Its happend before, so why not now?

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
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.


Well for proof the only one available is that chemtrails have been researched and tested. Most debunkers won't even accept this. Is there any proof chemtrails have NOT been researched?

A lot, like me, at least believe in the possibility of chemtrails and I bet most don't think that they are made to make us sick.

Most chemtrailers don't think all contrails are chemtrails, although debunkers think all that ever was are contrails. So basically, most debunkers are closer minded. Sorry about that.




posted on Jun, 11 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by User8911

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
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.


Well for proof the only one available is that chemtrails have been researched and tested.


they have? Can you point me to the findings?



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Now, in reference to decontamination, the gov (DARPA) has been spraying chemtrails from civilian and military aircraft. This is part of a special program noted below:
UNCONVENTIONAL PATHOGEN COUNTERMEASURES PROGRAM - CHEMTRAILS IN OTHER WORDS.
Research and Development Areas :
Advanced Biological and Medical Technologies:
Biological Warfare Defense Unconventional Pathogen Countermeasures
The goal of the Unconventional Pathogen Countermeasures program is to develop and demonstrate defensive technologies that afford the greatest protection to uniformed war fighters, and the defense personnel who support them, during U.S. military operations. While no defense may stop a determined adversary from unleashing biological weapon, a sufficiently robust array of pathogen defenses and countermeasures - deterrents in their own right - will reduce the probable damage that would result from biological weapons used in a particular operation.
The most sinister offensive biological warfare scenario employs surprise, immediate proximity, and rapidly lethal, persistent agents in overwhelming quantities. Under these circumstances, real-time sensing, donning of physical protection, and conventional nonmedical countermeasures are only marginally effective. An effective operational defense ideally requires instantly available or emplaced countermeasures that can defeat biological threats as they enter the body and before they reach and attack target cells and tissues.
The focus of the Unconventional Pathogen Countermeasures program is the development of revolutionary, broad-spectrum, medical countermeasures against significantly pathogenic microorganisms and/or their pathogenic products. These countermeasures will be versatile enough to eliminate biological threats, whether from natural sources or modified through bioengineering or other manipulation. They will also have the potential to provide protection both within the body and at the most common portals of entry (e.g., inhalation, ingestion, ranscutaneous).
Strategies include but are not limited to:
Defeat of a pathogen's ability to enter the body, traverse the bloodstream or lymphatics, and enter target tissues.
Identification of novel pathogen vulnerabilities based on fundamental, critical molecular mechanisms of survival or pathogenesis (e.g., Type III secretion, cellular energetics, virulence modulation).
Construction of unique, robust vehicles for the delivery of countermeasures into or within the body.
Modulation of the advantageous and/or deleterious aspects of the immune response to significantly pathogenic microorganisms and/or their pathogenic products in the body.
WARFARE CHEMICALS BEING TESTED
The strange-looking streaks in the sky aren't your imagination. They are anti-bacteriological warfare chemicals being tested by the federal government. And the public has been kept in the dark.
The chemical spraying is the "Unconventional Pathogen Countermeasures Program" of the top-secret Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
NOTE: Novavax is a bio pharmaceuticals company. BCTP is made of water, soybean oil, Triton X 100 detergent and the solvent tri-n-butyl phosphate. BCTP envelops VIRUSES and SPORES, causing them to explode and thus destroying them upon contact.
NOVAVAX AND DARPA INVOLVED IN CHEMTRAIL CONSPIRACY
Novavax - www.novavax.com...
BCTP's research studies were funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). BCTP appears to inactivate the virus on contact. The U-M and Novavax have filed a patent application covering BCTP's use as a decontamination agent for various anti-microbial applications.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 03:01 AM
link   
I don't disagree with the possability of chem trails, just not on the magitude people always seem to suggest. If used they would need to be done in very small areas and low to the ground to have any chance of working. Think of crop dusting...

Who would even want to use such an ineffective method in the first place. Extremely hard to control and short lived. That is one reason chemical warfare uses liquid dropplet that fall and stick to objects and slowly give off the chemical gasses.

I would think putting chemicals in our water would be 1000 times more effective and controllable.
edit on 12-6-2011 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by User8911

Well for proof the only one available is that chemtrails have been researched and tested.


Indeed they have. Quite extensively, especially from the 1970s onwards.

The military are keen on finding ways to prevent them occurring

Climate scientists are keen on finding out to what extent they may affect climate.

Astronomers are up in arms because they make ground viewing increasingly difficult.

Of course, in every case, they've been found to be caused by the exhaust of aircraft engines and dependent on their formation and persistence on the ambient atmospheric conditions through which the aircraft is flying at the time.

We call them contrails.

edit on 12-6-2011 by Essan because: typo



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
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.


