Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Black Beams

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:26 AM
link   
More video of the black beam shadows.


Debunkers Up, Up and Away!!!




posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:39 AM
link   
Debunk what? I've observed this myself and it looks pretty bizarre to see it happening in front of you.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:48 AM
link   
It's a shadow

contrailscience.com...
edit on 7-5-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kester
Debunkers Up, Up and Away!!!



Not sure there's anything to debunk here.
I'm simply surprised you didnt know that contrails (which is the same as what clouds are) can cast shadows.



Anyway, here's a much prettier one...



..and you'd say "but they're clouds!"

And you'd be right. Like I said, water vapour.

I'm surprised you had to get past infancy before you learned this.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:57 AM
link   
I am becoming more and more horrified by the chemmies on a daily basis. I am beginning to think it's just one drunk guy with WAY too much time on his hands.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 04:58 AM
link   
So I am just curious. But, Isn't it possible that a chemtrail could be perfectly disguised by a contrail? So whats the point of even trying to say you have proof? Its possible you wouldn't even know.

Also, why is every chemtrail theory point toward the fact that the government is poisoning or otherwise intending malicious outcomes? Why hasn't anyone suggested that they could be doing it to help people?



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


Thank you.

And this proves just how much light we lose through air travel.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


It does look very bizarre. Less bizarre but of far greater concern is the effect of multiple contrails day after day. The light reaching the ground is drastically reduced. This has many effects. If air travellers paid for the damage they cause each seat would cost millions.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


Nice pic. Thank you.

Your picture shows something natural. None of us are responsible for that. Those who use jet aircraft are responsible for the extensive shadowing caused by multiple contrails. Time to grow up and take responsibility.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


Shorry did you shay shomething? Bleaargh.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Renegade2283
 


This proves how much light contrails block. It's about time air travellers took responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

For the second part of your question I say track record gives cause for mistrust.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:32 AM
link   
This chemtrail nonsense is just that...People who believe this nonsense make threads like this, and then act like they know "debunkers" aren't going to buy their crap, but it's like they still believe they're right. There is NO conspiracy against you people. Jeez, just because you don't understand something doesn't mean that it is an unsolved mystery, or that it needs some elaborate conspiracy theory to explain it.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by JiggyPotamus
 


My main concern is the theft of light carried out by air travellers. This video shows how much shadow is cast on the ground later in the day. I live on the ground and I object to air travellers stealing my light.

I also object to the almost constant background noise of jet engines. Following the 'control' offered by the grounding of jet aircraft here during an Icelandic volcanic eruption it was realised that this noise has a noticeable effect on mental health.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Kester
 


I see but you didn't really answer my question. I was just asking if it is agreed that "chemtrails" could possibly be either invisible or disguised by contrails.

Also, I completely understand why most conspiracy theories are pointing toward malicious action. But why not even one theory with an alternative view. Like since all these theories are supposedly made up anyway. What if the chemtrails are really some form of gold dust being realeased into the atmosphere to protect us from solar radiation.

Totally bogus I know, but I find it funny I havent even seen it suggested. Seems like it would fit in well with the ancient alien theory
edit on 7-5-2012 by Renegade2283 because: (no reason given)
edit on 7-5-2012 by Renegade2283 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Renegade2283
So I am just curious. But, Isn't it possible that a chemtrail could be perfectly disguised by a contrail? So whats the point of even trying to say you have proof? Its possible you wouldn't even know.

Also, why is every chemtrail theory point toward the fact that the government is poisoning or otherwise intending malicious outcomes? Why hasn't anyone suggested that they could be doing it to help people?



imho if the gummint was doing anything at all to 'help' people they'd be shouting it from the housetops.

anyone ever read 'Thanatos Syndrome' by Walter Percy? part of the plot (spoiler) involved the local gummint putting a sodium isotope in the water, which made everybody happy and productive.
just sayin'



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:14 AM
link   
reply to post by works4dhs
 


Well not help people but more protect the earth. Which in turn would help them.

Im not saying they are good guys. I'm just saying that they also are not necessarily bad guys. By "they" I mean the supposed people running these chemtrail operations, the government or what ever the conspiracy theories say.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Renegade2283
 


It seems like a rhetorical question. Of course 'things' can be disguised as other 'things'. I'm not here for theoretical discussion. I thrive on evidence.

This phrase 'conspiracy theory'. What does it mean exactly? The two separate words have well defined meanings. Where does the extra meaning come from when they're put together?

Would you consider the Hilton Bombing, carried out by ASIO, New South Wales Special Branch and others a 'conspiracy theory'? I'm very closely related to the drunken slob who planted the bomb. I see people trying to 'debunk' the Hilton Bombing 'conspiracy theory' because they are uncomfortable with the implications. I live with the effects of that disgusting crime. How many other 'conspiracy theories' are really uncomfortable facts? Evidence is the key.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Kester
 


Ok well if you are here to provide real evidence why did you just post a video of a contrail shadow. And if you don't want to respond to my rhetorical and theoretical question then don't.

Also I'm not talking about disguising "things". I'm talking about disguising chemicals with the use of contrails specifically. Which you should not have an "of course" answer to.

Second, a Conspiracy is sharing knowledge, usually for a purpose or common goal, without the knowledge of at least one or more person. A conspiracy is when it actually happened. A conspiracy theory is the suggestion of a conspiracy without actually having evidence to prove its existence.
edit on 7-5-2012 by Renegade2283 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Renegade2283
 


Evidence like the WTC debris on Staten Island? Never treated as evidence itself, merely sorted through looking for evidence. When it's treated as evidence average particle size matched to energy input indicates extraordinary demolition. To uphold the 'conspiracy theory' status of the 9/11 story it's necessary to ignore this evidence. It isn't a case of evidence or lack of evidence. It's just choosing which evidence to ignore, even if it weighs around a million tons.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Kester
 


We were talking about chemtrails, not 9/11. I never said that 9/11 was a conspiracy theory, though it technically is because as compelling as all that evidence is it is still inconclusive.

Not saying I believe the official story I am just saying you cant prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is a conspiracy at hand that is not theoretical.

Anyways back on topic I think Im starting to lose understanding in where your going with this because you are constantly changing the subject





new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join