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.

 

A Challenge to Chemtrail Believers - Explain this 1969 Issue of Popular Science:

page: 27
69
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by nihilistnick
The fact one must drudge up from the recesses of popular culture a snippet of non-peer reviewed "science" in the name of debunking the most obvious deceit of weather modification in modern times, is ludicrous. .

Be weary.

-Nick


Except that are literally 100s of peer-reviewed papers written by atmospheric scientists from around the World (many of which HAVE been presented in this thread) over the last 40yrs and they all say the same thing...

This "pop" culture piece merely shows (contrary to popular chemtrail belief) that contrail DO persist and spread and always have been able to persist and spread and it is not some new phenomena that only recently started occurring.

Alas, the existence of this article undermines the entire premise of the "chemtrail" theory.

There is plenty of peer-reviewed hard science to back it up if you are willing to look and learn.

Chemtrail Believers make me very weary indeed...oh so tired...




posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Thorazine
 


I disagree. I think there are more likely to be, literally, thousands of papers
Most of which we don't get to hear about as they are published in minor journals.

But of course, all scientists are in on the conspiracy. Obvious, innit



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by AndyMayhew
 


You may be right...its certainly easy to find out:

scholar.google.com...,5



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uncinus
Chemtrail believers claim that persistent contrails are a new thing, and they call the persistent trails "chemtrails". They also claims that contrails don't last a long time, and they certainly don't spread out and cause cirrus clouds and overcast skies. They also claim the chemtrails started in the late 1990s.

First, calling people "believers" is a bit inaccurate. While there are chemtrail "believers" out there, as there are exceptions to almost everything and every group of people, there are also people who have studied and considered the chemtrail issue with rational objectivity and estimations and informed speculation based on facts gathered from a variety of sources and media. The people I just described are not "believers" because they have studied the issue and base their thoughts and opinions on evidence in its various forms, some even stemming from Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) declassified pages. And, of course, you realize that you're setting up a straw man argument: the oversimplification of the opposing point of view, limited to a single bit of a larger mosaic of facts and theories, in the attempt to shoot down the oversimplified idea that you present, like a lawyer playing-out his opponent's court case for him so that it can be more easily defeated.


Originally posted by Uncinus
So if contrails did this 43 years ago, and back then they were doing it for 30 to 40 days of the year, then why do some people insist that this is something new? Why the mantra of "contrails fade away, chemtrails persist and spread"? Clearly contrails quite frequently persist and spread, at least according to the science of 43 years ago.

Perhaps people did not begin to notice the spraying until the 1990s? Perhaps people noticed chemtrails earlier, as I'm sure they did, but word did not spread until later with the advent of the internet (1990s --coincidence?). There are more possibilities as to why chemtrail perception and documentation might not have begun until the 70s, 80s or 90s. In fact, they might have been noticed far earlier than that, and again, word just didn't spread back then as easily as it does today. And, according to the information that has been presented to me, it is indeed a fact that jet contrails disperse rather quickly as they are a thin streak of water vapor in a large, expansive sky. However, chemtrails have a stronger molecular bond (apparently) based on their contents which is evidently more resilient than water vapor, and thus last far longer as they disperse and expand, even attracting water vapor into their mix (forming clouds) because of their denser molecular makeup. Again, not 100%, but informed speculation based on evidence and information presented. The fact is that water vapor from airliners does not (usually) form clouds. I'm sure there are exceptions, though; for the most part, this is true.


Originally posted by Uncinus
So consider your options here, what could be going on?

A) The Popular Science Article is a modern fake.

B) The Popular Science Article is 1969 Propaganda, brainwashing people for the chemtrails to come.

C) The Popular Science Article is true.

Again, this "straw man" argument oversimplifies the issue, and bases that oversimplification on a single bit of an article. Here are a couple more options:

D) The Popular Science Article is *inaccurate* based on the level of science at that time as well as the scientist's theories. Other scientists' theories from many decades were proven inaccurate. Therefore, the timing of his article doesn't add immediate validity to an idea that has been proven wrong since then.

E) Jetliner travel at that time was relatively new and engine configurations and latest technology may not have had the emission control technology available today, thus allowing emissions to contain particles and other molecular compounds that are filtered and/or do not exist in today's emissions.


Originally posted by Uncinus
So what do you think, chemtrail believers? One of the above? Something else? Clearly someone is lying to you. Is it me? Is it Popular Science from 43 years ago? Or is it Michael J. Murphy?