I am not sure if it will absorb all the particular fallout radiation, but it does absorb X-rays, which is promising in helping to absorb any northern hemisphere fallout.
www.ehow.com...


Barium sulfate is radiopaque, meaning that it absorbs x-ray radiation....... Inside the gastrointestinal tract the barium sulfate absorbs the x-rays that would otherwise travel through the body, causing the GI tract to appear white on the film.


You say you don't talk about members? I've seen you repeatedly patronize chemtrail believers on several forums, both you & Uncinus have been relentless in your efforts to convince the masses chemtrails don't exist, but Uncinus has been more cordial about it from what I've seen.

I've presented lots of evidence over the years to you guys and I'm not going to sway either of your opinions until TPTB just come right out and admit it live on TV, which will never happen.
Meteorologists speak openly about chaff, but it's all right because they "say" it's safe. Fine, whatever you guys think. I'll see you in the hospital in a few years when the whole northern hemisphere is sick & dying, then we can continue our arguments about how nothing is happening or being done to any of us and it's all in our heads.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
I am not sure if it will absorb all the particular fallout radiation, but it does absorb X-rays, which is promising in helping to absorb any northern hemisphere fallout.
www.ehow.com...


Barium sulfate is radiopaque, meaning that it absorbs x-ray radiation....... Inside the gastrointestinal tract the barium sulfate absorbs the x-rays that would otherwise travel through the body, causing the GI tract to appear white on the film.



Barium sulfate absorbs x-rays in the same way lead does. It does not vacuum them out of the air - X-rays just can't travel through barium as easily as though flesh.

So adding 1 part per billion of barium to the atmosphere is not going to do anything. You'd need to actually coat your body in an inch or so of barium sulphate.

And of course the danger from nuclear fallout at a distance is NOT for radiation impacting your body. It's from you breathing or otherwise consuming radioactive particles (the fallout), which then irradiate you from the inside.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   
This thread is for debunkers to prove why chemtrails can't exist since I've already proven with my OP chemtrails have been used by the US army. How can something that has already come into existence suddenly cease to exist? Chemtrails are real and thats a fact. The only question is are they still being used in some secret manner. I already admitted 99% of chemtrail claims are garbage and nothing but contrails. That still doesn't dismiss the possibility that there are chemtrails being used, which it turns out is pretty likely based on news from Germany.

Over and over again I have asked debunkers why Operations Dew&LAC are still classified 50 years after the operations concluded. Why would they not want us to see this info? Do you really see nothing wrong with that?


Secret Army Chemical Tests Did Not Harm Health, Report Says
By WARREN E. LEARY
Published: May 15, 1997

The spraying of a potentially toxic chemical in several cities in Army tests in the 1950's and 60's apparently had no adverse health effects, a National Research Council committee said today.

The 15-member committee said in a report that the compound, zinc cadmium sulfide, which was secretly sprayed from airplanes, rooftops and moving vehicles in 33 urban and rural areas of the United States and Canada, did not expose residents to chemical levels considered harmful.

The panel, which looked at the toxicity of the compound and its components as well as exposure data collected by the military, said it was highly unlikely that people were exposed to significant levels of the most dangerous component, cadmium. In occupational studies and studies on animals, cadmium inhaled in high doses has been found to be a cause of lung cancer.

In most of the Army tests, people were exposed to such small amounts of the compound that they would have been likely to get higher doses of cadmium from environmental and industrial sources, the report said.

Source

Notice how the article says the chemicals were SPRAYED form airplanes. Not dumped in one mass but sprayed. I wonder what that spray would look like. Maybe a contrail perhaps.


Like my title says - It happend before, so why not now?

edit on 12-6-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by spirit_horse
 

There are several things "wrong" with your post. First, the link is to a company website, not the source of the article you seem to be quoting. You need to supply the source of the article so we can read it and assess it.
Then, this seems to be part of a title:



UNCONVENTIONAL PATHOGEN COUNTERMEASURES PROGRAM - CHEMTRAILS IN OTHER WORDS.


Is the "chemtrail" part your addition? It's a really non-professional title otherwise. It makes me immediately suspect the article you seem to be quoting from, even if "chemtrail" theory was proven right. "Real" writing doesn't include that kind of phrase in the title. It's very high-school journalistic.

Then, you didn't read or understand the purpose of the article. Using the last quote, above, and this:



The goal of the Unconventional Pathogen Countermeasures program is to develop and demonstrate defensive technologies that afford the greatest protection to uniformed war fighters, and the defense personnel who support them, during U.S. military operations.

