Chemtrail goop? CA Bay Area people?

reply to post by kalamatas


No all spider web is sticky. Spiders can spin both kinds.

en.wikipedia.org...

Spiders do not usually adhere to their own webs, because they are able to spin both sticky and non-sticky types of silk, and are careful to travel across only non-sticky portions of the web. However, they are not immune to their own glue. Some of the strands of the web are sticky, and others are not. For example, if a spider has chosen to wait along the outer edges of its web, it may spin a non-sticky prey or signal line to the web hub to monitor web movement.

I would suspect that the "parachute" strands of a ballooning spider are non-sticky, as they would work better for travel (gather less dust). That would also explain the wool-like substance composed of multiple strands. I think it would still self adhere under light pressure - explaining the "dissolving" as it occupies less and less space.

Spider silk is fascinating stuff:
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Uncinus


Very interesting. Thanks for that info.

I was on a walk the other day and spotted a hideously large spider called a banded garden spider. I took a few pictures of it. It didn't like that, and tilted it's abdomen towards me a shot silk at me! That made me jump. Yuck!

Originally posted by kalamatas
reply to post by adeclerk

But let's refrain from certainties when in truth, having not seen the stuff yet, we really don't know what the heck it is.

Interesting that you say that when your title (even though a question) presumes that "chemtrails" could be a possible origin. Which is fallacious, given that there is no evidence suggesting they exist.

Originally posted by thirdeyeflight

This is from about 830 this morning in Auburn ca

Can you change the video privacy please so we can view it. Thanks.

The thing I removed was fixed before I finished posting. Please disregard this post.

reply to post by v1rtu0s0


That's a horrible thing to say to people.

Please post evidence.

I am not in the Bay Area, but I love people there. Support what you say with evidence, please.

Link to information about earthquakes and haarp:

presscore.ca...

Recent quake info in the Bay Area:

latimesblogs.latimes.com...

reply to post by kalamatas


Good Lord!

It's the Winged Serpent!

And I am NOT being sarcastic....

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by kalamatas
reply to post by adeclerk

But let's refrain from certainties when in truth, having not seen the stuff yet, we really don't know what the heck it is.

Interesting that you say that when your title (even though a question) presumes that "chemtrails" could be a possible origin. Which is fallacious, given that there is no evidence suggesting they exist.

Where have you been? There's a boatload of evidence they exist. Hence the reason so many people believe they're real. Saying it's "fallicious" is just an ignorant statement. If you want to use the word debatable, that works for me, but fallacious? Hmmm, not so much. You're not a very good debunker. At least the other debunkers make good arguments.

In any event, I'm glad you find the title interesting. The first thought of the person who found these was chemtrails, because of the heavy dripping trails that were being laid in the sky at the time. And after seeing that other woman's video, apparently we're not the only ones. I don't understand why you people have a problem with speculation? So what if that's what she suspected they might be first? It doesn't mean anyone's definitively made up their minds. I'm sorry, but I don't feel nit-picking is constructive contribution to a thread.

And please remember this isn't a chemtrail debunking thread. It's a "did you see this stuff?" and "what could this substance be?" thread, topped with a nice dollop of specualtion of chemtrail correlation, for those of us that believe crap is being sprayed out of planes (which the government admits it does mind you).

reply to post by antoinemarionette


I'm sorry, you lost me at winged serpent.

What are you referring to? The crap falling out of the sky?

Originally posted by kalamatas

Where have you been? There's a boatload of evidence they exist.

None of it credible, let alone verifiable.

All the evidence I have ever seen - ALL OF IT - is either hearsay, obvious fiction, or, at best, really bad attempts at science.

It is unfortunate that people do not check the evidence for its credibility, or, at worst, embrace it simply because it conforms to their preconceptions of how they think the world is.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I agree, and they are only the honest believers, who I actually feel a little sorry for, given all the rubbish they are presented with. The ones that really anger me are the ones who knowingly peddle in deliberate fakery and misrepresentation. The disappointment is that so many people seem to want chemtrails to be real and proven that all such evidence is then re-used by them in discussion to people who already know its crap.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Of course there is going to be hogwash out there. The hogwash is the speculation and correlation based upon zero evidence. You know there is verifiable evidence, hence the mission here of the "usual supsects" to debunk it. Once again not going into a debate about their validity.

