Fox News Chemtrail Propaganda

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by dplum517

 

The funny thing is, that the commentator and Bill said nothing about the video feed with the trails.

That's because they can't see the stock footage, they're looking at the cameras, not the monitors. That footage is there because some moron at Fox (and there are so many there) doesn't know the difference between cloud seeding and contrails either.

Awesome! So you agree that there are multiple uses of propaganda?? ...or did you need to go rethink life?

Showing the trails on the screen without the commentators knowing = form of propaganda

Insinuating the trails are for cloud seeding = form of propaganda (possible "they" want us to think it's just cloud seeding)

Again ...... that's a sad excuse to say that some "moron" at fox news just didn't know what he was doing

The 23 seconds of showing us trails on the screen was done on PURPOSE.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

Why do you think the trails (what I see as contrails) were put in the clip?

A simple answer would be: They are desensitizing us to the trails in the sky.

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Why do you think the trails (what I see as contrails) were put in the clip?

A simple answer would be: They are desensitizing us to the trails in the sky.

So you don't think it is possible that the person who included that video is simply someone who simply believes chemtrails are used for weather modification.

I mean, you believe that. Don't you think it's possible that others are just like you and believe it also?

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Really? Like you cannot tell the difference? You must either live in some Magic Land that never sees these airborne abominations, or you never go outside and look up.

Out here in west Texas, chemtrails are done fairly regularly. Here is the difference: A regular jet aircraft in this area will fly around 30,000 to 35,000 ft in elevation. They do leave a contrail behind, but it evaporates fairly quickly, as our air is very dry as a rule. They do not leave long stripes in the sky, although on more humid days, their stripe is a bit longer. However, it EVAPORATES in a timely manner.

A jet leaving a chemtrail out here flies a bit lower (I estimate around 25,000 ft, sometimes a bit less). I can usually see it's color and a few more details than the higher-flying commercial jets. I have seen them fly over and then suddenly they start to release the chemicals. The trails left behind are a bright white, rather fluffy, and they remain in the sky. They DO NOT evaporate. They slowly dissipate with the wind currents, spreading themselves out into a milky-looking mess. I have sat and watched them spray, sometimes in one long trail, sometimes in short bursts, like the lines on a road. These chemicals stay airborne and spread out.

They typically do this out here in advance of weather fronts. My husband feels they are spraying to try and keep the rays from our more active sun from cooking us. I feel it has to do with geo-engineering and cloud-seeding.

However, these sprayed trails consist of barium salts and aluminum oxide. Aluminum is particularly alarming because it collects in our bodies in places where the cellular turn-over is slow, such as our brain. Wonder where Alzheimer's comes from? Aluminum.

Also concerning is that this stuff coats every plant and blade of grass, and it is a fire accelerant, meaning that a wildfire will burn twice as fast and twice as hot.

Please see the following video: www.youtube.com...

Chemtrails are very real, and very distinguishable from contrails. Chemtrails don't evaporate, contrails do.

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Why do you think the trails (what I see as contrails) were put in the clip?

A simple answer would be: They are desensitizing us to the trails in the sky.

Or they are having a good laugh at some peoples gullibility...

Read some of the older threads on ATS where excellent evidence has been presented explaining, atmospheric conditions and the formation of CONDENSATION trails.

You too can get your life back... before you make a fool of yourself.

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Really? Like you cannot tell the difference? You must either live in some Magic Land that never sees these airborne abominations, or you never go outside and look up.

Out here in west Texas, chemtrails are done fairly regularly. Here is the difference: A regular jet aircraft in this area will fly around 30,000 to 35,000 ft in elevation. They do leave a contrail behind, but it evaporates fairly quickly, as our air is very dry as a rule. They do not leave long stripes in the sky, although on more humid days, their stripe is a bit longer. However, it EVAPORATES in a timely manner.

A jet leaving a chemtrail out here flies a bit lower (I estimate around 25,000 ft, sometimes a bit less). I can usually see it's color and a few more details than the higher-flying commercial jets. I have seen them fly over and then suddenly they start to release the chemicals. The trails left behind are a bright white, rather fluffy, and they remain in the sky. They DO NOT evaporate. They slowly dissipate with the wind currents, spreading themselves out into a milky-looking mess. I have sat and watched them spray, sometimes in one long trail, sometimes in short bursts, like the lines on a road. These chemicals stay airborne and spread out.

