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

reply to post by fireyaguns

The Idaho Observer reported with considerable skepticism that the General Accounting Office admitted that chemtrails exist but that they are “merely” fiberglass particles coated with aluminum whose health effects are unknown but whose existence is now acknowledged after decades of official denial.

Any chance you have a link to the Idaho Observer article and not from someones blog?

Don't get me wrong blogs are good,but I would rather see the original article since a blog makes it easier to maybe embelish the facts.

reply to post by fireyaguns

Just because you haven’t found evidence doesn’t mean there is none. You are not looking because you have made up your mind already. Let the ignorant be ignorant.

Now that can go both ways as the chemtrail believers have their minds made up, and will not believe any evidence that is presented to them that contradicts their beliefs.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


also it is not just because "we" have not found any evidence.

no-one else has either - not even those who think "it" is happening - eg Rosalind Peterson

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I find it funny that Rosalind Peterson has finally admitted that there isn't any evidence to support the chemtrail hoax. I am not surprised that she admitted that, but I wonder why it took her so long?

reply to post by Uncinus


Chaff being released from some planes, jets and/or aircrafts is 100% chemtrails. You just won’t admit you’re wrong.
You are also a liar.
Why not provide some evidence that chaff has no chemicals in it and is not left in a trail behind some planes, jets and/or aircrafts.
No matter how you go about twisting the explanation you can’t prove that chaff has no chemicals in it. You can’t prove chaff is not trailed out of some planes, jets and/or aircrafts.
Chemtrails are real, they are dispersed above us in our atmosphere without our agreement or permission and you defend that.

reply to post by fireyaguns


You just saying something is so, does not make it so. In what way does chaff dispensing resemble, in any way, a long white trail that stretches for miles and sits in the air?

You calling everyone with a different opinion to yours "liars" does nothing for your credibility. Neither does making stuff up about what other people are saying, I mean, DEFENDING chemtrailing? Really? Show me where.

Originally posted by fireyaguns
reply to post by Uncinus

 

No matter how you go about twisting the explanation you can’t prove that chaff has no chemicals in it. You can’t prove chaff is not trailed out of some planes, jets and/or aircrafts.

"Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense."

Google 'Russel's teapot' or 'flying spaghetti monster' for a more light-hearted take...

Seriously, the gist of your last post was just "it's real, you can't prove it isn't, so NER!"

Originally posted by fireyaguns
reply to post by Uncinus

 

Chaff being released from some planes, jets and/or aircrafts is 100% chemtrails. You just won’t admit you’re wrong.

Why is it a chemtrail when the definition commonly used is a secret material that looks liek contrails (chaff does not), that is released at high altitude in cruise (chaff is not), for some unknown purpose (we know why chaff is used), by civilian airliners (chaff is not - except maybe El Al who I beleive have some defence mechanisms fitted to their a/c?)?

Why not provide some evidence that chaff has no chemicals in it and is not left in a trail behind some planes, jets and/or aircrafts.

Of course it has chemicals in it and is released from aircraft. But that is not what chemtrails are supposed to be - they are not EVERY chemical released from aircraft, or they would have to include the exhaust even when the exhaust is not visible - such as at takeoff.

No matter how you go about twisting the explanation you can’t prove that chaff has no chemicals in it. You can’t prove chaff is not trailed out of some planes, jets and/or aircrafts.
Chemtrails are real, they are dispersed above us in our atmosphere without our agreement or permission and you defend that.

You have no idea what it is chemtrails actually are supposed to be.

You have adopted a common and erroneous definition that chemtrails are every chemical released from aircraft, without bothering to think what that actually means.

Esterline Technologies based in Bellevue Washingtion has had US defence contracts totalling over $252 million. From 2002-2003 its contracts grew from $36 million to $116 million. Half of the contracts to the Pentagon has been catagorized as "Research and Development".

Chaff has aluminized fiberglass particles which can stay in the air for 20-hours or longer. And when mixed with fuel additives and other emmissions there becomes a real risk of several layers of aerial deception: weather modification, electronic controls, atmospheric heating (HAARP) and a whole stew of other interests.

Originally posted by fireyaguns
Esterline Technologies based in Bellevue Washingtion has had US defence contracts totalling over $252 million. From 2002-2003 its contracts grew from $36 million to $116 million. Half of the contracts to the Pentagon has been catagorized as "Research and Development".

and?? uz:

Chaff has aluminized fiberglass particles which can stay in the air for 20-hours or longer. And when mixed with fuel additives and other emmissions

when is this done?

there becomes a real risk of several layers of aerial deception: weather modification, electronic controls, atmospheric heating (HAARP) and a whole stew of other interests.

Says who? You?? Any actual evidence to back up this claim?

There you all go again, spewing BS and denying the truth.

Not one of you have put up a single peice of evidence showing chaff contains no chemicals or have any one of you shown that chaff is not trailed out of planes, jets and or aircrafts.

reply to post by fireyaguns

Chaff is not particles. Chaff is fibers.


Chaff is not "trailed", it is ejected in bundles. The bundles seen above.
www.globalsecurity.org...

Originally posted by fireyaguns
There you all go again, spewing BS and denying the truth.

Not one of you have put up a single peice of evidence showing chaff contains no chemicals or have any one of you shown that chaff is not trailed out of planes, jets and or aircrafts.

Why would "we" want to?

reply to post by Phage


No, chaff is chemicals formed into a chemical matter and dispersed from planes.

It so easy to understand. Why don't you all get it. A grade one student can undrestand this better than you guys.

EVERYTHING contains chemicals.

Chaff started out as something called 'Window', aluminium foil strips cut to varying lengths literally thrown by hand in bundles out of RAF Bombers flying over Germany to confuse the defending forces radar screen. At the same time the Germans were developing the same sort of defensive aid, which they called Duppel, as they do today. Phages picture above shows you what this has evolved to now with canisters of the type shown above ejected from attacking aircraft dispensing clouds of very fine fibres that are virtually invisible to the naked eye on the ground unless reflecting sunlight that do the same job whenever radar is detected.

You still have not said how, in your eyes, this resembles the long white trails that airliners typically leave behind?

"chemicals formed into chemical matter" is just meaningless bollocks. You don't even know hat you are talking about.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Thank you, you just showed you can not.
Defeat excepted.

reply to post by fireyaguns

Chaff is not particles. It is fibers.
Chaff is not "trailed" it is dispensed in bursts.

No, chaff is chemicals formed into a chemical matter and dispersed from planes.

A fart is chemicals formed into a chemical matter and dispersed from your rear.

reply to post by waynos


What your implying is only military fighting jets use chaff?
What your also implying is chaff has only one purpose?

reply to post by Phage


Is this your attemp to admit chemtrails exist?
It seems childish but I will except you defeat also.

Thank you

Originally posted by fireyaguns
reply to post by waynos

 

What your implying is only military fighting jets use chaff?
What your also implying is chaff has only one purpose?

No and no, in that order. I wrote what I wrote, I inferred nothing. There is a passable article about chaff on wiki which mentions other uses, I was also aware of El Al's introducing defensive aids including chaff back in the 1970's when they ran trials on Vickers Viscounts.

Not sure where you pick your inferences up from.