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.

 

Dailymail UK Thread On Chemtrails: How Jet Trails Block Out The Sunshine

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 11:10 PM
link   
Here is an interesting article for the Chemtrail believers. Also, notice how the website site stopped accepting posts only after 242 comments. Anyone on ATS in the UK that can comment on this? I can comment about the USA blocking the sun everyday: The day begins clear and end-ups in a haze everyday.

www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-128 9893/Attack-vapours--jet-trails-block-sunshine.html


This is a chemtrail thread for believers but other are welcomed. Please only post positive comment towards posters and do not discredit them. No need to be negative this is a brainstorming session.




In a 2009 Met Office study into the effects of contrails, scientists from a number of UK institutions used a weather satellite to track a large military aircraft as it circled over the North Sea. The team expected high-level winds to disperse its contrails without trace. But instead they helped to form clouds, which the researchers were astonished to find eventually covered a massive 20,000 square miles. Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...



The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline. We are no longer accepting comments on this article.


A good qoute from a commenter:




Anyone in Royton want to talk about this? - blizzard drago, royton, 29/6/2010 22:50 Click to rate Rating 13 Report abuse These chemtrails will not go away. I phoned the environment agency and the CAA about these 'chemtrails'. Nobody knew anything about them, unusual for a Govmt. agency, that! Geezer at CAA gave me the usual bull about contrails and then asked me if I had any evidence. I told him 20,000,000 internet sites can't all be wrong. Anyone who has young children will be aware of the so-called, 'vomiting sickness' affecting their chidren in the last couple of years, there was none of this when we were young. Article in the Mail a couple of weeks ago spoke of and I quote " THE ANNUAL SICKNESS BUG ". When, in the name of the Lord, did it become annual. Has anyone noticed that everybody they meet has got a niggling cough that won't go away? Good news for the pharmaceutical companies. Has anyone noticed that they are forgetting things that happened in the last week? has anyone noticed that they are feeling lethargic and in a state of ennui? Has anyone noticed that their Planet is being Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...




edit on 21-6-2011 by afw2121 because: Forgot to hit enter




posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by afw2121
 


Here is another great quote:



"any thinking person has now realised that planes are spraying us with chemicals and have been since the mid 90s. Call yourself a reporter, I call you a weak minded person who thinks your job and big pay are more important than getting the truth out , don't forget you and your family are breathing in this stuff too." - Emanuele Ciriachi, London, 29/6/2010 5:17 Click to rate Rating 48



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by afw2121
 


Wow! There are alot of posts from people in the US. Read this comment:




What a joke of an article. The picture is "CHEMTRAILS" and this is a propaganda piece. People are apparently beginning to notice them and ask questions, so what better to have some yellow journalist to write a fluff piece of propaganda. The "Chemtrails" are criss cross the entire world and scientists are saying that they've darkened the earth 20% in some stupid effort to "cool" the earth and protect it from the Sun. The chemicals used are making people world wide sick and asthma has increased like 300% since the 70's. The people quoted in this article are LYING. Vapor or "Contrails" will disperse after a minute or two. Chemtrails, spread out and cause your skies to become milky white and will last for the entire day. You might wake up to beautiful blue skies and puffy clouds and as soon as they start laying down the chemtrails, in a matter of hours you'll have ugly milky white skies. - Mary, Oregon USA, 29/6/2010 1:52



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by afw2121
 


Here is someone in Australia:




Think about it people if any one person of average intelligence took the time to study and observe CT's they would eventually come to the conclusion they surely exist. Now if you were someone who had never heard of ,or actually seen a CT (you would have to be blind or work in a cave) you may simply shrug it off with words like "ah your not serious" or "wouldn't surprise me what the government gets up to", or even, "nah i dont believe that crap",, You wouldn't go on a site so aggressively debunking a fact your not fully aware of,,But what you have here on this site are people (probably the same 1 or 2 individuals) actually going out of there way to consistently mock, make up utter rubbish and using intelligent content laced with deceptive lies NOT to try and convince YOU that CT's don't exist, (they can never do that) but REALISE that these paid trolls are here to put doubt in the minds of people who come across sites like this that are not fully aware of CT's existence - Frank, Melbourne Australia, 28/6/2010 10:24



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 11:34 PM
link   
OP, this article lends more to the argument of contrails than it does chemtrails. However, the health concerns over these "vapors" expressed by the commentors is the aspect of the chemtrail argument that I am not inclined to dismiss. There are many issues involved in this topic that have yet to be explained to disprove chemtrails.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 11:47 PM
link   
OP, the fact that there are a number individuals on ATS who jump on these topics or continuously post threads to debunk the chemtrail theories at any given time of the day or night and rarely show up in any other threads gives reason enough to believe there is something to be concerned about.

