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.

 

Why do they block the sun?

page: 8
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by jackmac




Just say there was a geo-engineering effort going down...indulge me.... and answer these three questions:

1. What form would it take?


Carbon sequestration, forrestation, renewable energy, nuclear power.


2. Would it be controversial?


yes


3. What might it look like?


Surface facilities pumping liquefied CO2 into the ground. Bigger forests, wind farms, solar power, etc, and nuclear power plants.


Is this what you'd like to see?




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Great thread OP and great question. I have a complaint, though...why do I have to be bombarded by a constant commercial for contrailscience in this thread? They're even blatantly asking for science editors to point out the errors in their site. I can get this by watching TV. Constant commercials. Or I can get it by reading employment sections. I thought the topic was as stated. I realize that advertising pays for our venue here but why does advertising of a foreign site with no known ties to ATS have to come up so often? If they want to advertise, let them pay for it.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by crankyoldman
 



The elements contained in the sky soup, aluminum, barium, iron, nickel etc. all do one key thing - block energy.


(What followed after that sentence was an incredible wall of speculative nonsense. Problem was, while it was all fun to read as a conjecture, it falls apart since the initial premise, quoted above, is wrong to begin with. There is certainly no such thing as a "sky soup" of those various metals mentioned. And, the dire lack of comprehension displayed by presuming that such a thing, even IF it existed, could "block energy"? Well.....that shallow appraisal and missing grasp of science knowledge is truly unfortunate to see, if someone actually writes it without being sarcastic).



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi
Great thread OP and great question. I have a complaint, though...why do I have to be bombarded by a constant commercial for contrailscience in this thread? They're even blatantly asking for science editors to point out the errors in their site. I can get this by watching TV. Constant commercials. Or I can get it by reading employment sections. I thought the topic was as stated. I realize that advertising pays for our venue here but why does advertising of a foreign site with no known ties to ATS have to come up so often? If they want to advertise, let them pay for it.


I agree. Constant 'contrailscience' ads - Mick, who runs it and posts as Uncinus here on ATS, very often references his own site - the above mentioned, without saying he founded and runs it - along with metabunk.org, wonder what that's about? Aloysius (or is it Mike?) and Mick are quite well known to one another, there's another couple not too far away, but let's wait a bit before saying who they are....maybe we should have a sweepstake?

Bottom line: Yes - there's enough of that rubbish on tv - ban the ads.
edit on 23-1-2012 by jackmac because: every action has



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jackmac
 


lol - have you been to any of the chemtrail sites lately, to complain about the advertising there?

contrailscience is a blog - a collection of information. the information there is from many sources and you can check the originals if you like.

Why is it that you cannot actually debate the actual information, and instead have to keep resorting to unsubtle ad hominem attacks?

Why is it that you are seeing to stop people finding information, wherever it may reside? are you getting paid to try to censor the 'net or something??
I'm pretty sure such efforts won't work


Why do you say Mick and I are well known to each other? I have never met the man, and have exchanges perhaps a dozen emails over the last year. I have written more in response to Luxor than to Mick - so I guess that must mean Luxor and I are better known to each other??

However as I have said before it is completely typical of chemtrail believers to try to attack the people who bring them science - along with continual lack of evidence for chemtrails, and the continual refusal of believers to even try to obtain the evidence that would show that they exist - these things puzzle me - for people supposedly interested in the truth the believers make no effort whatsoever to actually provide any good evidence to support their case.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackmac

Is this what you'd like to see?


It is an answer to your question - nothing more or less.

Are you going to try to lead me down a path of revelation with some variant of 20 questions, or do you have a point that you should make now??



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by jackmac

Is this what you'd like to see?


It is an answer to your question - nothing more or less.

Are you going to try to lead me down a path of revelation with some variant of 20 questions, or do you have a point that you should make now??


Sorry, but I can't see the answer...



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by jackmac
 


lol - have you been to any of the chemtrail sites lately, to complain about the advertising there?

contrailscience is a blog - a collection of information. the information there is from many sources and you can check the originals if you like.

Why is it that you cannot actually debate the actual information, and instead have to keep resorting to unsubtle ad hominem attacks?

Why is it that you are seeing to stop people finding information, wherever it may reside? are you getting paid to try to censor the 'net or something??
I'm pretty sure such efforts won't work


Why do you say Mick and I are well known to each other? I have never met the man, and have exchanges perhaps a dozen emails over the last year. I have written more in response to Luxor than to Mick - so I guess that must mean Luxor and I are better known to each other??

However as I have said before it is completely typical of chemtrail believers to try to attack the people who bring them science - along with continual lack of evidence for chemtrails, and the continual refusal of believers to even try to obtain the evidence that would show that they exist - these things puzzle me - for people supposedly interested in the truth the believers make no effort whatsoever to actually provide any good evidence to support their case.


I'm not interested in your 'chemtrail' sites, whatever they are. I'm interested in the topic of this thread - that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly. What do you say to this? Do you say it isn't so? Topic....



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by jackmac
 





I agree. Constant 'contrailscience' ads - Mick, who runs it and posts as Uncinus here on ATS, very often references his own site - the above mentioned, without saying he founded and runs it - along with metabunk.org, wonder what that's about? Aloysius (or is it Mike?) and Mick are quite well known to one another, there's another couple not too far away, but let's wait a bit before saying who they are....maybe we should have a sweepstake?


