Alex Jones On Chemtrails

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Uncinus

 

It's pretty safe to say that they are all linked if you want to get technical

It is also pretty safe to say it is all linked to the gravity of the Andromeda Galaxy too if you want to get technical.

And just as relevant unless you can show just what that link is??

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

They use it to predict the weather. Meteorology goes hand in hand with geo-engineering. Come on bro get with it!

Let's just go with what they said:

The scientists hope that the research will enable them to predict electromagnetic storms with more accuracy.

If you want to call that geoengineering then you are casting a pretty wide net.

Whether you're into Alex Jones or not, geoengineering and HAARP are very real! Initially I assumed it was a load of rubbish, but how wrong I was. I only realized what was going on after carefully monitoring the sky each day, learning the flight paths, but most important of all is what happens with the chemtrails afterwards when HAARP is switched on; watch the waves form and the geoengineering process begin. Everyone who I've showed believes it now, you just need to see it for yourself with your own eyes

Originally posted by jameshawkings
Whether you're into Alex Jones or not, geoengineering and HAARP are very real! Initially I assumed it was a load of rubbish, but how wrong I was. I only realized what was going on after carefully monitoring the sky each day, learning the flight paths, but most important of all is what happens with the chemtrails afterwards when HAARP is switched on; watch the waves form and the geoengineering process begin. Everyone who I've showed believes it now, you just need to see it for yourself with your own eyes

If it's real, then why can't it be demonstrated, and the evidence publicized here on ATS - blow the whole conspiracy wide open?

I suspect you are just seeing regular wave clouds, as have been seen since the dawn of time,

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/107625291942.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/71c1f9c2d83f.jpg[/atsimg]

Originally posted by Uncinus

Originally posted by jameshawkings
Whether you're into Alex Jones or not, geoengineering and HAARP are very real! Initially I assumed it was a load of rubbish, but how wrong I was. I only realized what was going on after carefully monitoring the sky each day, learning the flight paths, but most important of all is what happens with the chemtrails afterwards when HAARP is switched on; watch the waves form and the geoengineering process begin. Everyone who I've showed believes it now, you just need to see it for yourself with your own eyes

If it's real, then why can't it be demonstrated, and the evidence publicized here on ATS - blow the whole conspiracy wide open?

I suspect you are just seeing regular wave clouds, as have been seen since the dawn of time,

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/107625291942.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/71c1f9c2d83f.jpg[/atsimg]

That is HAARP, the old photo is a fake old photo

Some of you are paid to be here and always ready to reply almost instantly, it gives the game away

Originally posted by jameshawkings

That is HAARP, the old photo is a fake old photo

Some of you are paid to be here and always ready to reply almost instantly, it gives the game away

edit on 13-11-2011 by jameshawkings because: (no reason given)

Wow, some of you are so paranoid that you any old book or photo that contradicts your conspiracy, must have been faked. Do you think someone went back in time, with a time machine and changed those books?

The only people who make money from chemtrails are :

Will Thomas
Len Horowitz
Alex Jones
Michael J Murphy
Anthony Hilder
Clifford Carnicom
Don Croft

reply to post by jameshawkings


Well you reply only took 5 minutes - who is paying you to be on here all the time??

That is HAARP, the old photo is a fake old photo

and your evidence for that is what??

as for the assertion that "some of you are paid to be on here" - who? how much? What's the evidence, and where can I sign up?

All the "money trails" for chemtrails flow to the hoaxers...not the debunkers!!

Matt Drudge,Glen Beck,Dr. Michal Savage,Rush(sigh) FOX News,Msnbc,NBC,CBS,ABC, Pat Robertson,Huffington,CNN, have ALL spread misinformation whether intentionaly or not,on a number of topics.

It doesn't mean we must disqualify all information as fact they supply as news sources.

So, If Alex Jones reported a story it has to be B.S because of the source?

Then we must disqualify anything we read unless it's on ATS where we require the source??

I've said all along for 5 years here on ATS I have no clue what's going on up there besides "CONtrails."

This just add's fuel to the fire of another WTF is THAT anyway?

No confirmation. Add's to speculation. Weakens CON trailers position though.

reply to post by niceguybob


All very true....the litany of the list you wrote. It is not all-inclusive, either.

However.....it is the "duty" of anyone who wishes to be properly informed to challenge any and all "stories" when they are not sufficiently backed-up by factual evidence.

The fact does remain, as well, that Alex Jones does have a demonstrated history of histrionic assertions that aren't much different from the "Jerry Springer Show" type of hyperbole. He has damaged his own chance at "credibility" as a result. This is not to say that some of what he says isn't true.....he just must be considered as a less-than-credible "source" unless or until his claims can be fact-checked properly.

I am reminded of, also, something I just saw about Karl Rove....and his current private sector media corporation that produces paid political "attack ads". The same sort of rhetoric, and outright lying tactics are seen in those species of assertions, too. FWIW......

reply to post by niceguybob



I look at the evidence - not the source - I'm not American & I don't know Alex Jones at all - never seen him except on videos on ATS.

so what is his evidence?

Assertion - so nothing verifiable or checkable at all.

I would be quite concerned if ARE "things" out there along tht lines of the chemtrail myth.

But, time after time, and indeed EVERY time....the evidence fails.

If they exist someone is doing a better job of hiding them than anythinf else I can think of.

Which is quite amazing since the evidence should, literally, be in the air we breath.

Originally posted by firepilot
and metals are not found in the ground naturally.

Who said metals are not found in the ground naturally?

Seriously what human stated that? I seriously doubt a single one ever did.

That's called a straw-man.

You basically make up some totally ludicrous point of view, then claim the opponents claimed that.
Straw-men arguments are huge failures.

Originally posted by jeichelberg
I also do not hear him state that geo-engineering is currently possible..

