Its happend before, so why not now?

reply to post by FreeSpeaker


Where did it say these tests occured with aircraft at 25,000 ft - 40,000ft spraying? You know, where contrails can form. And chemtrails, apparently?

Did you miss the part where it said chemicals were released from a ship?

Can chemmies read one of their articles all the way through before crying proof?

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Cloud seeding alone proves chemtrails exist.

So does crop dusting.

Neither are what people normally mean by chemtrails.

Please state where your goalposts are before building a straw man.

What are you even saying here? You agree and then say thats not what people mean. You are the one who stated there is little or no evidence chemtrails exist. If a plane leaves a trail of chemicals not related to normal contrails, is it not a chemtrail?

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by FreeSpeaker

 

Where did it say these tests occured with aircraft at 25,000 ft - 40,000ft spraying? You know, where contrails can form. And chemtrails, apparently?

Did you miss the part where it said chemicals were released from a ship?

Can chemmies read one of their articles all the way through before crying proof?

Read all the info and try posting again. Dew II and LAC were carried out by aircraft. You obviously gave up reading at Dew I and gave the typical knee-jerk reaction I spoke of earlier.

Look at that! Someone even gave you a star for not reading.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
If a plane leaves a trail of chemicals not related to normal contrails, is it not a chemtrail?

Nope. Read here.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Cloud seeding alone proves chemtrails exist.

So does crop dusting.

Neither are what people normally mean by chemtrails.

Please state where your goalposts are before building a straw man.

What are you even saying here? You agree and then say thats not what people mean. You are the one who stated there is little or no evidence chemtrails exist. If a plane leaves a trail of chemicals not related to normal contrails, is it not a chemtrail?

Thats not the defintition, because if you are changing it to that, then you have to include firefighting aircraft, cropdusters, and airshow teams now as part of chemtrails.

Chemtrails was invented to sell DVDs, books and "remedies", by people who claimed evidence for it was contrails at low levels, and then it later became about contrails at high levels that did not dissipate.

reply to post by FreeSpeaker


Did you miss this part?

The tests involved the release of 250 pounds (110 kg) of fluorescent particles from a minesweeper off the coast.

Here is a picture, since your reading comprehension is questionable.

You're really starting to look credible, you can't even read your own "proof". Not that you posted evidence of anything but your own ignorance.

reply to post by FreeSpeaker


I'm saying that most people, when referring to chemtrails, are talking about big white clouds in the upper troposhere - not cloud seeding (which isn't visible from the ground) nor crop spraying (which occurs low to the ground, but usually is visible at the time of spraying). No-one disputes that cloud seeding or crop spraying have been taking place for decades.

If they are what you think chemtrails are, then fine, you are correct. Is that the case? Otherwise you're playing with a straw man.

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by FreeSpeaker

 

Did you miss this part?

The tests involved the release of 250 pounds (110 kg) of fluorescent particles from a minesweeper off the coast.

Here is a picture, since your reading comprehension is questionable.

That was called Dew I and yes I saw it because I posted it. Look up Dew II for crying out loud. Its on my first post and should be that hard for you to find.

The only thing questionable here is why you keep getting a star for not reading my full post and posting nonsense.

Originally posted by adeclerk


Here is a picture, since your reading comprehension is questionable.

You're really starting to look credible, you can't even read your own "proof". Not that you posted evidence of anything but your own ignorance.

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

Oh wow, ship trails!!! Have you seen this smoking gun proof of them? There are far more unnatural wake trails on the water than 200 years ago too!!

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
reply to post by Phage

 

Any guess as to how high that dust reaches before it is able to be spread around the world? I know dust storms in Iraq can reach up to 15,000 feet high. Guess how much higher it can get in a region with stronger winds.

Um. Yes. And the dust started on the ground. Wind doesn't lift dust, vertical air movement does. Thats how dust gets lifted, even when it starts at low altitudes. That's how dust gets carried long distances. Small particles don't fall very fast. Wind can carry them great distances.

some of the particles were detected 1,200 miles away

You assume the tests were done at high altitude. That is not a valid assumption.

Originally posted by firepilot

Originally posted by adeclerk


Here is a picture, since your reading comprehension is questionable.

You're really starting to look credible, you can't even read your own "proof". Not that you posted evidence of anything but your own ignorance.

