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.

 

New World Order, China, Chemtrails and Big Business.

page: 10
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 

They are dropping very small quantities of dry ice, salt (sometimes), and silver iodide.

Yes, the effects are of concern and have been studied in great detail. The questions have been answered.
There are many environmental impact statements for weather modification.
www.platteriverprogram.org...
www.usbr.gov...
www.mcwra.co.monterey.ca.us...
www.water.ca.gov...
edit on 6/29/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus

Originally posted by luxordelphi
I just rewatched several times the video in the first link of the opening thread post on Olgacom and the former employee whistleblower saying that Olgacom is logistics for chemicals and chemical waste supplying this to commercial airlines like, I think she mentioned KLM and one other I can't catch. She says that commercial airlines are being used to dump chemicals and also being used to dump chemical waste on regularly scheduled and traveled routes which probably is supposed to be in some sort of special dump area and not in the sky. They are doing this under the guise of supplying catering. She is being threatened for breaking her non-disclosure agreement and her online activity is claimed to be monitored and a veiled threat issued towards her friends.


I'm pretty sure that's a hoax. Olgacom does not seem to be a real company. Their web site contains just a few stock photos, and was only just set up.


Good catch. Have had a cursory look see and even CIECH Group ( a legit. co. - I can tell based on some of the names and bios of their negotiators) also shows a June 29, 2011 date for articles on contracts made in 2003. May be a change to the matrix in order to eliminate Olgacom, now a blown identity because of the whistleblower, from linked groups.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


So what's stopping them from experimenting with other things to make it more potent? And that should be enough evidence to realize that they could be experimenting with other substances.

And how can you be sure that there is no long-term effect with dropping these things? Dry-ice is made of CO2 so when dropping small quantities for a long time builds up doesn't it? Dropping small quantities for many trips still accumulates to make a big batch.

You also have no idea what they are dropping and take their word for it. Just because they say it isn't bad for you doesn't mean they are right. People used to say smoking wasn't bad for you but it turned out to be the opposite. So how can we be sure that what they say is in fact true? How can we be sure that they are dropping what they say they are dropping and the quantities they say they are dropping?

Ultimately, that is my concern. We have been deceived in the past and we will be deceived in the future.
edit on 29-6-2011 by Equinox99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 

Make what "more potent"? You need to have some understanding of what cloud seeding is before you can make a statement like that. It is not the government which is cloud seeding, it is small independent companies which are regulated by their local governments and the FAA. They are not free to go around throwing stuff out of their airplanes whenever and where ever they feel like it. That is not only illegal, it makes no sense. They don't get paid to experiment, they get paid to make rain (and reduce hail).

The CO2 in dry ice is taken out of the air in the first place. When it sublimates, it goes back into the air. There isn't enough of it to make any difference.


So how can we be sure that what they say is in fact true? How can we be sure that they are dropping what they say they are dropping and the quantities they say they are dropping?

Because they are independent companies which are closely regulated by local governments. They are required to provide detailed reports of their activities. Reports which can be verified.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Equinox99

Originally posted by Uncinus
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Cloud seeding (for rain augmentation, which is what we are talking about here) is not geoengineering. Geoengineering alters the global climate for years. Cloud seeding alters the local weather for an hour or two.


Regardless if the words are broken down it forms the same meaning. Cloud ceding is throwing something at a lower atmosphere to make rain clouds. Geo-engineering is high altitudes to reflect some sunlight away from the Earth to make it cooler.



No, its not. How many times will you chemtrailers repeating post misleading nonsense like that. Cloud seeding does not make rain clouds, its trying to coax a little bit more out of existing storm clouds.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by chrismicha77
reply to post by firepilot
 


You of all people should know that it gets warmer the higher you get, closer to the stratosphere...but anyway.

Give me some suggestions on what you would do, to prove they existed, if you believed in them. I'll do whatever I can to get the answers!


Then why is there snow on mountains? How do cirrus ice crystals exist?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 




Who else is doing weather modification?
The latest data from the World Meteorological Organization compiled in 2000 listed 74
projects ongoing in 23 countries worldwide (WMO, 2000). In 2001 the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) documented 66 projects conducted in the
western U.S. Project objectives included fog dispersal, snowpack and rainfall
enhancement, and hail suppression.


23 countries and 66 documented projects in Western US alone, now how can you be sure they are only dropping silver iodide, various salts, and dry ice?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Equinox99
Cloud ceding is throwing something at a lower atmosphere to make rain clouds.


Not sure if this has been picked up, but no, that is not what cloud seeding is.

Cloud seeding does not under any circumstances ever make clouds.

Unlike high altitude commercial jet airliner engines, which sometimes do.