Lies? Unless you're a paid disinformation agent, I don't think anyone is lying. I think people have different ideas that we're merging, sharing and evolving. Water vapor disperses rather quickly in the atmosphere. If there is more than simple vapor, then it lasts longer, attracts existing vapor and grows. FOIA information has revealed that the government/CIA has sprayed chemicals and toxins over American cities from the 1950s to test the effectiveness of these poisons. (google MK ULTRA). FACT. Do you fully trust a government that has committed these crimes, trust their official stories?



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 


And, according to the information that has been presented to me, it is indeed a fact that jet contrails disperse rather quickly as they are a thin streak of water vapor in a large, expansive sky.
The information which has been presented to you is incorrect. Water vapor is invisible. Contrails, like cirrus clouds, are composed of ice crystals.


The fact is that water vapor from airliners does not (usually) form clouds.
The fact is that water vapor from airliners does produce clouds whenever the atmospheric conditions (temperature, pressure, humidity) allow it.



edit on 7/20/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhostLancer
according to the information that has been presented to me, it is indeed a fact that jet contrails disperse rather quickly as they are a thin streak of water vapor in a large, expansive sky.



This is the crux of the issue. Your understanding is incorrect...which leads you to assumptions and conclusions that will, inevitably, also be incorrect.

In fact, the article from the OP shows that your belief was incorrect even back in 1969

I am curious- what is this "information" that has been presented to you...can you supply it?

Alas, said information is wrong...contrails are NOT water vapor...water VAPOR is invisible...a contrails gets its name from the aforementioned vapor condensing into droplets- which then freeze into ice crystals...because its well below zero at typical flight levels...

These ice crystals either dissipate quickly or persist depending on ambient humidity levels...

Follow this link to 100s of papers written over the last several decades that shows how your understanding...your belief...is incorrect:

scholar.google.com...



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advancedboy
Chemtrails can`t be debunked with references to popular scientific magazines that are even unable to talk about physics behind WTC 7 collapse. We know how reliable those large printing houses are, some are so reliable that they even have 6 reporters going to work simultaneously on a 200 yard strip along the Pentagon so they could report a striking aeroplane; go USA Today.
I have collected a lot of suspicious videos, follow the link and study the cases. Then report back.


www.alienscientist.com.../page3
edit on 08.15.09 by Advancedboy because: (no reason given)

Very good point, Advancedboy. If I remember correctly, just 20 years ago (or so), the country had about 55 different media companys. TV stations, radio stations, newspapers, magazines, etc. Over the last couple/few decades, these separate media entities have been distilled down to (last I heard/read/saw) FIVE. The end result is that 100% of the mass media we rely on are owned by a handful of compaines, and who knows if there are singular owners of these five companies (i.e. one or two larger corporations that own these last five seemingly separate compaines). With this much ownership of our media. it is **certain** that important stories, ideas, theories and some people are buried, distorted and/or ridiculed by the media.

Example: Charlie Sheen speaks out about 9-11. The media ridicules him and overblows reporting on his possible addiction, engaging him --daring him to take the bait and publically strike back, which he does and this fuels the fire for their initial plan.

Example: Governor Jesse Ventura speaks out about MANY stories not reported in mainstream media. His show is edited and put on hiatus. I liked his show, for it covered (uncovered) facts that the general public is not exposed to, such as the proliferation of biological warfare labs throughout our country and other facts (chemtrails included). Fox News attempted to railroad his interview and portray him as a loon, even having one of their "coolest" commentators harshly stomp off the stage.

Example: Important stories such as Morgellon's disease get very little media coverage. The doctor who spoke out against vaccinations was buried by the media, to the point where the man had to "cave in" and relent in order to continue to make a living even though he brought forth important facts about the issue and revealed that vaccine companies previously used mercury-based preservatives in childrens' vaccines --a fact not mentioned frequently if ever by the media.

I can go on, but this is about chemtrails. The media is not covering chemtrails for whatever reasons their corporate owners have to keep this topic suppressed.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thorazine

Originally posted by GhostLancer
according to the information that has been presented to me, it is indeed a fact that jet contrails disperse rather quickly as they are a thin streak of water vapor in a large, expansive sky.



This is the crux of the issue. Your understanding is incorrect...which leads you to assumptions and conclusions that will, inevitably, also be incorrect.

