The Chemtrail Hoax

page: 9
25
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 07:49 PM
link   


Perhaps further explanation is required. The ATS audience is more skeptical than most, though I would expect increased decorum and respect from a few of its members.


If it means anything to you, add me to the "decorum" part of the ATS members. And I'm positive there are others here as well that do not instantly regard your posts as nonsense.

At least you seem to have something concrete to add to this debate, unlike some other members who merely seem to see it as their duty to defame anyone or anything that appear to be pro-government or alike.

(With this, of course, not said that I in full regard what you have to say as 100% truths, I simply suck in information and store it, without placing it in either the "truth" or the "false" folder.)

I very much welcome any further information you might have in this subject. Please, keep in touch, let us now.


(ps. I apologize for my english, I come from a non-english speaking country.)




posted on Feb, 19 2005 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Well, as far as dosing everyone with chemicals/drugs there is a far easier and pre-existing distribution method: Dump it into the water supply along with the chlorine and fluoride. Would save a ton of cash. :p



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Well, let's see here. "waltersmith" is, by his own account, eighty-four years old, and is still receiving a paycheck from the department of the interior.

He talks about "serving his country", but, if his non-existent Kemtrail Kapers are as secret as he says they are, then he's violating just about every law in talking about them, even if it's to a colloquium of harmless nuts like us.

He's right when he says that "...ATS audience is more skeptic..." and yet seems surprised that some of us here don't immediately buy into the boolsht just because he claims to be a Secret Government Agent -- who is either lying or violating his secrecy oath.

There is no James Minnis, of course; Pat is the real and true guy. I am sure, that, as a long time associate ofDr. Pat, you would probably be familiar with his two noms de plume on the two "chem-trail" sites that he and I hung out on four or so years ago.

Again, Walter, if you 've ever had a SECRET clearance (which you haven't, of course), you'd know that you don't talk about classified programs, regardless of the particular levels of secrecy which surround any portion of it.

But don't let me stop you; you're always good for a laugh from some of us, and, given that there're plenty of sheep here who desperately want to believe your stuff, you'll have an audience of sorts until you get tired and start trolling somewhere else.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:39 AM
link   
dh says:

"These little white lines are at it again Howard and off the street Love to snort the twins together Dont you?"

dh, is that the best you can do?

You can't answer any of the assertions made here in the initial post.

You can't answer the questions that I asked "waltersmith" (not that he'll answer them either).

All you seem to do is to use ad hominem arguments.

When you can't argue facts, insult the opponent.

That gets you a lot of credibility, bubba!

ANOK says:

"Another Chemtrail thread from Off The Street....Hmmmmmmm."

That's right, bud. And you'll continue to see "chem-trail" threads and posts from me for a long time.

Some people don't like scams and hoaxes, and we believe in denying the need of the hoaxters to start these scams and the ignorance of the well-meaning but technologically illiterate folks who buy into them.

"Now I'm really suspicious."

Well, you ought to be! If you suspect I'm an enemy of the "chem-trail" hoaxters, then your suspicions are correct. However, I don't consider you a hoaxter, you're a "hoaxee".

"You work for the aerospace industry right? Specificaly in Arizona right?
Mesa Arizona, right?"


Oh my God, I've been busted! How did you find out that information?

Oh, yeah... it's in my profile, along with my True Name, e-mail, phone number, connection to my photography web-site, etc., etc.

Of course I do. As a matter of fact, Integrated Systems Division, which is the public access webvsite you pulled up. As someone who's been in aerospace for about thirty years, that just might be the reason that I'm fighting ignorance -- including yours. Someday you'll thank me for this.

But you aren't releasing any of that information about yourself, are you, ANOK?

What are you trying to hide from the rest of us here on ATS?

"BTW I know the chemtrails are not a haox... "

No.

You think they're not a hoax; I know they are.

And by the way, ANOK, why aren't you and dh jumping all over my points in the first post of this thread and showing where my data there is wrong?



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:32 AM
link   
OK Off The Street here it is....
I am a Brit living in California, San Francisco to be precise.
I've been in the US for 17 yrs. Been in San fran for 6 yrs. I got kinda stuck here after being on the road traveling for awhile seeing this beautiful country. I have met some of the best people you could find anywhere.
I am unemployed at the moment due to health, my last job was bike messenger.
I spent 6 yrs in the Navy 89 to 95. The US Navy. I am a US citizen even though I was born in England. My father who is now deceased was American, from new York. He married my mom in 1950 whilst they were both performers in a circus.
I am 41 yrs old, my first name is Jeremy.
Anything else you want to know?