The point of what they are doing is defensive counter measures. Surely "chemtrails" would be a offensive measure. Otherwise, why does it bother you that someone is working to stop other entities from using bio-weaponry? That would be a good thing.
If someone used bio-weapons on the public, or even just our military, I would welcome the ideas and knowledge they are doing since it's goal is clearly stated as:


The focus of the Unconventional Pathogen Countermeasures program is the development of revolutionary, broad-spectrum, medical countermeasures against significantly pathogenic microorganisms and/or their pathogenic products. These countermeasures will be versatile enough to eliminate biological threats, whether from natural sources or modified through bioengineering or other manipulation. They will also have the potential to provide protection both within the body and at the most common portals of entry (e.g., inhalation, ingestion, ranscutaneous).

And the fact that someone has this type of program does not in anyway prove that there is an offensive program in the works or that they would be using high-altitude airplanes as a dispersal method. In the fight against all infectious disease, the use of mass vaccines has been shown to be the best way to protect a large group of people. This type of program usually spawns similar research for use in basic civilian medicine.
It's why we need the source of the document. Without it, it looks like you didn't read and understand your own reference.
edit on 12-6-2011 by stars15k because: clarity



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
This thread is for debunkers to prove why chemtrails can't exist since I've already proven with my OP chemtrails have been used by the US army. How can something that has already come into existence suddenly cease to exist? Chemtrails are real and thats a fact. The only question is are they still being used in some secret manner.


If you define chemtrails simply as "chemicals sprayed from a plane", then yes, they are real.

Are they being used in some secret manner? There's a few alternatives.

1) They are, and there's evidence
2) They are, and there's no evidence
3) They are not.


Like my title says - It happened before, so why not now?


Why no secret dispersion tests? I think a good "why not" is that the need for secrecy has lessened with dispersion tests, as we are no longer in a cold war. One can easily still do a test and keep the technical results confidential. Whereas in the cold war, the very fact that we were doing tests at all was considered classified information given the perceived nature of the communist threat.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


Just one question before I read any further into this.

What is your definition of a chemtrail. I only ask for clarity if I decide to take this any further.

Thank you. Civility is the key.
edit on 12-6-2011 by liejunkie01 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker
Notice how the article says the chemicals were SPRAYED form airplanes. Not dumped in one mass but sprayed. I wonder what that spray would look like. Maybe a contrail perhaps.



Probably not. A contrail has a gap between the engine and the start of the trail. Something sprayed would not. That alone would distinguish them.

There would likely also be other differences, depending on what it was. Remember a contrail is ice. So unless the trail was basically chemically identical to ice, then it is very unlikely that you would not be able to tell the difference.

Look, for example, at photos of corexit or pesticide being sprayed. The trail starts at the plane. You don't generally see much of the trail in the photos, but it looks like it quickly dissipates, rather than persist as a cloud.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


I live Fort Wayne, IN. I know they dropped a fluroescent powder, believed to be inert in the quantities to the ground and people in the exposure area. They would have been low-flying planes, because if you spread them at high altitude, they would be completely useless, having been diluted in the atmosphere and remaining aloft due to winds and updrafts. Just like anything "chem-" would be in a trail. It's not doing any good diluted that much.
These facts are known.
Does that mean they are doing it today? No.
Does that mean what believers call "being sprayed" today is somehow toxic? No.
Does it negate all the decades of scientific study on the phenomena of contrails? No.
Sorry, but if you want to claim "chemtrails", you need to prove there are actually "chem-" in those trails. This piece of history doesn't do that, it's only a deflection away from the fact that no chemical evidence is available.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker



The 15-member committee said in a report that the compound, zinc cadmium sulfide, which was secretly sprayed from airplanes, rooftops and moving vehicles in 33 urban and rural areas of the United States and Canada, did not expose residents to chemical levels considered harmful.

The panel, which looked at the toxicity of the compound and its components as well as exposure data collected by the military, said it was highly unlikely that people were exposed to significant levels of the most dangerous component, cadmium. In occupational studies and studies on animals, cadmium inhaled in high doses has been found to be a cause of lung cancer.

In most of the Army tests, people were exposed to such small amounts of the compound that they would have been likely to get higher doses of cadmium from environmental and industrial sources, the report said.

Source

Notice how the article says the chemicals were SPRAYED form airplanes. Not dumped in one mass but sprayed. I wonder what that spray would look like. Maybe a contrail perhaps.


Like my title says - It happend before, so why not now?

edit on 12-6-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)


It also mentioned releases from rooftops and vehicles, so should we talk about rooftrails and cartrails? Are you minimizing the potential of ongoing chemical operations from rooftops? i mean it happened then, then why not now?
edit on 12-6-2011 by firepilot because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-6-2011 by firepilot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


First off I would like to say thanks Uncinus for posting civily. I know your a debunker but I don't place you in that group of knee-jerk reactionaries I spoke of and who came into this thread without reading the OP and posting pictures of a boat trying to make me look stupid. As I pointed out some debunkers are without class but you certainly are not part of that group.


