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.

 

UK Admits Plans to Inject Aerosols into Stratosphere

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by tom goose
 

I didn't say the Sun doesn't affect climate. I said solar variation doesn't seem to.

We haven't had the ability to measure solar irradiance for long but over the past three cycles the change in total solar irradiance has been about 0.1% (each cycle, maximum to minimum). While a correlation with ENSO cycles and solar cycles has been observed, that does not equate to global climate change. There are no geoengineering proposals to mitigate ENSO cycles.

But to answer your direct question. No, there is not enough time to do anything before solar maximum even if it would make a difference.


edit on 6/10/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Monstertako
I am willing to entertain an explanation that it gets colder the higher it is, and the more likely a contrail will form, except for one repeated event. These high altitude planes leave a trail, then stop leaving it. They turn around in the sky, and once they've positioned themselves parallel to their previous line, the trail starts up again, like skywriting.


I've seen the same thing here in Southwest Virginia.

The only excuse I was offered here was that the plane was actually descending even though I couldn't see it, and that its descending is what caused the sudden cut-off and then restart of the chemtrail.

I'm not buying it though because the cut-off was sudden and not gradual like you would expect if it was related to the plane descending gradually rather than just instantly teleporting to a lower altitude or anything like that. And then like you say, it starts back up again.


There are YouTube videos showing this too and there is an obvious difference between the real contrails in these cases (which dissolve after only a few seconds) and the chemtrails that linger for extended periods and eventually turn into wispy-looking cloud formations.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 





I don't hear politicians talking about it much at all.



Of course you don't. Where would you expect to hear about politicians discussing illegal spraying of toxic chemicals on an unsuspecting population? In the MSM? Is Phage now entering the realm of standup comedy?



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   

edit on 10-6-2011 by NightGypsy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Why that's a mighty big straw man you have there


There were plans in the 1960s to build cities on the Moon. Do you accept that this proves there have been cities on the Moon for 50 years?

(of course, any such proposed stratospheric spraying would be a major operation - not the sort of thing that can really be done in secret - and in any case would not produce any obvious visible effects from the ground. See here for more details)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Well, I don't know what is being introduced into the atmosphere, and I highly doubt it is poisonous, as the nation's capital seems to be getting plenty, and someone posted a video of trails over a Rothchild mansion a few days ago, but I will say that I don't know why it is happening, and that people in other countries claim they are not seeing any trails at all.
Maybe foreign planes are at the altitude of the commercial traffic I usually saw, and not as high as the ones the trails are coming from.
But as for the turning around, I'm positive nothing was coming out for a minute or two as the plane repositioned itself, several times in the same day. I wasn't working at the time, and I had all day to sit around and watch. Too bad my digital camera couldn't focus that far!

edit on 6/10/2011 by Monstertako because: Forgot a word!



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Monstertako
 

You are asking questions which have been asked many times. I'm not going to get into a discussion about flight paths and meteorological conditions (nothing personal, I'm just tired of going through it time and time again). This thread is supposed to be about "UK Admits Plans to Inject Aerosols into Stratosphere".



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 




OP, I guess it's just coincidence that these jet planes we all see leaving "contrails" in the skies are leaving patterns consistent those discussed on Page 31 of the T.A.P. proposal. And I'm sure it's another coincidence that these plume clouds that we see in the aftermath of chemtrails fit the description of the "plumes" that will result from the spraying of aerosols also discussed in this document.

www.monkeypuppet.net...



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by NightGypsy And I'm sure it's another coincidence that these plume clouds that we see in the aftermath of chemtrails fit the description of the "plumes" that will result from the spraying of aerosols also discussed in this document.

www.monkeypuppet.net...


Thanks for posting this. I just keep coming across more and more evidence already in public domain.

I'll pour over this more tomorrow. Looks like the UK isn't the only government admitting to this stuff.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:51 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


The UK govt is admitting that this idea exists in the same way they admit that road traffic accidents happen


It's been well known, in the public domain, for decades.

There's even a page about it on that litte known, highly secret, website called wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 02:58 AM
link   
Reply to post by bsbray11
 


BSbray complaining about semantic bickering? LoL

One of THE most hypocritical comments I've ever seen on this website. Stop pushing your agenda of fear and actually read the plans in detail. No, this does not magically validate 'chemtrails', not even close.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by NightGypsy
 


So which one is it?

First you say it's secret and won't be discussed openly then go and link to a freely available document saying it's proof of chemtrails.

You can't even make your mind up, then there's the fact that your 'proof' is about studying aerosols and page 31 is discussing studying plumes from a power station on the ground .