I take all my information with an open mind yet discernment. To me admitted use of particulate matter being let in the skies, previous admitting of government aerosol experimentation, air samples, soil samples and actual personal confirmation from "someone who'd know", is good enough evidence for me to believe something's wrong.

If you're here to argue me on it, please don't waste your or my time. I will not engage. If you're here to sway or argue with other folks, please pick another thread.

Originally posted by kalamatas
Where have you been? There's a boatload of evidence they exist. Hence the reason so many people believe they're real. Saying it's "fallicious" is just an ignorant statement. If you want to use the word debatable, that works for me, but fallacious? Hmmm, not so much. You're not a very good debunker. At least the other debunkers make good arguments.

None of the evidence is independently verifiable, or even from a credible source. The sources will readily sell you books, "orgone devices" and "chemtrail" remedies, though.

Originally posted by kalamatas
In any event, I'm glad you find the title interesting. The first thought of the person who found these was chemtrails, because of the heavy dripping trails that were being laid in the sky at the time. And after seeing that other woman's video, apparently we're not the only ones. I don't understand why you people have a problem with speculation? So what if that's what she suspected they might be first? It doesn't mean anyone's definitively made up their minds. I'm sorry, but I don't feel nit-picking is constructive contribution to a thread.

She is speculating things based on speculations. Instead, she should be looking for evidence, then drawing a conclusion. She has speculated that chemtrails exist, and that whatever substance she has handled has somehow fallen 6 miles, nearly vertically from the trails above, only to land at her feet. I shouldn't have to explain why that is impossible.

Originally posted by kalamatas
And please remember this isn't a chemtrail debunking thread. It's a "did you see this stuff?" and "what could this substance be?" thread, topped with a nice dollop of specualtion of chemtrail correlation, for those of us that believe crap is being sprayed out of planes (which the government admits it does mind you).

Please remember that this is a public forum, where people may readily call you out for speculation and false presumptions about a topic. You've falsely decided that "chemtrails" exist, which, given the lack of evidence, is absurd.

I wrote a brief article on spider ballooning and "chemwebs" over on Metabunk. There are some interesting accounts of it going back to the 1700s

metabunk.org...

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

I agree, and they are only the honest believers, who I actually feel a little sorry for, given all the rubbish they are presented with. The ones that really anger me are the ones who knowingly peddle in deliberate fakery and misrepresentation. The disappointment is that so many people seem to want chemtrails to be real and proven that all such evidence is then re-used by them in discussion to people who already know its crap.

Who the hell wants chemtrails to be real? You know, I agree people come up with some preposterous correlations, but there is so much other crap being fed to people out there about other issues, that chemtrail belief is not such a big deal, if it in fact does not exist. The time spent by some people to batter it all down, is a bit of a red flag. I could think of better uses of people's time than to obsess over proving people wrong who see that the phenomena exists. Everyone has a brain of their own and when truly no harm is being done, it's best to live and let live. There's no arguing the government does messed up things to it's own people, it is undeniable, inarguable fact.

Don't feel sorry for people because they do not see things the way you do. Some people see beyond the veil of "facts" that shroud other facts that essentially prove denial or conspiracy. Some people prefer to take their "facts" and settle comfortably into them. And it DOES go both ways. But in the grand scheme of things no one is being harmed, except for in the instance that people are unknowingly breathing crap into their lungs. So really "live and let live".

Thanks.

Originally posted by kalamatas
The time spent by some people to batter it all down, is a bit of a red flag. I could think of better uses of people's time than to obsess over proving people wrong who see that the phenomena exists.

Not that I'm obsessed, but I never really thought that was a very good argument. Lots of people spend LOTS of time on highly trivial things. Do you get suspicious because your great aunt watches a lot of TV? Doesn't she have anything better to do with her time? Clearly she's a government agent!