I have no reason to scam or hoax anybody...
I am very observant having been around the block a few times...I have been to many country's and seen many things. Things most ppl would laugh at and say that's immpossible...
I'm not gonna re-state why I believe in the chemtrails because I'm sure you know by now why I do.
But I will state that I don't believe, like some people seem to think, that it is some kind of brain washing. That is stupid IMHO.
Weather control and manipulation has been an ongoing program since the 40's both here and in Russia particularly. I don't see why it's so hard to believe it's still going on.

If this whole thing is a hoax, what's the point? Why would a lot of people independent of each other make the same claim? What do they gain form this? I could think of a lot easier and more profitable way to scam ppl than claiming they are spraying chemicals in the sky.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 02:53 AM
link   
I lived in parkland for 9 years, across the street from McChord AFB and every day saw many many trails in the sky. They do touch and go aircraft flights for pilots to log flight time all day long. I have many distinct memories of seeing these lines and think nothing of them. That's cool you took so much time to demystify it for people.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 03:08 AM
link   
ANOK says:

"I have no reason to scam or hoax anybody... "

ANOK, I know that is true. You are not a hoaxter or a scam artist; I have read your posts and gone round and round enough with you to realize that you are an honest person.

But I believe that you are misinformed by these same hoaxters and scam artists like Cliff Carnicom, Jeff Rense, Will Thomas, and all the other people who write this stuff for the notoriety or just the desire to hustle their books or whatever.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
ANOK says:

"I have no reason to scam or hoax anybody... "

ANOK, I know that is true. You are not a hoaxter or a scam artist; I have read your posts and gone round and round enough with you to realize that you are an honest person.

But I believe that you are misinformed by these same hoaxter's and scam artists like Cliff Corncob, Jeff Rense, Will Thomas, and all the other people who write this stuff for the notoriety or just the desire to hustle their books or whatever.


How am I misinformed? I am going on what I saw, not what I've read about on web-sites...Those ppl could well be scam artists, no argument there. But still no one has been able to explain what I've witnessed.
If I Hadn't seen what I did I'd be right there with you debunking the whole thing.
Anyway, thank you for your comments mate, I appreciate that...



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 03:46 AM
link   
I think Off_the_street made his case pretty clearly and there really hasn't been much evidence from the other side to really prove him wrong.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by 00PS
I think Off_the_street made his case pretty clearly and there really hasn't been much evidence from the other side to really prove him wrong.


Thats very true but the problem is how do you find evidence for a thing like this?
There really is NO evidence that it's NOT happening either...
And there is evidence that weather manipulation has happened in the past.
There are even US patents for aerosole spraying equipment...

chem-trails.org...

Do a search you'll find more...



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Off_The_Street and Howard Roark are one of two things:

They are either working for the other side or are they are truly honest people that are just happen to be very ignorant.

Either way they add nothing to the discussion yet seem to bring enough attention to themselves to detract from any discussion.

Those who know the trails in the sky are not simply jet exhaust could better themselves by dicsussing the matter with other intelligent people.

Therefore I suggest that those who wish to discuss the matter DO NOT RESPOND to anything said by these two gentlemen and furthermore put them on IGNORE. I for one have done this today.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 04:17 PM
link   
I'm with Anok. Seeing chemtrails every other day here in Europe.

Off the Street,
I've never believed that stupid theory of the UN conspiring for a communist world. Any time I stumble into a web site claiming these stupid things, I simply click away. I'd never ever got engaged with them in a dispute... mainly because I'd find it extremely boooooring.
So why are you wasting so much time discussing such a boring thing like chemtrails? it really sounds weird to me. And please, don't say it's because you want to save us from hoaxes... or you'd go to the UN-communist theory boards, to the Greys-conquering-the -world boards, to the meteoriteX-is-hitting-us boards, to the we-never-went-to the-Moon boards and so on to save them all.



posted on Feb, 20 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hello. Though I've never posted here before, I have been watching this site for several years. It is a minor, but enjoyable part of my job.

Of all the discussions on ATS, the chemtrail discussion comes closest to the truth. I know this because I am a part of the team that makes it happen.

We have a few people working in key facilities to make sure that certain chemicals are added, randomly, into supplies of Jet A-1 and Jet A fuel. Though I work with people on the military side of this project, I do not know much about additives to JP-8 or similar fuels.

There are no specific areas that are being targeted, as far as I know. This is a global project with a global goal.