In fact, the article from the OP shows that your belief was incorrect even back in 1969

I am curious- what is this "information" that has been presented to you...can you supply it?

Alas, said information is wrong...contrails are NOT water vapor...water VAPOR is invisible...a contrails gets its name from the aforementioned vapor condensing into droplets- which then freeze into ice crystals...because its well below zero at typical flight levels...

These ice crystals either dissipate quickly or persist depending on ambient humidity levels...

Follow this link to 100s of papers written over the last several decades that shows how your understanding...your belief...is incorrect:

scholar.google.com...

Okay, let me rephrase in simpler terms: The WHITE STUFF that comes out of jetliners that looks like thin, vaprous clouds NORMALLY disperses quickly unless there is more to it that water vapor --or ice crystals--- or whatever that "normal" stuff consists of. That's what I meant when I said water vapor. I mis-wrote.

The gist of it was to differentiate between the NORMAL WHITE STUFF that dissipates quickly and the ABNORMAL trails that don't, that go on to form clouds because there is more in them than crystals, than whatever is cleaner and "normal."

But, good to see that you skipped over the other points, that FOIA requests have proven the government has sprayed toxins, agents and chemicals over population centers in our own country to test the effectiveness of both the agents and the dispersal method! Google MK ULTRA FOIA.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhostLancer
Okay, let me rephrase in simpler terms: The WHITE STUFF that comes out of jetliners that looks like thin, vaprous clouds NORMALLY disperses quickly unless there is more to it that water vapor --or ice crystals--- or whatever that "normal" stuff consists of. That's what I meant when I said water vapor. I mis-wrote.


Can you explain why you think that? It appears to contradict all known physics and history of water and contrails.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 





Example: Governor Jesse Ventura speaks out about MANY stories not reported in mainstream media. His show is edited and put on hiatus. I liked his show, for it covered (uncovered) facts that the general public is not exposed to, such as the proliferation of biological warfare labs throughout our country and other facts (chemtrails included). Fox News attempted to railroad his interview and portray him as a loon, even having one of their "coolest" commentators harshly stomp off the stage.


That comment speaks volumes about you,and the way you think...

Jesse Ventura....seriously ???



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by GhostLancer
 





Example: Important stories such as Morgellon's disease get very little media coverage. The doctor who spoke out against vaccinations was buried by the media, to the point where the man had to "cave in" and relent in order to continue to make a living even though he brought forth important facts about the issue and revealed that vaccine companies previously used mercury-based preservatives in childrens' vaccines --a fact not mentioned frequently if ever by the media.


Stories about something that isn't even a known to be a disease such as Morgellons usually don't make for good news.

The CDC had this to say about a study they did on Morgellons..


This comprehensive study of an unexplained apparent dermopathy demonstrated no infectious cause and no evidence of an environmental link. There was no indication that it would be helpful to perform additional testing for infectious diseases as a potential cause. Future efforts should focus on helping patients reduce their symptoms through careful attention to treatment of co-existing medical, including psychiatric conditions, that might be contributing to their symptoms.


www.cdc.gov...



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhostLancer
The media is not covering chemtrails for whatever reasons their corporate owners have to keep this topic suppressed.


Nor are internet weather and aviation forums, around the world, covering this subject, other than as a matter of ridicule.

btw 99% of media outlets are NOT american, Be wary of parochialism

edit on 20-7-2012 by AndyMayhew because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   
I notice the article doesn't mention "Chem-trails", just the average "Con-trails"...
Is it because they didn't start for about 15 years after this?



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by LosTNForGotteNWayS
I notice the article doesn't mention "Chem-trails", just the average "Con-trails"...
Is it because they didn't start for about 15 years after this?


But what they are describing is exactly what the chemtrail promoters now call "chemtrails".

The point is that aircraft trails have always persisted like this, in fact since the 1920s. The idea that persistent trails are "chemtrails" is a hoax.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhostLancer

Originally posted by Advancedboy

Example: Charlie Sheen speaks out about 9-11. The media ridicules him and overblows reporting on his possible addiction, engaging him --daring him to take the bait and publically strike back, which he does and this fuels the fire for their initial plan.



I can go on, but this is about chemtrails. The media is not covering chemtrails for whatever reasons their corporate owners have to keep this topic suppressed.