They typically do this out here in advance of weather fronts. My husband feels they are spraying to try and keep the rays from our more active sun from cooking us. I feel it has to do with geo-engineering and cloud-seeding.

However, these sprayed trails consist of barium salts and aluminum oxide. Aluminum is particularly alarming because it collects in our bodies in places where the cellular turn-over is slow, such as our brain. Wonder where Alzheimer's comes from? Aluminum.

Also concerning is that this stuff coats every plant and blade of grass, and it is a fire accelerant, meaning that a wildfire will burn twice as fast and twice as hot.

Please see the following video: www.youtube.com...

Chemtrails are very real, and very distinguishable from contrails. Chemtrails don't evaporate, contrails do.

Evidence? Samples?

or just paranoia and blind belief?

Lol. No other topic, with the possible exception of 9/11, gets the debunkers fired up as quickly as chemtrails. I've been watching planes in the sky my whole life and I know when I was a kid you just did not see the trails in the sky like I see almost daily now. Something has changed in the last 30 years. I for one don't think its all that hard to believe we're being poisoned en masse. Just seems like good business. Sickness = $.

reply to post by FissionSurplus

Everything you mentioned is misinformation (or possibly intentional DISinformation) put out by people who believe in chemtrails.

1. Contrails CAN last for hours. Contrails are basically the same as a cirrus cloud, and a cirrus cloud can last for hours. Please show me evidence that contrails can NOT last for hours, and explain to me WHY they can't.

2. There has never been confirmation of high barium and aluminum levels associated with contrails. People have measured levels of aluminum and barium in soil and water before, but those levels are not exceptionally high (i.e., they are natural levels), and there has been no direct link to contrails.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

So you don't think it is possible that the person who included that video is simply someone who simply believes chemtrails are used for weather modification.

That's a tough one for me to swallow.

Maybe ....maybe ..... accidents might happen at your local news agency but even then....

Fox News is watched by over 100 Million people. Everything put on that screen is some form of propaganda to sway a mass of people one way or the other.

Fox news is owned by Globalist Rupert Murdoch...... whatever that means to you

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

So you don't think it is possible that the person who included that video is simply someone who simply believes chemtrails are used for weather modification.

That's a tough one for me to swallow.

Maybe ....maybe ..... accidents might happen at your local news agency but even then....

Fox News is watched by over 100 Million people. Everything put on that screen is some form of propaganda to sway a mass of people one way or the other.

Fox news is owned by Globalist Rupert Murdoch...... whatever that means to you

I didn't say "accidentally". I said that the person who put together the video for that segment may be just like you -- someone who has researched "chemtrails" on the internet and mistakenly believes that contrails are chemtrails, and that chemtrails are associated with cloud seeding.

Do you really think it is unlikely that there are people in society who believe the same t6hings about chemtrails that you believe?

reply to post by CrimsonMoon

Read some of the older threads on ATS where excellent evidence has been presented explaining, atmospheric conditions and the formation of CONDENSATION trails.

Done that.

And you could read the many papers that NASA and other agencies have presented on "contrails."

And you could read the many studies that have been done by universities decades ago on "contrails."

Yes.... I have read all that. Does that convince me that contrails exist in multiple forms? Sure.

Does it convince me that there is no possibility of Chemtrails existing? Not even close.

Originally posted by Urantia1111
Lol. No other topic, with the possible exception of 9/11, gets the debunkers fired up as quickly as chemtrails. I've been watching planes in the sky my whole life and I know when I was a kid you just did not see the trails in the sky like I see almost daily now. Something has changed in the last 30 years. I for one don't think its all that hard to believe we're being poisoned en masse. Just seems like good business. Sickness = $.

Well I remember contrails 30 years ago pretty well and I can tell you what has changed in the last thirty years.

Air traffic has increased, resulting in more contrails persistent and dispersible. There is no mystery there.

Originally posted by dplum517
reply to post by CrimsonMoon

 

Read some of the older threads on ATS where excellent evidence has been presented explaining, atmospheric conditions and the formation of CONDENSATION trails.

Done that.

And you could read the many papers that NASA and other agencies have presented on "contrails."

And you could read the many studies that have been done by universities decades ago on "contrails."

Yes.... I have read all that. Does that convince me that contrails exist in multiple forms? Sure.

Does it convince me that there is no possibility of Chemtrails existing? Not even close.