I have very little trust in the government so to me the possibility of some secret project being perpetrated against the population is all to likely. They have done it before and frankly I have less trust in our government today than I would have had 50 years ago. Its not like science has run out of chemicals to test on us and the US army has proven its willing to do just that. For now, there is no 100% proof of any project but then again, there was no proof of the U2 spy plane untill one fell out of the sky.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by liejunkie01
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


Just one question before I read any further into this.

What is your definition of a chemtrail. I only ask for clarity if I decide to take this any further.

Thank you. Civility is the key.
edit on 12-6-2011 by liejunkie01 because: (no reason given)


Well, I know my opinion on chemtrails is different from wiki's. To me if a aircraft is set up to disperse any chemicals beside's the normal engine exhaust, that would be a chemtrail. To me cloud seeding is a chemtrail albeit an explained one.


The chemtrail conspiracy theory holds that some trails left by aircraft are actually chemical or biological agents deliberately sprayed at high altitudes for a purpose undisclosed to the general public in clandestine programs directed by government officials.[1]

Wiki

It seems the majority of the chemtrail debate rages around unexplained trails not explained ones. I lump them togethar because, well, they are a trail of chemicals left by a aircraft.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by FreeSpeaker
 


Thanks, I don't think there's anything to be gained from being impolite.

It's all about the evidence. While proof of chemtrails is possible (sample the trail for example) proof of there not being chemtrails is impossible (you'd have to have sampled all trails ever). The former is hard to do, the latter is, as stated, impossible.

So all you've got to go on is various pieces of evidence, from which you attempt to then give a probability to the theory. One should also do due diligence on the evidence - check to see if it's correct, reliable, and relevant. As a debunker my main focus is on checking that evidence - to identify and remove the bunk. I may stray occasionally to debate some interpretations, or even get sucked into essentially semantic discussions, but really, it's all about the evidence.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by firepilot
It also mentioned releases from rooftops and vehicles, so should we talk about rooftrails and cartrails? Are you minimizing the potential of ongoing chemical operations from rooftops? i mean it happened then, then why not now?
edit on 12-6-2011 by firepilot because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-6-2011 by firepilot because: (no reason given)


I know you're here just argue and derail any debate so I won't humor you. Your belief in your own opinion is almost as bad a fanatical christian's belief in their faith.
edit on 12-6-2011 by FreeSpeaker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

I have very little trust in the government so to me the possibility of some secret project being perpetrated against the population is all to likely. They have done it before and frankly I have less trust in our government today than I would have had 50 years ago. Its not like science has run out of chemicals to test on us and the US army has proven its willing to do just that. For now, there is no 100% proof of any project but then again, there was no proof of the U2 spy plane untill one fell out of the sky.


Neither are good examples. Its not 1960, and people did know about the U-2, but it was not all that well known ab out. But people had seen them flying around and at bases. Its also not 1960, there is digital photography, and the internet too, not to mention its been 12 years during the information age of this chemtrail hoax.

Its not that you chemmies do not have 100 percent proof, you have 0 percent proof. Actually it should be less than 0 percent proof, because there have been hoaxes used as proof, and each time there is some supposed evidence, its just the same debunked photos and videos as before. How many days before the KC-10 video is reposted? If there was proof, why would chemtrail promoters take photos from airliners.net, strip out all the information and copyright data, and then claim it is evidence?

If there was all this proof, chemmies would not be falling for the same hoaxes time and time again.



posted on Jun, 12 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus
Look, for example, at photos of corexit or pesticide being sprayed. The trail starts at the plane. You don't generally see much of the trail in the photos, but it looks like it quickly dissipates, rather than persist as a cloud.


Take a look at this.


The Prospects for Successful
Air-Defense Against Chemically-Armed
Tactical Ballistic Missile
Attacks on Urban Areas

THEODORE A. POSTOL
March 1991
DEFENSE AND ARMS CONTROL STUDIES PROGRAM

Center for International Studies
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

However, since the air temperature at higher altitudes can be as low as -70 °
Fahrenheit, it is likely that dispersal of chemicals at these altitudes would result in the
formation of considerably larger aerosol particles that would fall at still higher rates.
These particles would initially be frozen (rather than being a liquid that suffers
evaporation as at lower altitudes) until they drop below about 2 kilometers altitude.
Since the cloud of large particles (of diameters perhaps of thousands of Am) would fall
quite fast (perhaps 10 or more m/sec), it would likely be distributed in a column of air
of only a few kilometers altitude. In a wind field of .9 m/sec, such a cloud could deposit
a large fraction of its total chemical content on the ground over a downwind distance of
several kilometers.

Source

Even though this is discussing shooting down a chemicaly armed scud missile you can see that dispersion at high altitude will freeze the chemical untill it falls to a much lower altitude. It even states the particles themselves would be larger at a high altitude.





top topics
 
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join