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.

 

Its happend before, so why not now?

page: 1
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I've been watching this forum for a while now after I shared my personal experience with chemtrails. What disturbed me most was the debunkers who do seem to know their stuff when it comes to aircraft and contrails etc, but are soo damn sure this isn't happening. The list of things each individual doesn't know is too large to even fathom so how are all you debunkers so damn sure? Because you haven't personally seen the planes they don't exist?

We all know history repeats itself so how can we ignore the possibility that a government program isn't in effect and spraying chemicals for whatever reasons?


Operation LAC

OperationOperation LAC was undertaken in 1957 and 1958 by the U.S. Army Chemical Corps. Principally, the operation involved spraying large areas with zinc cadmium sulfide. The U.S. Air Force loaned the Army a C-119, "Flying Boxcar", and it was used to disperse zinc cadmium sulfide by the ton in the atmosphere over the United States. The first test occurred on December 2, 1957 along a path from South Dakota to International Falls, Minnesota.

The tests were designed to determine the dispersion and geographic range of biological or chemical agents. Stations on the ground tracked the fluorescent zinc cadmium sulfide particles. During the first test and subsequently, much of the material dispersed ended up being carried by winds into Canada. However, as was the case in the first test, particles were detected up to 1,200 miles away from their drop point. A typical flight line covering 400 miles would release 5,000 pounds of zinc cadmium sulfide and in fiscal year 1958 around 100 hours were spent in flight for LAC. That flight time included four runs of various lengths, one of which was 1,400 miles.

Specific tests
The December 2, 1957 test was incomplete due to a mass of cold air coming down from Canada. It carried the particles from their drop point and then took a turn northeast, taking most of the particles into Canada with it. Military operators considered the test a partial success because some of the particles were detected 1,200 miles away, at a station in New York state. A February 1958 test at Dugway Proving Ground ended similarly. Another Canadian air mass swept through and carried the particles into the Gulf of Mexico. Two other tests, one along a path from Toledo, Ohio to Abilene, Texas, and another from Detroit, to Springfield, Illinois, to Goodland, Kansas, showed that agents dispersed through this aerial method could achieve widespread coverage when particles were detected on both sides of the flight paths.

Scope
According to Leonard A. Cole, an Army Chemical Corps document titled "Summary of Major Events and Problems" (1958) described the scope of Operation LAC. Cole stated that the document outlined that the tests were the largest ever undertaken by the Chemical Corps and that the test area stretched from the Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean, and from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. Other sources describe the scope of LAC varyingly, examples include, "Midwestern United States", and "the states east of the Rockies". Specific locations are mentioned as well. Some of those include: a path from South Dakota to Minneapolis, Minnesota,Dugway Proving Ground, Corpus Christi, Texas, north-central Texas, and the San Francisco Bay area.

Risks and issues
A large body of evidence exists of ZnCdS having adverse health effects as a result of LAC. However, a U.S. government study, done by the U.S. National Research Council stated, in part, "After an exhaustive, independent review requested by Congress, we have found no evidence that exposure to zinc cadmium sulfide at these levels could cause people to become sick." Still, the use of ZnCdS remains controversial and some critics have accused the Army of "literally using the country as an experimental laboratory".



Operation Dew

General description
Operation Dew took place from 1951-1952 off the southeast coast of the United States, including near Georgia, and North and South Carolina. Operation Dew consisted of two sets of trials, Dew I and Dew II. The tests involved the release of 250 pounds (110 kg) of fluorescent particles from a minesweeper off the coast. Operation Dew I was described in a U.S. Army report known as "Dugway Special Report 162", dated August 1, 1952. The purpose of Operation Dew was to study the behavior of aerosol-released biological agents.

Dew I
Operation Dew I consisted of five separate trials from March 26, 1952 until April 21, 1952 that were designed to test the feasibility of maintaining a large aerosol cloud released offshore until it drifted over land, achieving a large area coverage. The tests released zinc cadmium sulfide along a 100-to-150-nautical-mile (190 to 280 km) line approximately 5 to 10 nautical miles (10 to 20 km) off the coast of Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Two of the trials dispersed clouds of zinc cadmium sulfide over large areas of all three U.S. states. The tests affected over 60,000 square miles (150,000 km²) of populated coastal region in the U.S. southeast. The Dew I releases were from a Navy minesweeper, the USS Tercel.

Dew II
Dew II involved the release of fluorescent particles and Lycopodium spores from an aircraft. Dew II was described in a 1953 Army report which remained classified at the time of a 1997 report by the U.S. National Research Council concerning the U.S. Army's zinc cadmium sulfide dispersion program of the 1950s.


Dew II stayed secret from 1953 to 1997 and was only revealed because of a investigation into people getting sick from it.


We may be wrong about 99% or even 100% of the "trails" we see but how can some of you debunkers be soo opposed to even the possiblity that chemtrails exist now, when they obviously did in the past?




posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
There's always some kind of "experiments" ongoing that according to their laws, they don't have to reveal anything to us that is still in it's testing phases. It's a clever way to hide their activities, happens to work too.
People do seem sure of things others tell them without personally verifying the information.