Example of typical flight path executed by research aircraft in the study
of oxidant formation in power plant plume in the vicinity of Nashville TN. The color
code identifies the flight track of the aircraft (green) and the various point sources in
the region, the direction of their plumes and the plume-crossings by the aircraft.


Seriously, you need to learn to read and comprehend if you want to be taken seriously.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 





First you say it's secret and won't be discussed openly then go and link to a freely available document saying it's proof of chemtrails. You can't even make your mind up, then there's the fact that your 'proof' is about studying aerosols and page 31 is discussing studying plumes from a power station on the ground .


Nice try, Chadwickus.....I suppose when all else fails, putting words in people's mouths is the only option for those of your ilk.

It is you who has failed to read and comprehend.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 03:59 AM
link   
reply to post by NightGypsy
 


First you said:



Of course you don't. Where would you expect to hear about politicians discussing illegal spraying of toxic chemicals on an unsuspecting population? In the MSM? Is Phage now entering the realm of standup comedy?


Then go onto saying:



OP, I guess it's just coincidence that these jet planes we all see leaving "contrails" in the skies are leaving patterns consistent those discussed on Page 31 of the T.A.P. proposal. And I'm sure it's another coincidence that these plume clouds that we see in the aftermath of chemtrails fit the description of the "plumes" that will result from the spraying of aerosols also discussed in this document.


The T.A.P. proposal you linked to is a government document.

Government - politicians, there's a synchronicity there.

Where's the rebuttal that you've completely misread your source?

Or are you conceding that you're wrong?



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by byteshertz
Phage is right. And there is an obvious difference between proposing something and planning to do it.


You know "proposal" and "plan" are synonyms, right?


No, they aren't.

From dic.com:


1
a method worked out in advance for achieving some objective
Synonyms arrangement, blueprint, design, game, game plan, ground plan, master plan, program, project, road map, scheme, strategy, system
Related Words collusion, conspiracy, plot; contrivance, device, gambit, maneuver, ruse, stratagem, subterfuge, trick; counterplan, counterstrategy; means, tactic, technique, way; procedure, protocol; conception, idea, projet, proposal, specific(s), specification(s); aim, intent, intention, purpose; diagram, formula, layout, map, pattern, platform, policy, recipe, setup


and

1
: an act of putting forward or stating something for consideration
2
a : something proposed : suggestion

Synonyms: offer, proffer, proposition, suggestion



Do you know what a synonym is?


Probably he does...clearly you do not.


I can't believe you people are trying to turn this into semantic bickering, given the actual content of the PDF above.


Perhaps you should learn what a synonym is then
.





A proposal is the initial step to see what others think of an idea


An extremely controversial idea that, by pure coincidence I'm sure (
), thousands of people are already convinced has already been happening for years/decades.


And so what?

Have you got any evidence yet of anything that actually exists that looks and behaves exactly like a contrail, but is not a contrail??

Just curious of course......'cos proposals, and research, and yes, even actual plans for geo-engineering are neither new nor particularly secret .....and AFAIK don't look like contrails......but feel free to show me wrong.
edit on 10-6-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Chadwickus, it's easy to see what you are trying to do.....and I must say, you're not very good at it. But if you insist, here is my rebuttal....

You reference the following quotes of mine:



Of course you don't. Where would you expect to hear about politicians discussing illegal spraying of toxic chemicals on an unsuspecting population? In the MSM? Is Phage now entering the realm of standup comedy?





OP, I guess it's just coincidence that these jet planes we all see leaving "contrails" in the skies are leaving patterns consistent those discussed on Page 31 of the T.A.P. proposal. And I'm sure it's another coincidence that these plume clouds that we see in the aftermath of chemtrails fit the description of the "plumes" that will result from the spraying of aerosols also discussed in this document.


You state the following in response the above comments:



First you say it's secret and won't be discussed openly then go and link to a freely available document saying it's proof of chemtrails. You can't even make your mind up, then there's the fact that your 'proof' is about studying aerosols and page 31 is discussing studying plumes from a power station on the ground .



Please direct me to the point in my first comment where I say anything about government secrecy. My comment addresses the likelihood that the MSM would not report discussions of chemtrails among politicians.

As for my second comment, please show me where I state that I am providing excerpts from the T.A.P. proposal as "proof" of anything.

And in reference to the T.A.P. proposal and the diagram I reference on Page 31, which is labeled Figure 5.3, it's caption reads:




Figure 5.3. Example of typical flight path executed by research aircraft in the study of oxidant formation in power plant plume in the vicinity of Nashville TN. The color code identifies the flight track of the aircraft (green) and the various point sources in the region, the direction of their plumes and the plume-crossings by the aircraft. The estimated relative magnitude of the various sources of NOx are listed in the box. From SOS (1998)


Is there anything about the words "example of typical flight path," "flight track of the aircraft," and "direction of their plumes and the plume-crossings by aircraft" that would give the impression that this is not a diagram showing an example of a flight paths of aircraft that are emitting plumes?