If a person thinks the chemtrail theories are pure nonsense, why would he bother? Why spend your day arguing with people you believe to speak nonsense? Why vehemently defend the government is there is truly nothing to defend? Why do they care what allegations people make about the government if the government has nothing to hide?

Either they are assisting in the cover-up, or it makes them feel important. Anyone with a shred of self-esteem wouldn't feel the need to spend so much time arguing an issue if they truly believed it was a joke.

I believe one would find the definition of such a person under the word "pathetic" in any dictionary of the English language.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by NightGypsy
OP, the fact that there are a number individuals on ATS who jump on these topics or continuously post threads to debunk the chemtrail theories at any given time of the day or night and rarely show up in any other threads gives reason enough to believe there is something to be concerned about.

If a person thinks the chemtrail theories are pure nonsense, why would he bother? Why spend your day arguing with people you believe to speak nonsense? Why vehemently defend the government is there is truly nothing to defend? Why do they care what allegations people make about the government if the government has nothing to hide?

Either they are assisting in the cover-up, or it makes them feel important. Anyone with a shred of self-esteem wouldn't feel the need to spend so much time arguing an issue if they truly believed it was a joke.

I believe one would find the definition of such a person under the word "pathetic" in any dictionary of the English language.


Well put and I will whole heartedly agree!



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by NightGypsy
 


removed
edit on 22-6-2011 by afw2121 because: Removed.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by NightGypsy
 


I agree.

I really like this qoute from the person in Australia (half way around the world from me). He says it the best for us Chemtrail believers.




Think about it people if any one person of average intelligence took the time to study and observe CT's they would eventually come to the conclusion they surely exist. Now if you were someone who had never heard of ,or actually seen a CT (you would have to be blind or work in a cave) you may simply shrug it off with words like "ah your not serious" or "wouldn't surprise me what the government gets up to", or even, "nah i dont believe that crap",, You wouldn't go on a site so aggressively debunking a fact your not fully aware of,,But what you have here on this site are people (probably the same 1 or 2 individuals) actually going out of there way to consistently mock, make up utter rubbish and using intelligent content laced with deceptive lies NOT to try and convince YOU that CT's don't exist, (they can never do that) but REALISE that these paid trolls are here to put doubt in the minds of people who come across sites like this that are not fully aware of CT's existence - Frank, Melbourne Australia, 28/6/2010 10:24

edit on 22-6-2011 by afw2121 because: na



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Any reports on the chem/contrail's argument even if it's a falseflag is still useful to us because once it appears in a newspaper mainstream people will begin to notice and the stone of truth will start to smash through the lies.
When i hear the word troll or dissinfo agent it makes me sad and i have never used these word's to describe anyone here and yes i agree it is strange how so many so called experts have the time to waste on a subject they consider a hoax.
Now throughout my life i have found 1 rule that has given me an advantage over most people i meet because i can use a negative trait in someone to my advantage.
In mathematics a equation even when proven to be false can still be useful because you know it is false so if you catch someone in a lie you can
1.pull them up on it causing them to recoil and strike out at you.
2.don't pull them up on it causing them to think they have got away with the lie and you have a base upon which you can build on knowing that information from them is more likely to be false.
so i myself feel it is better to use there false statement's to your advantage and then take a look at what else that person may be interested in and from this you can build a good idea of what is really going on especially if you think that person is payed to lie to you.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by afw2121
 


Not only is the article not about chemtrails, it specifically says this:


The phenomenon occurs when aircraft fly above 25,000ft, where the air temperature is around minus 30C. This causes water vapour emitted by the engines to crystallise and form the familiar white streaks across the sky, known as contrails.

Your own source.

Did someone just use the word "pathetic?"



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


that article debunks itself minus 30 is not really cold enough for contrail's or cirrus clouds to form
quote:perse samples of the submicrometer aerosols (50–200 nm in diameter) to cirrusrelevant temperatures between –45 and –60◦C and a range of relative humidity above
ice-saturated conditions (RHi) to map out regions of RHi and temperature space where
significant ice nucleation rates occur.

link:www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net...
so that alone shows that the report there has not been researched properly and as a result bring's more questions than it answers.

edit on 22-6-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by NightGypsy


If a person thinks the chemtrail theories are pure nonsense, why would he bother? Why spend your day arguing with people you believe to speak nonsense?


