, or define as, "evidence"???:


No they did not provide any proof or evidence, just a cluttered maze of links and external content.



Is this hypocrisy? That you don't realize??

What the heck are all the "chem"-trail *believers* using as their "evidence"?? Each time, the only thing possible, in an online forum like this, is to find the sources that directly refute that (usually, misguided and misunderstood, sometimes outright lies) with the solid proof of original sources, and the explanations.

This scam is slippery.....and, there are many at work, behind the scenes, to keep it going.....some of you just don't realize how easy it is, for them, to fool you, and con you.....



Nice try to turn the tables, weedwhaker, but that doesn't refute the fact that neither you nor any of the other extremist deniers can PROVE that all white lines in the sky are merely innocent contrails, yet you, more than anyone, have ridiculed and attacked anyone who doesn't share your own SUBJECTIVE INTERPRETATION of available evidence..



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


I forgot to emphasize that I am a believer in "chemtrails" but do not let my bias blind my judgment. I keep an open mind on all topics.


Unlike the team of extremist deniers who appear within seconds on any thread about chemtrails. In my experience there's no point in entering any discussion with said members. They are neither unbiased or open minded - nor even that well informed.




Yep, they got onto this one quickly. Isn't that ..umm, "funny", that the same ones jump on any chemtrail post as fast as possible to derail it?




posted on May, 31 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by TexasTea
 



Yep, they got onto this one quickly. Isn't that ..umm, "funny", that the same ones jump on any chemtrail post as fast as possible to derail it?


"derail"??

You have it all wrong.

Dispute.

Explain.

Educate.


If a thread started on any topic, and it was obvious bunk, and had NO science to back it up --- NO proof --- but, was claimed as "true"?

Well, the only ones of that sort that are usually unassailable, are in forums such as "Religion and Creationism" or "Predictions and Prophecies".

(Or, maybe "Skunk Works", etc)


Because, unlike a science-based fact, a "chem"-trail belief is not much different from a religious belief. Has all the same indications, and behaviors, by the *faithful*....


BTW...you will notice many of the "same ones" coming here constantly, and repeating the same tired old, discredited garbage, over and over. What's worse, is MORE are making "new" accounts ("new" in quotes, since it's obvious often, that they aren't really "new" to ATS) to further spread their "religion".

It looks more and more like a concerted effort to keep the con, the scam, the hoax...the money-maker alive, best they can, by keeping the myth going.

Follow the money....you will find the culprits.



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



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Facts:

1. Jet emissions contain C02/water vapor.

2. There are A LOT of jets in the sky at any given time.

3. The EPA is concerned about the C02 jet fuel emissions and one can easily find documents on Google to substantiate that.

4. C02 contributes to global warming and sea level rise.

5. We are expected to see at least a 2 meter global sea level rise (some scientists claim 4 meters) before the end of the century due in large part to C02 (based on EPA data).

6. These trails are a blight on our skies at the very least.

Very good scientific theory with ever mounting evidence:
Cirrus clouds hold heat down, cumulus clouds reflect sun's heat back to space.

Bottom line, whether these are contrails or chemtrails they DO affect and alter the weather, this is substantiated by many scientists. This info is easy to find. Time to come up with a better fuel that might be.....get ready because you're not going to like this one.....MORE EXPENSIVE....that emits less CO2 into the atmosphere .



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   

I am sure some might even say this is normal air traffic.


Include me in that "some" group. I have at least 5 airports within 20 miles of me, including at least two International Airports, an AFB, and a USCG Air Station, as well as small private airports...and I see this kind of thing all the time.

Seeing as how my family has lived around here for decades and generations, IF they were spraying something, can't say that it is doing anything (as I've had great grandparents make it past 100, and a set of grandparents make it into their 90's...)...so, I'm not really all that worried about it.

Also, considering the atmosphere's volume is about 4.2 BILLION KM cubed, I'm also, not that worried. The ocean's volume is considerably far less than that of the atmosphere, and you saw how quickly even a major oil catastrophe could be diluted. That's nothing compared to the diluting ability of the atmosphere.