Building a factory that emits pollution is by definition, geo-engineering.

Building a huge hydro-electric dam is also geo-engineering, by definition.

Planting new trees is also geo-engineering, as you are trying to reduce certain chemicals and increase others.

Show me something that isn't geo-engineering.

Who cares what some guy says, let's use our brains and think for ourselves.

reply to post by ProudBird


Excellent answer and I support your responce. I also read additional sources for reference. The ones I mentioned were off the top of my head. My point was made,as well as yours.

Jones has the least credibility of all named,and yet,this perticular story happens to strike a nerve with me.

I believe chemtrails or geoengineering is not contrails, and not I'm too stoopid to understand the difference.

This just add's to the conspiracy,AND it happens to be from Jones,with quote and sources,but not conculusive evidence.

I'm an engineer by trade,so I like to be logical. This topic is hard to stay logical on.P

reply to post by muzzleflash


The majority of the de-bunkers on the chemtrail threads are quite adept at pulling the strawman routine. They are also quite good at sourcing their quotes and providing contradictory information that melds with mainstream science; something that most chemmies cannot do. The chemmies do not have a textbook on Chemtrails to source from.

Most are here to share and provide whatever evidence they have to be discussed in a civil manner. Unfortunately most threads are derailed rather quickly either by personal attacks or inflammatory rhetoric. I suspect the attack dogs are quite proud when a thread gets derailed and ceases to go any further.

I know that the other more ludicrous forums do not get this type of attention and makes me wonder if they doth protest too much?

Originally posted by niceguybob

I'm an engineer by trade,so I like to be logical. This topic is hard to stay logical on.P

Let's forget what everyone said and ignore all personalities for a second.

So Mr engineer, tell me what law of physics makes it impossible to spray an aerosol from an airplane?

I cannot seem to find any law that prevents such a scenario. If you can find one please enlighten me. Thanks.

reply to post by Goldcurrent


You can say that again Goldcurrent.

Seriously, you could just copy paste that and post it again, and I'd star it again.

reply to post by muzzleflash

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by niceguybob

I'm an engineer by trade,so I like to be logical. This topic is hard to stay logical on.P

Let's forget what everyone said and ignore all personalities for a second.

So Mr engineer, tell me what law of physics makes it impossible to spray an aerosol from an airplane?

I cannot seem to find any law that prevents such a scenario. If you can find one please enlighten me. Thanks

I thought it was only debunkers set up strawman arguments??

Planes have been "spraying" aerosols for decades. NGB didn't say there was such a law, and he never said that it couldn't be done. What is your point??

Do you actually have any credible evidence that it IS done at all??

reply to post by muzzleflash


MR. engineer? Ya want to start with that? I specialize in New Product Development in plastics and surface mount technology. I work with people all over the world trying to launch new products commercially and in the medical industry. I work with biodegradable plastic enzymes and nano technology. I help sell products to Sam's Club, Cosco and Target in consumer market. I help do manufacturability reviews for start ups.
Yep..... I know how.

That's what New Product Development does from the manufacturing and sales side. I do both.

To say to me " OK Engineering Guy explain yourself" is insulting.

I mearly said it was illogical from an engineering point of view to dismiss the article from Jones website.

You want to go for character references,go ahead. I don't work with people as closed minded as you.

OK For YOU, I'll show you where to make changes... in your product of course.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by niceguybob

I'm an engineer by trade,so I like to be logical. This topic is hard to stay logical on.P

Let's forget what everyone said and ignore all personalities for a second.

So Mr engineer, tell me what law of physics makes it impossible to spray an aerosol from an airplane?

I cannot seem to find any law that prevents such a scenario. If you can find one please enlighten me. Thanks

I thought it was only debunkers set up strawman arguments??

Planes have been "spraying" aerosols for decades. NGB didn't say there was such a law, and he never said that it couldn't be done. What is your point??

Do you actually have any credible evidence that it IS done at all??

edit on 13-11-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

"Debunker" is vague and can be applied from either side, depending on your point of view.

Also, how is asking a simple question a straw-man argument?
Wouldn't it be a straw-man inquisition?

I never said there was or wasn't credible evidence, at least not in this thread or any time recently. What does me having or not having credible evidence have to do with me asking a simple question about the laws of physics?

Originally posted by niceguybob
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

MR. engineer? Ya want to start with that? I specialize in New Product Development in plastics and surface mount technology. I work with people all over the world trying to launch new products commercially and in the medical industry. I work with biodegradable plastic enzymes and nano technology. I help sell products to Sam's Club, Cosco and Target in consumer market. I help do manufacturability reviews for start ups.
Yep..... I know how.

That's what New Product Development does from the manufacturing and sales side. I do both.

To say to me " OK Engineering Guy explain yourself" is insulting.

I mearly said it was illogical from an engineering point of view to dismiss the article from Jones website.

You want to go for character references,go ahead. I don't work with people as closed minded as you.

OK For YOU, I'll show you where to make changes... in your product of course.

You called yourself an engineer, I had the decency to add "Mr" to it, which is suppose to be respectful.
And then you went off about a bunch of unrelated stuff which doesn't really matter.

What should I go ask non-engineers questions about physics? Or is it better I ask the engineers? I don't know I would rather get your professional opinion on the matter since you indicated you may be qualified to make an assessment about physical laws.

I was actually being nice by choosing you to provide a valid answer to the question, of which I already know the answer to, but wanted to hear you say it because your statement would be very fitting.

I meant no offense seriously. I really think you misread my comment since you can't actually hear my voice inflection and tone, which was honestly not intended to degrade you in any way. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

But, does it break any laws of physics? Chem-trail theory? Is it at least possible theoretically?
'Mr' is actually a respectful term btw.