(Edit: although the clouds they make are of ice particles and so high up that they can never produce preciptation that reaches the ground - though virga may be observed at times)
edit on 29-6-2011 by Essan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 




23 countries and 66 documented projects in Western US alone, now how can you be sure they are only dropping silver iodide, various salts, and dry ice?

They use them for a very good reason, they work.
There is no reason to think they would use anything else.
edit on 6/29/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Well, those selling cloud seeding claim they work. Some of us are still rather dubious



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Equinox99
reply to post by Phage
 




Who else is doing weather modification?
The latest data from the World Meteorological Organization compiled in 2000 listed 74
projects ongoing in 23 countries worldwide (WMO, 2000). In 2001 the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) documented 66 projects conducted in the
western U.S. Project objectives included fog dispersal, snowpack and rainfall
enhancement, and hail suppression.


23 countries and 66 documented projects in Western US alone, now how can you be sure they are only dropping silver iodide, various salts, and dry ice?


Do you have evidence that they are secretly using anything else? no, you do not. You are just playing what if and speculating.

I do not even know of any projects in the US that use hygroscopic flares, everything I know of is mostly AgI, and then dry ice used in North Dakota.

23 projects? Seems a bit high to me, but even if that is true, that does not mean there are 23 projects always going on. They are all seasonal (summer or winter), and flown with small single and twin engine propellor planes.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Hi there phage i asked a question and i wondered what your thoughts are on it?
I will post only a sample don't want to be double posting

Maybe i can explain that a little better we all know that light has a wide spectrum one end gamma rays and am radio waves at the other end but my question relates to ultra violet, visible spectrum and infra red.
Would such a filter [aluminium/barium] block out any of the visible light spectrum and if so would it be the blue/indigo/violet part of the spectrum[light with shorter wave lengths]?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 


From the wiki article on Rayleigh Scattering - en.wikipedia.org... and info that David Keith's proposal would use platelets 10 micro-meters across - ieet.org... it would appear to me that those particles would be so large as to affect all wavelengths of light - they would reflect red as much as blue, as much as everythign in between, and so I think there would be no change in colour, but there would be change in intesity since they would be reflecting some of it back into space (but maybe not, since they'd also be reflecting some of it back to earth too..??)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Thanks for your input but it was phage i directed the question at as i feel he would have a better grasp on the question i am asking no offence.

ps first link was a dud.
edit on 29-6-2011 by djcarlosa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 


Why make it personal - the information I gave is either correct or not.....



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


I thought when you reply to a member it was a personal response to that person and as my question was directed at phage [because he claims to have a wide range of knowage on many scientific subjects]
And i was interested on his answer i also posted that i meant no offence by this.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 


If yuo want a personal reply make it U2U - otherwise everything is public.

I dont' take offence - I just find it curious that you're not prepared to consider the information because it didnt' come from phage.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by djcarlosa
 

SRM strategies really call for any "blocking" of solar radiation, they call for the selective scattering of sunlight. It is this scattering effect which makes the sky blue.

It is mostly the size of the particles which is important and that is determined by the wavelength of light which is to be affected. Large particles (like the ice crystals in contrails) scatter all wavelengths. That's why clouds appear white and that's also why cirrus clouds (and contrails) are thought to lead to a net increase in temperatures. They reflect some light back into space but allow some to reach Earth's surface. The light that reaches the surface heats the ground and is radiated as infrared. The trouble is, those same clouds now reflect that infrared back into the atmosphere instead of letting it escape into space.

So the idea is to use particles which are small enough to scatter shorter wavelengths but to not affect the longer infrared wavelengths. What's that look like? Here's what Edward Teller says:

Interestingly enough, such Rayleigh scattering of sunlight, performed by stratospherically-deployed aerosols whose diameters are several-fold smaller than the wavelength of light itself, will selectively scatter back into space the largely deleterious ultraviolet component of sunlight while diminishing the light that we see – and that plants use for photosynthesis – only imperceptibly.

From the human perspective, skies would be bluer, twilights would be more visually spectacular, plants would be less stressed by UV photodamage and thus would be more productive, and children playing out-of-doors would be much less susceptible to sunburn (and thus to skin dysplasias and dermal cancers as adults), if this stratospheric Rayleigh scattering system were to be deployed.

www.newruskincollege.com...

edit on 6/29/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Note that Phage's reply is for use of sulphate aerosols, which particles are a lot smaller than teh proposal by David Keith for using aluminium & barium platelets.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks for the information so item's in the sky that maybe inbound [comet elenin] that would shift to shorter wavelengths (blue) would be harder to see through a smaller particle aluminium/barium mixture covering the sky from ground based telescopes?




top topics



 
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join