So, even if it COULD be proven that there is some kind of international conspiracy, using several airlines and planes, somehow hiding the transfer and use of tons of chemicals in substitution of manifested passengers and cargo that somehow still get to their destinations, and a careful maintenance of absolute secrecy from all the pilots and ground personnel of said aircraft...., even if ALL of these ludicrous ideas were true, it STILL wouldn't be a serious threat...just due to simple math.


(not to mention the fact that such spraying is non-selective and cannot be targeted, therefore, the sprayers would ALSO be their own victims). Now, if you suddenly see a bunch of people walking around in Hazmat suits on their way to work, when some contrails are overhead, THEN we can talk seriously, but otherwise, why on Earth would TPTB spray themselves and their children, etc.?



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by TexasTea
 



Yep, they got onto this one quickly. Isn't that ..umm, "funny", that the same ones jump on any chemtrail post as fast as possible to derail it?


"derail"??

You have it all wrong.

Dispute.

Explain.

Educate.



You forgot:

Ridicule
Attack
Belittle
Insult
.......agressively.

Oh, and cherry picking what you consider to be 'evidence'.




If a thread started on any topic, and it was obvious bunk, and had NO science to back it up --- NO proof --- but, was claimed as "true"?



What SCIENCE can you present that ALL white lines in the siy coming from airplanes are simply contrails?

You still haven't answered that question, because you can't.






Well, the only ones of that sort that are usually unassailable, are in forums such as "Relion and Creationism" or "Predictions and Prophecies".

(Or, maybe "Skunk Works", etc)



Thanks for immediately providing an example of the 'belittling' and how you assert SUBJECTIVE OPINION as FACT, as well as your mistaken belief that 'denying' is the same as proving something is incorrect.




Because, unlike a science-based fact, a "chem"-trail belief is not much different from a religious belief. Has all the same indications, and behaviors, by the *faithful*....



Again, wheedwhaker, I ask you to present here on this thread the SCIENTIFIC FACT THAT ALL WHITE LINES IN THE SKY CAUSED BY AIRPLANES ARE CONTRAILS.

I'm sure you understand the meaning of this simple question, so why are you avoiding answering it?




BTW...you will notice many of the "same ones" coming here constantly, and repeating the same tired old, discredited garbage, over and over. What's worse, is MORE are making "new" accounts ("new" in quotes, since it's obvious often, that they aren't really "new" to ATS) to further spread their "religion".



More disinfo tactics from the manual. Care to substantiate your accusations? Show me proof of these 'new' accounts which aren't really new. Prove to everyone that the new accounts you are referring to are really not new.

You're always asking others for proof. You've just made a very clear statement, designed to undermine the integrity of people who believe in chemtrails (straight from the disinfo manual). Now, wheedwhacker, PROVE YOUR STATEMENT.




It looks more and more like a concerted effort to keep the con, the scam, the hoax...the money-maker alive, best they can, by keeping the myth going.


Follow the money....you will find the culprits.


Can you prove the above drivel? No.

You're now resorting to insults and drivel, the cheapest form of argument, but you still haven't proved your point.






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

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

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

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

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



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by indigo25
 



Facts:

1. Jet emissions contain C02/water vapor.


Not really....not CO2, so much.

But, let's talk about the water.

One gallon of petrol (gasoline or diesel or Jet-A1) will produce, depending on how it is combusted, up to about one gallon of water.

Now, consider....a jet engine is running from leaving the departure gate, until parking at destination (mostly). SO...even on the ground, taxiing, idling...putting out water vapor. Climbing, below altitudes where contrails form, same thing, Etc.

Now.......just go to Google, and find the numbers...total gallons of Jet Fuel used, in say...one year.

Then, compare to the usage of gasoline and diesel, in ground vehicles. (Cars, trucks, diesel locomotives, lawn-mowers, scooters.....hedge trimmers....and, yes, non-electric weedwhackers.....)


Try to understand the vast difference.

Also, the real amount of water, overall on Earth, is just about stable....it gets recycled, into various forms......the planet IS affected by so-called "greenhouse gases", of Human activity.....but, airplanes certainly are NOT a major contributor......



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

What SCIENCE can you present that ALL white lines in the siy coming from airplanes are simply contrails?

You still haven't answered that question, because you can't.