I can only describe my own point of view.
Recently, I have seen a trend in internet chatter, that people wholeheartedly distrust the government.
So much so, that they make an effort to spread ideas based on bad knowledge, invented facts, otherwise incorrect understandings of science, as well as attempt indoctrinate new believers.....who then continue to spread incorrect information passed off as fact.

My thoughts have always been -- that if there is no one out there to correct under-researched claims....I feel like I am filling a void. You may not see it as a void....but I do.

Example....imagine you surfing the net, and you come across a topic where a whole group of people have come to a consensus regarding a certain topical subject....which you knew was founded on a baseless claim.
Might you attempt to correct these people ?

This is what happened to me. This is how I feel.
I am not "paid" by anybody.
My name is Randy Leifer, I am an artist and a scenic artist living in Los Angeles CA, USA.
I have nothing to hide.

I will gladly examine any info you have that might go against my beliefs.
I will not insult anyone as a means of attempting to "win" a debate.

What else do you want from me (?), that allows me to prove that I am just a person that does not agree ythe "chemtrails" as described in wikipedia...
..."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."



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 



that article debunks itself minus 30 is not really cold enough for contrail's or cirrus clouds to form
quote:perse samples of the submicrometer aerosols (50–200 nm in diameter) to cirrusrelevant temperatures between –45 and –60◦C and a range of relative humidity above
ice-saturated conditions (RHi) to map out regions of RHi and temperature space where
significant ice nucleation rates occur.


Why are you quoting a paper about heterogenic ice crystal formation? In any event, the article did say -30 degrees when it should have said -40. That doesn't "debunk" it. The point is that it is about the effects of contrails, the naturally occurring by product of jet engines under certain circumstances, not chemtrails, which are an imagined plot to destroy all life on Earth.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by EyeDontKnow
 


Yes i can see your point of view and that comment has nothing to do with members like yourself but i do have a great mistrust of governments the fluoride n our water supply is a key reason why i have this mistrust and then when you look at N.H.S websites and see the lies they pedal about how fluoride is good for you heightens my mistrust further then add to that the mercury content found in tooth fillings then the vast testing done by the military without the public knowledge so as i said in my earlier post when you find a lie then would that not then prove to you that the person who told you the lie is then untrustworthy



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


The report is inaccurate and can we not then agree that the reporter has not done the right research and therefore his report is false as a result

edit on 22-6-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)

As for why i posted that link because it proves that the report of the temp needed for contrail's to form is false.
edit on 22-6-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 



The report is inaccurate and can we not then agree that the reporter has not done the right research and therefore his report is then false as a result


We can agree that the reporter typed a "3" when he or she should have typed a "4." Everything else seems to be well sourced and typo free. You still haven't explained why you linked to a paper about heterogenic ice formation.

Edit to add: Ah, I see. There is a difference between "wrong" and "false."
edit on 22-6-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


did i not?
sorry i thought i had it was the first paper i had to hand that contained the information on temp required for ice nucleation there are many but it was just to provide a source of information to explain why the report was inaccurate after all if i was to post information that was inaccurate you would be the first to attack it would you not?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by NightGypsy
OP, the fact that there are a number individuals on ATS who jump on these topics or continuously post threads to debunk the chemtrail theories at any given time of the day or night and rarely show up in any other threads gives reason enough to believe there is something to be concerned about.

If a person thinks the chemtrail theories are pure nonsense, why would he bother? Why spend your day arguing with people you believe to speak nonsense? Why vehemently defend the government is there is truly nothing to defend? Why do they care what allegations people make about the government if the government has nothing to hide?

Either they are assisting in the cover-up, or it makes them feel important. Anyone with a shred of self-esteem wouldn't feel the need to spend so much time arguing an issue if they truly believed it was a joke.

I believe one would find the definition of such a person under the word "pathetic" in any dictionary of the English language.

YES! This same phenomenon of people being obsessed with that which they insist is not real occurs on other topics too, especially theism and creationism. People who don't believe in God seem unable to stop flaming and bashing every single thread or comment about it, they stay parked in the Religion section and travel around in gangs it seems. Pathetic or psychotic or whatever, it isn't healthy for people to focus on things they don't believe in.
edit on 22-6-2011 by SaberTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 



did i not?
sorry i thought i had it was the first paper i had to hand that contained the information on temp required for ice nucleation there are many but it was just to provide a source of information to explain why the report was inaccurate after all if i was to post information that was inaccurate you would be the first to attack it would you not?


You added your explanation while I was typing my post, so I edited mine to reflect that. A single typographical mistake does not invalidate an entire article. If you were to make an honest mistake, I certainly would not "attack" you, I would try to correct you. Is there anything in the article you do not agree with?



new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join