Debunking is a hobby. I think it also has a net positive effect if done politely and honestly. Perhaps there are better things to do with my time, but I chose this.

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by kalamatas
Where have you been? There's a boatload of evidence they exist. Hence the reason so many people believe they're real. Saying it's "fallicious" is just an ignorant statement. If you want to use the word debatable, that works for me, but fallacious? Hmmm, not so much. You're not a very good debunker. At least the other debunkers make good arguments.

None of the evidence is independently verifiable, or even from a credible source. The sources will readily sell you books, "orgone devices" and "chemtrail" remedies, though.

Originally posted by kalamatas
In any event, I'm glad you find the title interesting. The first thought of the person who found these was chemtrails, because of the heavy dripping trails that were being laid in the sky at the time. And after seeing that other woman's video, apparently we're not the only ones. I don't understand why you people have a problem with speculation? So what if that's what she suspected they might be first? It doesn't mean anyone's definitively made up their minds. I'm sorry, but I don't feel nit-picking is constructive contribution to a thread.

She is speculating things based on speculations. Instead, she should be looking for evidence, then drawing a conclusion. She has speculated that chemtrails exist, and that whatever substance she has handled has somehow fallen 6 miles, nearly vertically from the trails above, only to land at her feet. I shouldn't have to explain why that is impossible.

Originally posted by kalamatas
And please remember this isn't a chemtrail debunking thread. It's a "did you see this stuff?" and "what could this substance be?" thread, topped with a nice dollop of specualtion of chemtrail correlation, for those of us that believe crap is being sprayed out of planes (which the government admits it does mind you).

Please remember that this is a public forum, where people may readily call you out for speculation and false presumptions about a topic. You've falsely decided that "chemtrails" exist, which, given the lack of evidence, is absurd.

Hey, "news flash!", this is a conspiracy forum and in the "chemtrail-geoengineering" section. Do I really need to say more? Do you know what a conspiracy is? Is speculation illegal here? Quit going on with your "lack of evidence". That phrase doesn't "prove" anything. And continuing to say there is no evidence doesn't make it all go away either. These people, as well as myself, speculate from evidence. Not sylphs, not orgone generators, not airplanes too high to see they must be cloaked.

The woman in the video actually stated that the junk started falling before some of the trail blew her way, so no one said vertical. And if you're talking about initial reported incident, no one claimed vertical drop there either as the stuff was found in multiple places over a few mile range.

I have a pretty good idea of what absurd is. Thank you and have a nice day.

Originally posted by Uncinus

Originally posted by kalamatas
The time spent by some people to batter it all down, is a bit of a red flag. I could think of better uses of people's time than to obsess over proving people wrong who see that the phenomena exists.

Not that I'm obsessed, but I never really thought that was a very good argument. Lots of people spend LOTS of time on highly trivial things. Do you get suspicious because your great aunt watches a lot of TV? Doesn't she have anything better to do with her time? Clearly she's a government agent!

Debunking is a hobby. I think it also has a net positive effect if done politely and honestly. Perhaps there are better things to do with my time, but I chose this.

edit on 24-10-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)

No I don't get suspicious when my great aunt watches a lot of t.v., but it's probably not good for her brain. If that's what you're into, then debunk away. And I do appreciate your politeness, as everyone needs to understand that people see things differently, and what may resonate with one may not with another. I'm not telling anyone here to believe in chemtrails. Yes, I for one believe they exist, based upon credible information, and even weighing things against yours and others good arguments. You do make good arguments, but not enough to convince me away from the other things that really make you go "hmmmm".

I don't think people who really try to batter others down with nastiness is a good use of time. It's all negative an goes nowhere. And I've already been reduced to having to defend myself and this thread, when I'm posing a question, not making a blanket statement. Speculation isn't a decided opinion.

I'd like it to be a discussion and not a "you're so pathetic for believing in chemtrails" or "you're a paid disinfo agent" or "I'm going to use semantics to nit-pick everything you said and not focus on the topic" thread. How exhausting.

I'm going to go attempt to be productive myself. A camera is headed right about now to where the big glob of goop is, so I'll hopefully have a picture or video up in a little bit.