I see we're on the same page and have done the same research. Not quite ready yet to tie the two (you know what I mean here) together but almost. Sometimes motive is not the obvious. Obvious here is government but greed, sex and power are the more basic motives. The internet is rather unforgiving as far as the scent of impropriety goes. And it's a known fact that clandestine organizations prefer a tarnished asset.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by jackmac
 


Oh, now it's the "emissions"? Emissions that are virtually invisible? (Take a look at your car's exhaust tailpipe, for examples of "emissions" to see how much they might be able to "block" sunlight).


...that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly.



"regularly", you say? How much, exactly? What total percentage of the Earth's surface? Don't have to be "exact", that was a figure of speech. An estimate will suffice.

How about, how about taking a look at any number of photographs of Earth from space, say from the ISS or older Shuttle missions? Take a good, long time to search those photos, and point out the cases of airplane contrails versus the other natural clouds.....and show which has more coverage.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackmac

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by jackmac

Is this what you'd like to see?


It is an answer to your question - nothing more or less.

Are you going to try to lead me down a path of revelation with some variant of 20 questions, or do you have a point that you should make now??


Sorry, but I can't see the answer...


go read the post you made then - you asked 3 questions - I provided answers to each.

Here's what you posted - www.abovetopsecret.com...

I would have thought you would have read what you were posting before actually posting it?!!



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackmac
I'm interested in the topic of this thread - that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly. What do you say to this? Do you say it isn't so? Topic....


Hey don't labour me about being on topic after you introduce the matter of advertising!!


I haven't seen any evidence here of aircraft emissions blocking the sun.

Creating cloud that attenuates it sure - blocking - no.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 





but greed, sex and power are the more basic motives.


How is sex a motive for so-called "chemtrails"?



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by luxordelphi
 



......clandestine organizations......


Care to show any evidence of "clandestine" activity as regards to contrails? This challenge has been proposed for months, even years.

Anything at all? One little verifiable peep?

Tossing around accusations is pretty darn easy, isn't it?? Backing them up? A bit harder......




posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by jackmac
 


Oh, now it's the "emissions"? Emissions that are virtually invisible? (Take a look at your car's exhaust tailpipe, for examples of "emissions" to see how much they might be able to "block" sunlight).


...that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly.



"regularly", you say? How much, exactly? What total percentage of the Earth's surface? Don't have to be "exact", that was a figure of speech. An estimate will suffice.

How about, how about taking a look at any number of photographs of Earth from space, say from the ISS or older Shuttle missions? Take a good, long time to search those photos, and point out the cases of airplane contrails versus the other natural clouds.....and show which has more coverage.


Now it's the emissions? No. It's always been the emissions, and that they spread out and create clouds. I can only speak for where I am - and that's one of the world's largest cities, London. On around a third to a half of the days of the year, this city is under a man-made cirrus-like cloud created by aircraft; that's quite a lot. It is unquestionable that the clouds are attributable to the aircraft as trigger, one only need perform the most basic ground of science to know this: observation. Look up.

Where do you live? What's your first hand experience of this?



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by jackmac
 





I'm interested in the topic of this thread - that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly.


Emissions, eh?

The title of the video in the OP is "Chemtrails blocking the Sun"

The OP mentions "Chemtrails in the making."



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by jackmac
I'm interested in the topic of this thread - that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly. What do you say to this? Do you say it isn't so? Topic....


Hey don't labour me about being on topic after you introduce the matter of advertising!!


I haven't seen any evidence here of aircraft emissions blocking the sun.

Creating cloud that attenuates it sure - blocking - no.


I didn't introduce advertising actually; I was agreeing with the person who did, is that ok with you?

The rest is semantics



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by jackmac
 





I'm interested in the topic of this thread - that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly.


Emissions, eh?

The title of the video in the OP is "Chemtrails blocking the Sun"

The OP mentions "Chemtrails in the making."



Yeah? And? So? What?



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackmac

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by jackmac
 





I'm interested in the topic of this thread - that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly.


Emissions, eh?

The title of the video in the OP is "Chemtrails blocking the Sun"

The OP mentions "Chemtrails in the making."



Yeah? And? So? What?


So are you thinking all aircraft emissions you see are really "chemtrails"?

You said:


I'm interested in the topic of this thread - that aircraft emissions block out the sun, regularly.

edit on 1/23/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackmac
Now it's the emissions? No. It's always been the emissions, and that they spread out and create clouds.


the visible ones do - sure - always have done, it isn't new.




I can only speak for where I am - and that's one of the world's largest cities, London. On around a third to a half of the days of the year, this city is under a man-made cirrus-like cloud created by aircraft; that's quite a lot. It is unquestionable that the clouds are attributable to the aircraft as trigger, one only need perform the most basic ground of science to know this: observation. Look up.

Where do you live? What's your first hand experience of this?


I liver in the south pacific and was born and raised in New Zeaalnd. My first experience with contrails spreading over the sky was watching brand new Boeing 737's flying between Wellington and Dunedin from New Brighton beach in Christchurch in the late 1960's - sometimes the contrail from the flight down would still be there when the contrail from the flight back was forming, and they would spread out.

then from 1976 I started working on those aircraft as a mechanic.

Since then I have sen contrails all over the world - not so many down here, but they do happen and they do occasionally spread out to cover a wide portion of the sky.

The possible effects of contrails on global warming are not lost on me - but at the moment the best science is they have little or no effect.

The effect of aircraft pollution is much more important IMO - and of course that is happening whether yuo can see a contrail or not!



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join