For one any Charlie Sheen story after the late 90's are going to bring up his past drug issues because he's most famous for being the bad boy drug addict who doesn't give a crap a similar situation is Lindsay Lohan. Lets not forget most tv shows praised him for speaking out what he believes no matter what and allowed him, Alex Jones, and Webster Tarpley to come on shows and talk about it. I'm a huge Charlie Sheen fan but possbile addiction are you kidding he was getting high when he was speaking out on 9/11 and just ruined his marriage to Denise Richards due to drug addiction and threats of violence and don't even get me started on Jesse Ventura's tv show.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
OP you do know that most Magazines, (including popular science) Newspapers, Textbook companies, News stations and even the movie industry are in the Council on Foreign Relations? Of course this is bull#. Even then, you don't have to believe that the Gov. is releasing deadly Toxins. Everybody on the planet is if they are using a petrol engine.

Not only that, but you have the deadliest toxin in the world in quite a few of your products. Mercury, the deadliest toxin in the world, is in your CFL lights, it's in High Fructose Corn Syrup, It's in your dental fillings, it's in your vaccines, and a majority of it is released in Coal Plants and car emissions.

We should never allow Mercury to be prevalent around us or in our diet other then the fish we eat from the Pacific. Yes, Mercury occurs naturally in Pacific Ocean fish, but in trace amounts, to which your body can naturally detox it with the correct natural supplements. (Not with your dental fillings, you have to get them removed first before detox)

The same people that are poisoning us are the same that are making a killing in the Pharmaceutical Cartel.

It is no coincidence.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

www.businesswire.com...

www.dentalwellness4u.com...

Do you know what these people are making off of Heart Disease? One of the Primary diseases from Mercury Poisoning? They're making a killing.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by nihilistnick
The fact one must drudge up from the recesses of popular culture a snippet of non-peer reviewed "science" in the name of debunking the most obvious deceit of weather modification in modern times, is ludicrous. This whole post smells fishier than fish! CoIntelPro anyone? ATS reeks of senseless disinformation these days. Anyway. Just wanted to make my first post on ATS with an intriguing story, after monitoring it for a while now. There is a lot of disinfo on here, possibly the work of government agents. Be weary. Take in all facts and all sides of every story and don't jump to crazy conclusions - but always remember: the owners of the world and its governments and corporations are not to be trusted!

Anyone else been down the Broad Rivers or witnessed military aircraft watching them while kayaking or other outdoor adventuring?
-Nick

So Because this person brings up facts and evidence he's a disinfo agent? He showed that a very popular theory for chemtrail believers had been debunked many years before chemtrails even came into question. When the OP or anyone else on here brings up the other hundreds of peer-reviewed sources they aren't valid because everyone knows scientist are working for the TPTB so he really can't win. I was buying in to the whole chemtrail theory but the more and more I read it's getting harder to believe.



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kang69
OP you do know that most Magazines, (including popular science) Newspapers, Textbook companies, News stations and even the movie industry are in the Council on Foreign Relations? Of course this is bull#. Even then, you don't have to believe that the Gov. is releasing deadly Toxins. Everybody on the planet is if they are using a petrol engine.

The same people that are poisoning us are the same that are making a killing in the Pharmaceutical Cartel.

It is no coincidence.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

www.businesswire.com...

www.dentalwellness4u.com...

Do you know what these people are making off of Heart Disease? One of the Primary diseases from Mercury Poisoning? They're making a killing.


How are pharmaceuticals and contrails connected? Oh...they are spraying the pharmaceutical poison in the contrails...I suppose [facepalm]...

Just for kicks, though....these evil pharmaceuticals have somehow changed their desire to help (i.e., elimination of polio/diphtheria/whooping cough and other scourges of humanity) in order to poison us through medicine....gotcha chicky...yeah...



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by totallackey
 


I know you have not looked at the vaccines having ethyl mercury put in them toprevent bacteria from growing in them .They have found that ethyl mercury causes hormonal problems causing misscarriages . Any form of mercury will cause neurological problems and has been heavly thought to cause autism in children 24 hours after innoculation . In the report to Congress in1977 the military has admitted that they have injected all kinds of things in civilian people including a plutonium substance . Suspicion ? Why would people suspect that the drug industry and the military would do things to hurt them .



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by totallackey
 

. Any form of mercury will cause neurological problems ..


That's not quite true - there are a number of non-toxic mercury compounds....just for the sake of accuracy
]

but in general - yeah - mercury is not good for you.

However what has it got to do with chemtrails?




top topics



 
69
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join