The goal is not mind control, creating illness or harming people in any way. The goal is averting an enviromental disaster. There are not supposed to be negative side effects, and everyone I work with is saddened when we hear of them.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by iceTman
There cannot be purer B.S. than the above.
if the above is true - why bother spraying the day before a big storm front approaches. does not compute. Lately i have noticed night time spraying. They used to spray during day times but they're polly getting smarter with all the negative publicity.


So, it never occurred to you that the occurrence of persistent contrails might be related to existing weather conditions?

Do you know all of the things that happen in the upper atmosphere that are associated with a frontal system? (i.e. changes in the temperature, the relative humidity, mass air movement upward or downward, gravity waves, etc.)

If you don’t, then how can you sit there and blithely assume that what you are witnessing is not part of a normal weather pattern?



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 11:53 AM
link   
ANOK says:

”How am I misinformed? I am going on what I saw, not what I've read about on web-sites....”

Your information is incorrect, but it’s not actual information about the mechanics and physics of astmosphere alone. It includes the information you got on how to interpret data, not the data itself. You were not informed on how to apply Occam’s Razor; you were not given enough information about meteorology to see that the meterological explanation (i.e., ice crystal formation as a function of temperature and humidity) makes sense, and the “chem-trail” thing doesn’t.

”Those ppl could well be scam artists, no argument there. But still no one has been able to explain what I've witnessed.”

Not so, both Howard Roark and I have explained exactly what you’ve witnessed. For several reasons, you choose not to accept those explanations (which, by the way, are accepted by just about every scientist, engineer, aviation professional, meteorologist, etc. throughout the world).

”Anyway, thank you for your comments mate, I appreciate that... “

You’re welcome. I can like and respect people and still disagree with them; you are an example of that. Besides, anyone who tries to use ad hominem arguments ends up shooting himself in the foot sooner or later.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 12:36 PM
link   
ANOK says:

”Thats very true but the problem is how do you find evidence for a thing like this?”

Well, there are several ways to find evidence for the assertion that there is such a thing as a “chem-trail” plot. Let’s assume, for a minute, that there really are such things as “chem-trails”.

First, you could determine what the three common assertions are about the cause of these “chem-trails”:

(1) Blocking out ultraviolet rays to ameliorate the effects of global warming.

Evidence for: None, since none of the “chem-trail” adherents has ever shown that the “chem-trails” are in a position to actually do any good at such an ameliorative effect. For example, if the purpose of the “chem-trails” was to block high levels of UV, then why aren’t there more “chem-trails” in places where the UV is very high, like southern Chile, the Desert Southwest of the United States, the Saharan desert, etc.?

Evidence against: “chem-trails” are in the wrong place to halt global warming; “chem-trails” are usually found right before there is heavy cloud cover, anyway, since the “chem-trails” usually immediately precede or follow a frontal movement (which makes sense if you look at them as being persistent contrails in the temperature/humidity envelope we have discussed ad nauseam); and there has been no correlatives between the start of “chem-trails” and a decrease -- or even a slowing of the increase -- in global warming.

(2) Inoculating us against Secret Diseases or deliberately sickening us with a Secret Diseases.

Evidence for: None, since no one in the “chem-trail” community has ever collected any of these “chem-trails” in situ to test to see if they’re anything but ice crystals with trace amounts of combustion byproducts.

Evidence against: Even people who believe in “chem-trails” agree that they are very fine aerosols, and they also agree that they, like any other aerosol at altitudes, are subject to slow falling and wide dispersal, given the high winds at the altitude they’re found (the jet stream sometimes has a lateral movement of 200 km/hr). If you figure the vertical movement at ten feet per minute, it could take two days and two hours for that stuff to reach the ground, at which time a lateral wind vector of, say, ten miles per hour would’ve moved it four hundred eighty miles away from the place that it was sprayed.

By the way, have you ever looked at satellite photos of contrails and seen all of them over the ocean? This makes one ask just who we’re trying to sicken or cure: the fish?

(3) Using “chem-trails” as a guiding methodology for HAARP waves (yes, this was a big hypothesis in the “chem-trail” community a couple of years ago).
Evidence for: Again, no one in the “chem-trail” community has ever collected contrails in situ to show any sort of material that might help to “transmit” any sort of electromagnetic waves. Cliff Carniecon, one of the original hoaxters, made a big deal about his collection of rainwater with traces of barium salts in it. This was leapt upon as evidence by the “chem-trail community until it was pointed out that finding barium salts in rainwater meant they could be just normal atmospheric pollution instead of coming from “chem-trails”, and besides, barium salts are a big byproduct of coal- and oil-fired generating stations, which are all over the country.