Indeed, that's obvious. There are plenty of white lines in the sky that are not contrails. Sky-writing for example.

What we are talking about are the type of trails that you would point to and say "chemtrails". And no, we can't prove what they are just by looking at them. However we can weight the evidence for and against them being contrails or chemtrails. Like:

Evidence in favor of the contrail theory


  • Planes make contrails which can persist and spread, depending on the weather.
  • Air traffic routes cross, so you will get crosses and grids
  • Wind blows contrails sideways, so you get parallel contrails.
  • Photos of “chemtrails” look like contrails
  • Contrails have been observed persisting since 1920, and photographed since the 1940s
  • Air quality has improved in the last 20 years
  • Aerosol density has decreased worldwide
  • Air and Soil tests have not shown any unusual changes in aluminum or barium in the last 20 years
  • Global dimming has steadily decreased since the 1990s
  • Some people remember seeing trails like this back to the 1960s
  • Scientists have noticed no changes in the sky
  • Weather records show no sudden change in the last 20 years


Evidence in favor of the chemtrail theory


  • Some people only started seeing these trails in the last 1-15 years, and they claim to have excellent memories and observational skills.
  • The government did bad things in the past, and is presumably still doing bad things.

Did I miss anything? Do you disagree with any of those points?
edit on 31-5-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


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



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Chemtrails not contrails, nice shots thread op.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus

Originally posted by wcitizen

What SCIENCE can you present that ALL white lines in the siy coming from airplanes are simply contrails?

You still haven't answered that question, because you can't.


Indeed, that's obvious. There are plenty of white lines in the sky that are not contrails. Sky-writing for example.

What we are talking about are the type of trails that you would point to and say "chemtrails". And no, we can't prove what they are just by looking at them. However we can weight the evidence for and against them being contrails or chemtrails. Like:

Evidence in favor of the contrail theory


  • Planes make contrails which can persist and spread, depending on the weather.
  • Air traffic routes cross, so you will get crosses and grids
  • Wind blows contrails sideways, so you get parallel contrails.
  • Photos of “chemtrails” look like contrails
  • Contrails have been observed persisting since 1920, and photographed since the 1940s
  • Air quality has improved in the last 20 years
  • Aerosol density has decreased worldwide
  • Air and Soil tests have not shown any unusual changes in aluminum or barium in the last 20 years
  • Global dimming has steadily decreased since the 1990s
  • Some people remember seeing trails like this back to the 1960s
  • Scientists have noticed no changes in the sky
  • Weather records show no sudden change in the last 20 years


Evidence in favor of the chemtrail theory


  • Some people only started seeing these trails in the last 1-15 years, and they claim to have excellent memories and observational skills.
  • The government did bad things in the past, and is presumably still doing bad things.

Did I miss anything? Do you disagree with any of those points?
edit on 31-5-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)


Well, at least we seem to have arrived at a consensus that extremist deniers are only defending a THEORY.

I accept that ithe evidence you list is that which leads you to believe in your theory. What I don't accept is that your interpretation is more valid than others who also find compelling evidence for the opposite theory.

Nor do I accept the aggression, ridicule and insults constantly hurled at those who believe in that opposite theory, usually by a small few who appear on all chemtrail threads and repeat the same tactics each time.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Why did you alter my quotes???!

In your post (the one with a star) you make it look as if I used the word "drivel".

I did NOT.

Retract your slanderous assertions.


How do I make it look as though you used the word drivel? It seems clear to me that I was saying you were resorting to using drivel, not that you used the word 'drivel'.


.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus

Originally posted by wcitizen

What SCIENCE can you present that ALL white lines in the siy coming from airplanes are simply contrails?

You still haven't answered that question, because you can't.


Indeed, that's obvious. There are plenty of white lines in the sky that are not contrails. Sky-writing for example.