The T.A.P. proposal document is from 2001. It does not provide evidence that chemtrails are currently underway. What it does, however, is outline plans for the T.A.P. program that include activities very similar to those many of us are witnessing at the present time. The T.A.P. proposal clearly states there are health risks that exist, the extent of which (at least at the time) were unknown and needed to be researched further. Coincidentally, many citizens in the regions who report ongoing chemtrails in their skies have also been stricken with health problems since the alleged chemtrails began. Some of their symptoms coincide with exposure to certain chemical components of the proposed aerosols.

Is this rebuttal satisfactory to you? And for the future, please refrain from manipulating my words to fulfill your (transparent) agenda.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by tom goose
reply to post by Phage
 


Phage, you have made me question what my eyes and memory tell me on a couple of occasions. I cannot argue your science because i don't understand it enough.

Could you please tell me though, If there is research and experimentation underway at any level, what time line would they be proposing? I thought we were coming up to a solar maximum that would begin to decline in 10-15 years or so anyway.

So the studies that focus on blocking sunlight - If the the technology is being seriously considered and the window of purpose is closing, when would you consider an appropriate time to deliver the results? and how do you propose the idea it delivered to the public?


That is the purpose of disinfo campaigns - to persuade people to doubt their own experience and believe the unproven OS instead.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 





No, they aren't. From dic.com:


The slight differences in the definitions of "proposal" and "plan" are irrelevant. As history has shown, the government does as it pleases, regardless of what the population thinks. They have given us no reason to believe they wouldn't implement "proposals" or "plans" such as these absent our knowledge or consent, especially if there were "unknowns" about the health risks or if the activity in question furthered some unknown agenda of theirs.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:05 AM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 





That is the purpose of disinfo campaigns - to persuade people to doubt their own experience and believe the unproven OS instead.


Yes, not to mention the fact that many times it's the accumulation of circumstantial evidence that is the most damning. Many of these conspiracies are not born from one piece of forensic evidence alone, but it's the job of the disinfo agents to convince people that it is.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:23 AM
link   
reply to post by NightGypsy
 




Chadwickus, it's easy to see what you are trying to do.....and I must say, you're not very good at it.


What am I trying to do? Why not come out and say it? You like to be subtle I see...

See, when you say things like this:



Where would you expect to hear about politicians discussing illegal spraying of toxic chemicals on an unsuspecting population? In the MSM?


I can't help but read between the lines, I know what you're trying to suggest.

More subtleties:



OP, I guess it's just coincidence that these jet planes we all see leaving "contrails" in the skies are leaving patterns consistent those discussed on Page 31 of the T.A.P. proposal


But not really that subtle if you ask me, we all know what you're trying to say, "I guess it's a coincidence" you say with a hint of sarcasm.

So if you're denying that you provided this link as proof of chemtrails, why did you post it?



The T.A.P. proposal document is from 2001. It does not provide evidence that chemtrails are currently underway. What it does, however, is outline plans for the T.A.P. program that include activities very similar to those many of us are witnessing at the present time.


No it doesn't, if one is to test aerosols (you've got the definition wrong on that, I'll cover that shortly), the most efficient way is to do it in a 'grid like pattern'. Have a close look at the diagram, I'll post it up for you:



Take a moment to read the caption and absorb the diagram, notice how the lines are 90 degrees to the wind direction?



The T.A.P. proposal clearly states there are health risks that exist, the extent of which (at least at the time) were unknown and needed to be researched further.
Coincidentally, many citizens in the regions who report ongoing chemtrails in their skies have also been stricken with health problems since the alleged chemtrails began. Some of their symptoms coincide with exposure to certain chemical components of the proposed aerosols.


What proposed aerosols?

If you go past page 31, you see what the source of these aerosols are, namely the cumberland power plant in Tennessee amongst others.

Also, an aerosol is any particle suspended in the air. When you breathe out, you make aerosols.

Dust is an aerosol.

Salt spray from the ocean is an aerosol.

Make no mistake, the paper you shared with us does not prove or indicate or allude to chemtrails, on the contrary, what they discuss is very similar to what needs to be done to prove chemtrails.


Look, It's ok to admit when you're wrong, I've lost count how many times I've admitted my mistakes.

So come on, act like an adult and admit you're wrong so we can both move on.





edit on 10/6/11 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join