Evidence against: Both Barium and Aluminum (another highly-touted “chem-trail” product according to the HAARP hypothesizers) are highly radar reflective; and yet contrails don’t show up on radar any differently than clouds do. If there were either barium or aluminum in the contrails, then they’d be huge bright lines on all the Doppler radar all over the Internet. They aren’t.

ANOK, what I have attempted to show you is that there is no evidence for “chem-trails”, and a lot of evidence against “chem-trails”.

Is this the same as me proving that “chem-trails” don’t exist?

No.

Science can’t prove anything, just like you, even if you came up with tons of evidence that I was not the Long-Lost King of France, could never actually prove that I wasn’t.

But the preponderance of evidence is that persistent contrails are just that, and not “chem-trails”

Now of course, the stuff above is not the only evidence that favors normal persistent contrails over “chem-trails”; there are many, many more articles of evidence that show the same trend. I am sure you’re familiar with the discussions of logistics, secrecy, etc. on the first post of this thread, and I’m sure you’re familiar with the use of Flight Explorer program to show that the vast majority of the “chem-trails” come from regularly scheduled commercial flights for which you actually have the flight number, altitude, speed, vector, etc.

Now, ANOK, I invite you, if you still have trouble believing what I say, to look at the three main scenarios above, and show me if there is an error in my logic, or if I have inadvertently left out any evidence that shows that persistent contrails are anything but.



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Cornelia says:

"So why are you wasting so much time discussing such a boring thing like chemtrails? it really sounds weird to me. And please, don't say it's because you want to save us from hoaxes... or you'd go to the UN-communist theory boards, to the Greys-conquering-the -world boards, to the meteoriteX-is-hitting-us boards, to the we-never-went-to the-Moon boards and so on to save them all."

Cornelia, I am an engineer in the aerospace business; that is my career and has been for years and years and years. The "chem-trail" hoax, because I actually know a bit about meteorology and aircraft, just happens to be my hot button.

I also get upset when I think of dogs not being sterilized and having unwanted puppies which are euthanized, and I don't like SUVs jacked up three feet off the ground so their headlights blind me, and I don't like teenagers wearing their pants hanging off their butts with a couple inches of their underpants showing.

But we have to prioritize in this life, which is, by geological standards, awful ephemeral; and the "chem-trail" hoax is what gets me going.

Hey, for some people it's Barry Manilow!


[edit on 21-2-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 12:49 PM
link   
joepits says:

"Those who know the trails in the sky are not simply jet exhaust could better themselves by dicsussing the matter with other intelligent people."

I don't care how "intelligent" you are, joepits; if you think you're going to "dic-suss" anything with me, bubba, you'll have to take it up with my shotgun first. I'm a happily married straight man.

"Therefore I suggest that those who wish to discuss the matter DO NOT RESPOND to anything said by these two gentlemen and furthermore put them on IGNORE. I for one have done this today.'

No big deal, joepits; you haven't contributed anything to the discussion so far anyway. However, you may ignore me, but I'm not ignoring you. I have a thing for denying ignorance, and that's you, bud!



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   


1. The existence of a huge and sinister plot is completely lacking in evidence.

2. The logistics of a massive spraying program would be an order of magnitude higher than the Manhattan Project, the Apollo Moon Landing, or the Vietnam War -- and simply could not be hidden from any oversight.

3. There is no evidence whatsoever of aircraft modified to perform some of the spraying methodologies that are proposed.

4. Anecdotal "evidence" of any illnesses caused by contrails is not backed up by any reliable data (and is actually contradicted by others).

5. There has never been any evidence of anyone collecting some of this "chemtrail" material in situ, having it tested by any reputable laboratory, and presented to anyone.

6. Every characteristic of chemtrails can be just as logically and rationally explained by normal contrails under normal (but differentiating) atmospheric conditions.

Now let's look at those counts in a bit more detail.



Off_the_street quite clearly laid out his arguement in 6 easy to digest chunks, all numbered. Like a Chinese restaurant.

Why don't you "believers" take each of these points and present your own evidence that will counter his?



posted on Feb, 21 2005 @ 05:53 PM
link   
#6 is just plain wrong. Before 1998 or so "contrails" did not stay in the sky so long. This is a fact. Look in old pictures and you will have trouble finding many horizon to horizon contrails.

The following image is a chemtrail, not a contrail. I'm talking about the wide horizontal trail, not the small white streak, which, by the way, is also a chemtrail.



[edit on 21-2-2005 by joepits]

[edit on 21-2-2005 by joepits]





new topics
top topics
 
25
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join