+4 more 
posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
The chemtrail debunkers should be completely and totally ignored. They only give science about contrails, which are not the same thing. That is like me trying to start a conversation about baseball, and a bunch of people chime in with football stats while pretending that what they are saying has anything to do at all with the argument at hand. For the simple reason they are arguing about something totally different than chemtrails, the same-old debunkers should be ignored time and time again. Their presence should simply not even be acknowleged, like a lowly gnat.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
There's no reason "why not".

There's just no actual indication that it's happening.

Nor is there any indication that the ZnCdS dispersion trials looked anything like contrails. And why would a dispersion test require thousands of planes spraying every day?

The two things seem unrelated.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by HenryPatrick
The chemtrail debunkers should be completely and totally ignored. They only give science about contrails, which are not the same thing.


The science demonstrates that what people claim are chemtrails ARE the same as contrails.

How do they differ?



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by HenryPatrick
The chemtrail debunkers should be completely and totally ignored. They only give science about contrails, which are not the same thing.


We can't ignore them because even I doubt 90% of what is reported as chemtrails. If we don't have the debunkers to elliminate the fake from the real we will get nowhere and continue to argue over true contrails. I do however believe that there really is a chemtrail program. I don't know if its all weather modification or something more sinister but I believe we have the right to know. Not 50 years from now when its declassified but today when it matters to our health.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by HenryPatrick
 


You sound like the perfect candidate to conduct a chemtrail testing program.

A person who can identify a chemtrail from a contrail is needed.

Would you volunteer if Cliff or Thomas calls?


+3 more 
posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


Why do you spend so much of your time trying to convince people chemtrails don't exist? You are all over contrailscience and I'm seeing you on here on a never ending campaign to convince people they are all contrails.

I find it peculiar that you find the need and passion to help all the "chemmies" change their minds and perceptions of what they've observed... what is your motivation to spend YEARS debunking them?
I personally don't believe in organized religions, and I don't spend more than 5 mins per year debating others about my beliefs... I just don't care enough to spend my time that way. I think you have motives that are very suspicious.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus
There's no reason "why not".

There's just no actual indication that it's happening.

Nor is there any indication that the ZnCdS dispersion trials looked anything like contrails. And why would a dispersion test require thousands of planes spraying every day?

The two things seem unrelated.


So because you see no indication its not possible?

We don't know what the dispersion looks like because they won't allow us to see it. I wonder why?


How can you say they don't seem related when you haven't seen all the information? Thats my problem with the debunkers attitude, haven't seen it so it doesn't exist.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

So because you see no indication its not possible?


No. Of course it's possible, that's what I was saying. There's just no evidence it is happening.


How can you say they don't seem related when you haven't seen all the information? Thats my problem with the debunkers attitude, haven't seen it so it doesn't exist.


What information haven't I seen? You seem to be suggesting that IF there was a secret program that resembled what people say are chemtrails, the that would be evidence for chemtrails. That's a bit of a circular argument. You have to start somewhere with some actual evidence.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
reply to post by Uncinus
 


Why do you spend so much of your time trying to convince people chemtrails don't exist? You are all over contrailscience and I'm seeing you on here on a never ending campaign to convince people they are all contrails.

I find it peculiar that you find the need and passion to help all the "chemmies" change their minds and perceptions of what they've observed... what is your motivation to spend YEARS debunking them?
I personally don't believe in organized religions, and I don't spend more than 5 mins per year debating others about my beliefs... I just don't care enough to spend my time that way. I think you have motives that are very suspicious.


It's a hobby. I explain in full here:

metabunk.org...



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

What information haven't I seen? You seem to be suggesting that IF there was a secret program that resembled what people say are chemtrails, the that would be evidence for chemtrails. That's a bit of a circular argument. You have to start somewhere with some actual evidence.


So what do you think the dispersion looked like in Dew II? We know how planes crop dust and have lots of video evidence on what the dispersion looks like. How would military dispersion differ from civilian? My bet is they look just like regular contrails and thats why we aren't allowed to see video of Dew II or LAC in action. Its classified for a reason.
edit on 11-6-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


A daily hobby? I'd spend my days on this planet differently, to each their own.
I've watched your responses to chemtrail arguments and I seem to see the same patterns in you and others, you either ignore the evidence presented, say it's a mistake, and you keep asking the same questions after they've been answered 100s of times.... "where's the evidence?"

People show you evidence, you say it's a mistake or not conclusive enough... then you go back to "where's the evidence?"
It's the same game the media does. There's more evidence now than there was in say 2008, and using the inconclusive argument with test samples doesn't solidify your "debunking" arguments, it's more like 2 sides not presenting conclusive evidence to satisfy the other. That's a round about circular waste of time don't you think?