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

Oh wow, ship trails!!! Have you seen this smoking gun proof of them? There are far more unnatural wake trails on the water than 200 years ago too!!

Another knee-jerk reaction from the debunk crew. Again not even reading the full post. Pathetic. I'll bow out before the arrogance gets unbearable.

Thanks to the debunkers who took the time to read my first post and responded civily.

reply to post by FreeSpeaker


Now go back and read the altitudes involved. They won't be the same as those modern 'chemtrails'. In fact, no one has ever seen a 'chemtrail' at low altitude, I guess the sprayers have altitude sensing on/off switches!

You're just another gullible person buying into the 'chem' garbage. Why don't you buy an orgone cloud buster for them 'chemtrails' while you're at it.

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by FreeSpeaker

 

Now go back and read the altitudes involved. They won't be the same as those modern 'chemtrails'. In fact, no one has ever seen a 'chemtrail' at low altitude, I guess the sprayers have altitude sensing on/off switches!

You're just another gullible person buying into the 'chem' garbage. Why don't you buy an orgone cloud buster for them 'chemtrails' while you're at it.

Read what altitudes involved? Your reading must questionable. Dew I&II and LAC are still classified and no information has ever been given beyond a general discription of the operations.

Your just one of arrogant debunk crew who doesn't read posts before jumping in and spouting your same old story over and over again. I've seen it many times on this forum. Your act, and your friends who pat you on the back with stars, is without class.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Read what altitudes involved? Your reading must questionable. Dew I&II and LAC are still classified and no information has ever been given beyond a general discription of the operations.

And yet this general description is 'chemtrail' proof? Sorry, I have reasonable standards of evidence.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Your just one of arrogant debunk crew who doesn't read posts before jumping in and spouting your same old story over and over again.

*You're.
I disagree, I'm seeing the same old junk that 'chemmies' continually parrot. Did you even use the search function?

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
I've seen it many times on this forum.

Yes, the same 'chemtrail' proof thread gets posted at least 19 times a month.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Your act, and your friends who pat you on the back with stars, is without class.

Why is it always about stars with you chemmies?

This ridiculous chemtrail proof threads are pretty much star mills for debunkers, not that anyone even gives a sh*t about stars. If you care that much about them, stop posting this absurdity, it's a literal star mine for those debunkers.

Actually if they want to get into "Stars", check out a thread that a chemmie starts, they all show up to star it. A chemmie can post something utterly ridiculous, and they will come of out of anywhere to star it. The Ted Gunderson video for example

I actually want them to spray barium and help slow down this Fukushima fallout.... chemtrails get a bad rap, but you should start thinking of them as a helping hand in fighting Japan's fallout all over the world, no?
Let's tell the geo-engineers to start spraying lower than usual so the Uranium 237 stays above that protective radiation barrier.

I see Phage and Uncinus are doing their usual routine here, like watching Batman & Robin in action. Except these superheros have too many "hobbies" of debunking chemtrails for 1000s of hours of their lives "without pay".... at least apply for the co-intel jobs instead of doing their work for free, yes?

reply to post by JibbyJedi

Barium slows down fallout? Interesting. Can you explain how that works?

I "debunk" a lot of things. But I don't talk much about members, I try to discuss the topic.

reply to post by FreeSpeaker


it's not that 'debunkers' are 'so damn sure'. It's that those who DO believe in chemtrails THINK they are so damn sure, but have NO PROOF.

pointing at something known to be a condensation trail and calling it a 'chemtrail' while not supplying even a shred of proof does not exactly lend credibility to your cause.

go out there and get the proof, or admit it is nothing more than an un-proven theory.

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.

Why do you spend so much of your tme trying to convince people chemtrails DO exist? I notice you on several threads attacking 'debunkers' but never supplying any evidence to support your theory.

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 know. Why cant he just accept ignorance?

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.

Instead of attacking the person, why not focus on actual data?

Oh, right, because you have none, so you resort to slimy insinuation and ad hominem attacks.

Originally posted by JibbyJedi


I see Phage and Uncinus are doing their usual routine here, like watching Batman & Robin in action. Except these superheros have too many "hobbies" of debunking chemtrails for 1000s of hours of their lives "without pay".... at least apply for the co-intel jobs instead of doing their work for free, yes?

I tend to think slimy character assassination like you just posted above tend to be the sign of someone who is unable to engage in informed, reasoned debate.