Accepting the technical possibility of something existing is one thing, sounding off that it does without any solid evidence is another.

reply to post by dplum517


>sigh<

The CONTRAILS, normal stock footage of perfectly normal CONTRAILS inserted between 2:22 and 2:44 in the video were all they had to hand, and were inserted by the local live segment producers and director, because either they didn't have actual stock footage of real cloud seeding activities. or indeed they are as clueless as the rest of the "chemtrail believers" out there.

Here's a thought (that I doubt will be acted upon), but that was Bill Nye they were interviewing (and how long ago was that interview, anyway>>>??? The story of the Russians and the chunk of cement is pretty old, from winter of 2010-2011 at least)...... (***)

.....anyway, Bill Nye, the "Science Guy".....why not contact him directly and explain your "theories" about the so-called "chemtrails".

He's a man of science, maybe he could set you straight.


(***) Update on the story of the concrete chunk......it was from 2008!

Here: When Cloud Seeding Goes Wrong: Cement Chunk Falls From the Sky
by IAN O'NEILL on JUNE 19, 2008


Way to stay relevant!

Originally posted by CrimsonMoon
Well I remember contrails 30 years ago pretty well and I can tell you what has changed in the last thirty years.

Air traffic has increased, resulting in more contrails persistent and dispersible. There is no mystery there.

Increased air traffic -- Yes.

Plus, the use of more efficient high-bypass engines with an exhaust that is wetter and cooler than older jet engines. These high-bypass engines (along with increased traffic) have contributed to the increase in contrails.

Originally posted by CrimsonMoon

Originally posted by Urantia1111
Lol. No other topic, with the possible exception of 9/11, gets the debunkers fired up as quickly as chemtrails. I've been watching planes in the sky my whole life and I know when I was a kid you just did not see the trails in the sky like I see almost daily now. Something has changed in the last 30 years. I for one don't think its all that hard to believe we're being poisoned en masse. Just seems like good business. Sickness = $.

Well I remember contrails 30 years ago pretty well and I can tell you what has changed in the last thirty years.

Air traffic has increased, resulting in more contrails persistent and dispersible. There is no mystery there.

Oh you got me good there tiger! I'm sure its just my faulty memory, but I'm talking about the quality of these trails, not really the quantity. Why is it so important to you that people disregard this chemtrail idea as pure fiction?

Originally posted by Urantia1111
Oh you got me good there tiger! I'm sure its just my faulty memory, but I'm talking about the quality of these trails, not really the quantity. Why is it so important to you that people disregard this chemtrail idea as pure fiction?

...And what quality would that be?

reply to post by ProudBird

He's a man of science, maybe he could set you straight.

HAHA. You would think you debunkers know a charlatan when you seen one since you are always eager to point them out.

Sure, he's a man of science. Doesn't mean he knows everything.

He is PAID by Fox News to spout off what Fox News wants him to spout off. They may not have a written script for him, but he's certainly not allowed to just say what he wants.

I have watched Bill Nye in several interviews on Fox and he is really just playing the debunker.

He's been in other interviews about UFOs where he tries to debunk UFOs. It's kind of amusing.

Funny how a paid debunker is not a charlatan in your eyes.

So the answer is no, I would never call that tool and ask him anything.

reply to post by Urantia1111

Why is it so important to you that people disregard this chemtrail idea as pure fiction?

Because it is pure fiction.

It also, as a demonstrably fictitious belief, causes damage by wasting people's time and effort...."worrying" about something that isn't even happening, when there are a lot of other legitimate concerns to "worry" over.

If you want to better understand why the jet contrails look differently than they did 20-30 years ago, then go out and do some studying up about high bypass turbofan engines, and compare them to the older, and just about nowhere-in-use today, low bypass types of turbofan engines.


And, in terms of the way the contrails form, you will also see why there are similarities in some ways to the big, heavy bombers of World War 2, and their contrails.

It has to do with airflow patterns that surround and envelope the hot, humid exhaust gases.....the old propeller engines had BIG propellers....and modern high bypass turbofan jet engines also have a type of "propeller" out front, supplying the majority of the engine's thrust, and pushing a LOT of air....cooler, ambient temperature air.....aft and around the central core of hot gases.

reply to post by dplum517

So you pick and choose what/who to believe. That's fine, but what is your basis for that.

When you see a contrail shown during a story about cloud seeding, you automatically trust that it is evidence that contrails are chemtrails. HOWEVER, you would automatically NOT trust the opinion of the scientist shown on that same segment.

What basis are you using to pick-and-choose what sources you automatically trust and what you sources you automatically don't trust?