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi There's more evidence now than there was in say 2008, and using the inconclusive argument with test samples doesn't solidify your "debunking" arguments,


Regarding test samples, what's inconclusive? There's a small number of "pro-chemtrail" samples that have used demonstrably bad techniques (like the Shasta snow sample), so show high levels of aluminum. Then there's thousands of experienced scientists monitoring the air, soil, and water, none of which have showing anything unusual. That seems pretty conclusive to me.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


And the thing about debunking - it's not about trying to make a case for disproving a theory. It's about removing the bunk. Stripping away the falsehood, mistakes, and bad science, so that facts and reason remain.

Like, for example, say someone says that chemtrail spraying decimated the tomato crop in California in 2009. If I then produce figures showing the tomato crop was actually higher than average, then I've debunked that particular piece of bunk. I've not debunked the entire chemtrail theory.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


I'm not sure anyone has ever denied the possibiity of similar tests being undertaken today?

However this has nothing to do with the claims that contrails produced by hundreds of aircraft every day are deliberate 'chemtrails'.

Worth noting that there is also no evidence that any form of deliberate spraying at altitude has ever been visible from the ground. Also, that historic tests were generally conducted at low or ground level (as in the case of test carried out in the UK) - and were again not visible.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


I'm not sure anyone has ever denied the possibiity of similar tests being undertaken today?


Not that I have read but the knee-jerk reactions of a small group on this forum whom always show up and dismiss almost every post on chemtrails with the same arguements time and time again make it very clear they do not believe it is happening. If the government has done it before there is a good chance that at least some of the "trails" are real chemtrails for whatever purpose.


However this has nothing to do with the claims that contrails produced by hundreds of aircraft every day are deliberate 'chemtrails'.


There is a good chance at least 1 of those trails is more than just a contrail and automatic dismissal by the debunk crew is nothing but arrogant.


Worth noting that there is also no evidence that any form of deliberate spraying at altitude has ever been visible from the ground. Also, that historic tests were generally conducted at low or ground level (as in the case of test carried out in the UK) - and were again not visible.


All the evidence that we need is held by the military and is not being shared. What could the reasons for that be? Historic tests you say. I say what about the tests we have never been told about. There is much we do not know about.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


Surely evidence that such tests are visible would come from the public who observe it? The fact no-one knew such experiments took place is surely evidence that they were not readily visible?

I know people see contrails and claim they are chemtrails. But so far no-one has produce evidence of a contrail that could not be a contrail.

And anyway, regardless of past experiments to help us prepare for a chemical/biological attack by the Soviets during the cold war, is there any actual evidence further experiments are being conducted today? If so, for what reason? And why at high altitude (where so-called chemtrails occur)?

Of course, it may be that they are indeed conducting such experiments and in order to divert attention they invented the chemtrail hoax to ensure everyone would look the other way? Maybe we shouldn't be looking overhead, but closer to home?



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


Surely evidence that such tests are visible would come from the public who observe it? The fact no-one knew such experiments took place is surely evidence that they were not readily visible?


No one observed Dew II 50 years ago and I doubt they dispersed over populated area's and maybe they also did it at night. There is also the problem that witnesses might have thought they were contrails.




I know people see contrails and claim they are chemtrails. But so far no-one has produce evidence of a contrail that could not be a contrail.


I have already agreed that 99% of it all is just plain contrails. The problem is unless we get an actual sample of the trail we will never really know. Endless arguement ensues.



And anyway, regardless of past experiments to help us prepare for a chemical/biological attack by the Soviets during the cold war, is there any actual evidence further experiments are being conducted today? If so, for what reason? And why at high altitude (where so-called chemtrails occur)?


If its a secret operation we won't be told will we? There could be any number of reasons. Many people like to point at HARP.



Of course, it may be that they are indeed conducting such experiments and in order to divert attention they invented the chemtrail hoax to ensure everyone would look the other way? Maybe we shouldn't be looking overhead, but closer to home?


I think with todays governments we should always be looking close to home but we should still be looking up from time to time for good measure.



posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


but when you have people from every state, and every country showing pictures of lines in the sky, claiming they are all chemtrails, where do you draw the line? When do you say, perhaps not all of those are chemtrails, hell, maybe none of them are. That is the position a rational person would take. They are all contrails, since they look and act just like contrails. And since there is ample scientific evidence that contrails exist, and very little to no evidence that chemtrails exist, it's the only logical conclusion that could be had. We are lucky to have some chemtrail believers always looking for evidence. Should there ever be a spraying program, someone will slip up and they will find the evidence. It's like always having a guard dog around in case someone tries to sneak in. Most folks would see the pit bull with teeth and slobber and chose not to enter.

These people need to get organized and spend the money to test the lines at altitude to determine what they are made of. Then they will have to understand that there is nothing to be afraid of or, they will have definitive proof of the world being poisoned. Sadly, I don't think the charlatans who promote the chemtrail myth want to know the truth since it might erase their lucrative ways.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join