What we are talking about are the type of trails that you would point to and say "chemtrails". And no, we can't prove what they are just by looking at them. However we can weight the evidence for and against them being contrails or chemtrails. Like:

Evidence in favor of the contrail theory


  • Planes make contrails which can persist and spread, depending on the weather.
  • Air traffic routes cross, so you will get crosses and grids
  • Wind blows contrails sideways, so you get parallel contrails.
  • Photos of “chemtrails” look like contrails
  • Contrails have been observed persisting since 1920, and photographed since the 1940s
  • Air quality has improved in the last 20 years
  • Aerosol density has decreased worldwide
  • Air and Soil tests have not shown any unusual changes in aluminum or barium in the last 20 years
  • Global dimming has steadily decreased since the 1990s
  • Some people remember seeing trails like this back to the 1960s
  • Scientists have noticed no changes in the sky
  • Weather records show no sudden change in the last 20 years


Evidence in favor of the chemtrail theory


  • Some people only started seeing these trails in the last 1-15 years, and they claim to have excellent memories and observational skills.
  • The government did bad things in the past, and is presumably still doing bad things.

Did I miss anything? Do you disagree with any of those points?
edit on 31-5-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)


OH SNAPS
Bingo!

/thread



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Well, at least we seem to have arrived at a consensus that extremist deniers are only defending a THEORY.



Ultimately everything is theory. Saying my cat is not a robot is just a theory. Gravity is just a theory. Saying you "known" something is just shorthand for saying your are fairly certain. I am fairly certain that most, if not all, of the trails that people say are chemtrails, are actually contrails.



I accept that ithe evidence you list is that which leads you to believe in your theory. What I don't accept is that your interpretation is more valid than others who also find compelling evidence for the opposite theory.


Where is this evidence? Do you mean the evidence that has been shown to be wrong? Or some new evidence?



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


I will tell you the first thing I saw in Picture #4; Nibiru!! Did you capture that on purpose?

You should feel somewhat privileged to have WeedWhacker and Phage drop by to clarify what you have seen!!






posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Thank you for your kind, well thought out response. You may just debunk this. Just know that there are those of us who do not believe there is some evil plot at play here. We are just concerned and care about our atmosphere/environment and mostly just don't like the blight in the skies. I don't think this concern is limited only to 'chem-trailers', but to all environmentalists (if you want to put chemmies into that group).

So, just to reiterate, there are two different groups here...those who think these are actual chemical trails and that we are being sprayed in some sick depopulation plot, and those who are just concerned about possible effects to the weather. 'My bad' for referring to these trails in previous posts as chem-trails. Honestly, I was about 20 when I first heard the word con-trail. Call it a generation gap if you wish, but my gen (which is X) has always referred to these trails as chemtrails. I honestly thought that was the real work for contrail. My husband had to straighten me out on that one. So I will try to remember in future posts to refer to them as CONtrails.


I like to speak with you when you are calm. I believe you more when you are calm. You do bring up very good points. Perhaps you are right, although I respectfully disagree that the ocean is so big that it easily diluted the oil spill. It will take two decades or more to study the long term consequences of that spill. I personally believe that everything we do has environmental consequences, some insignificant and some significant. ALL pollution is bad, no matter where it comes from, the ground or sky.

That's why I talk about advancements, etc. Is it possible to produce a fuel that would not leave such persistent and growing trails? I don't know. Sounds like you understand the topic of jet fuel much better than I do, so educate me. How can we advance, or are you absolutely convinced that this is such a mute point that has such little effect on the atmosphere that we don't need to look at it? My thoughts have always been that the reason people were not seeing these trails linger 20 years ago is perhaps because we were using a higher quality fuel back then....am I wrong?

Anyway, I'm here to learn mostly. I do have my own opinions, but you know what they say. I am always willing to look at the other side.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


[Previous issue addressed]

In any case.....your dissection of my comments is meaningless. My *point* is shown, clearly. The influx of so many "new" members is obvious, and is a definite undertaking, by those on the outside, to influence and promote the silly "chem"-trail nonsense.


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



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus


Where is this evidence? Do you mean the evidence that has been shown to be wrong? Or some new evidence?



You think I'm going to fall for that one? Think again. See my above post.

I believe there is compelling evidence to support the chemtrail theory. If you want to know what the evidence is (which you don't really) go read all the chemtrail threads and then search on the net. It's your absolute right not to find that evidence convincing. It's my absolute right to find it compelling. And it's my right to be able to discuss that theory without being attacked, ridiculed, insulted and baited.






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



new topics

top topics



 
84
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join