Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

History 101 of the Chemtrail Hoax

page: 8
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by r2d246
ya but the Nazi's invented the idea of putting floride in water at the concentration camps.


How about you do some of tha research that you insist others do??

There is actually no credible evidence that fluoride was used in any concentration camps at all.

The sole source of the story was Charles Perkins - so who was Charles Perkins and where did he get his info?

There is a claim he was sent by the US Govt to take charge of I.G. Faben after WW2 - but Perkins himself makes no actual mention of any connection with I. G. Faben in his book - an odd omission since it would be quite an important association to establish his credentials, and neither he nor fluoride rate any mention in "The Crime and Punishment of IG Farben".

Also I.G. Farbin had it's own war trial - the records are available online & I see no mention of Perkins or Fluoride in them - but they are very long - it's entirely possible I missed it so please feel free to point them out if you find any.

his failure to provide any documented link is analysed here.

Others have looked for evidence to support the claim - eg this forum discussion from 2009, and this one - AFAIK no-one has actually found any.

Just another BS conspiracy myth made up to scare people.


You're a former SS officer!!!! I know it! You escaped on a sub and made it to some other country so you didn't have to face war crimes! Admit it!




posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 


Aloysius is just doing what everyone should do -- looking for evidence to back up a claim.

Just because someone makes a claim, that does not necessarily mean it is true -- even if you THINK IT SHOULD BE TRUE. An unsubstantiated claim that supports your pre-existing notions is not automatically true just because it supports your pre-existing notions.

edit on 11/19/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by supergravity
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 




The Idaho Observer has a long history of printing complete and absolute bullsh*t, and this is part of it. I'm familiar with their reputation (or lack thereof) because I've lived in Idaho since 1989. This "report" is a complete fabrication.

*EDIT*

I am speaking about the first of the two pictures here. I dont know much in regards to the second one, but others might.
edit on 19-11-2012 by flyswatter because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by supergravity
 


First of all, as mentioned in the post above, the Idaho Observer lacks credibility...

...But secondly (and more importantly), even if we ignore the Idaho Observer's questionable reputation, and take those stories (images) you posted at face value, I would like to know what those two images you posted have anything whatsoever to do with Charles Perkins and/or the use of fluoride in WWII concentration camps.

Did I miss a connection?


edit on 11/19/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by r2d246
 


Aloysius is just doing what everyone should do -- looking for evidence to back up a claim.


I think he might have been having a little giggle...



because someone makes a claim, that does not necessarily mean it is true -- even if you THINK IT SHOULD BE TRUE. An unsubstantiated claim that supports your pre-existing notions is not automatically true just because it supports your pre-existing notions.


But that said - yes this is how things should work, especially on a site with the motto "deny ignorance"!



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by supergravity
 


I don't normally quote Rense, but even he says that there is no evidence that they ever used Ethylene Dibromide in jet fuel.

rense.com...

The only sources I can see that say JP8 has EDB in it are chemtrail sites. Even the MSDS for JP8 doesn't show EDB, and it's required to show all hazardous chemicals.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by supergravity
 


I don't normally quote Rense, but even he says that there is no evidence that they ever used Ethylene Dibromide in jet fuel.

rense.com...

The only sources I can see that say JP8 has EDB in it are chemtrail sites. Even the MSDS for JP8 doesn't show EDB, and it's required to show all hazardous chemicals.


It wa apaprently used as an anti-knock additive in gasoline - piston engine fuel - see EPA site, andEPA fact sheet -


Ethylene dibromide is mainly used (83% of all use) as a scavenger for lead in anti-knock gasoline mixtures, particularly in aviation fuel.


and Swift fuels page on 100LL leaded Avgas


100LL, also known as 100 octane aviation fuel (100 Low Lead), is a petroleum fuel designed for reciprocating aircraft engines. This gasoline has an octane number of no less than 99.6, adheres to ASTM Specification D 910, and contains tetraethyl lead as an anti-knock agent. The addition of tetraethyl lead (TEL) in aviation gasoline also requires the addition of ethylene dibromide (EDB) as a scavenger to help remove lead oxide from engine components after combustion. The resulting emission product is mostly a lead dibromide particulate which enters the atmosphere and pollutes the environment with lead. Unlike other pollutants, this compound is never absorbed or reacted into something less harmful.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by r2d246
 


Aloysius is just doing what everyone should do -- looking for evidence to back up a claim.

Just because someone makes a claim, that does not necessarily mean it is true -- even if you THINK IT SHOULD BE TRUE. An unsubstantiated claim that supports your pre-existing notions is not automatically true just because it supports your pre-existing notions.

edit on 11/19/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)


okay here's proof!




posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 


OK -- I saw the brief part of that where Alex Jones makes mention of the Nazi's using fluoride to control people in the prison camps (and people in general), but I didn't see any corroborating evidence to back up that claim; all I heard was the claim.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Alex Jones doesn't lie. he's got 10 million listeners scrutinizing his stuff. If he lies it hurts his rep and he'll be exposed. The Nazi's were taken to the you-us during paperclip Opp. Now they and their decendents run much of the show. Rand, see eye ah, pentagram etc etc, all had the nazi's in them. So they tought the you es how to make the people more dosile.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by r2d246
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Alex Jones doesn't lie. he's got 10 million listeners scrutinizing his stuff. If he lies it hurts his rep and he'll be exposed. The Nazi's were taken to the you-us during paperclip Opp. Now they and their decendents run much of the show. Rand, see eye ah, pentagram etc etc, all had the nazi's in them. So they tought the you es how to make the people more dosile.


So tell me all about the hour long infomercial that he had yesterday with the quack doc, trying to sell potentially harmful products to a consumer base of yes men?

Trying to use anything coming from Alex Jones as proof of something is a bad idea, for either side of an argument. If you would like some sort of credibility with your argument, go do your own research on the subject of what he showed and dont just regurgitate his crap.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 





Alex Jones doesn't lie. he's got 10 million listeners scrutinizing his stuff. If he lies it hurts his rep and he'll be exposed.


You really don't believe this do you?

Hurt his reputation, seriously?







I am pretty sure he doesn't care about his reputation when you take a good look at his videos..

BTW he was exposed a long time ago...



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 





Now they and their decendents run much of the show.


And what show would that be?



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by r2d246
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Alex Jones doesn't lie. he's got 10 million listeners scrutinizing his stuff. If he lies it hurts his rep and he'll be exposed. The Nazi's were taken to the you-us during paperclip Opp. Now they and their decendents run much of the show. Rand, see eye ah, pentagram etc etc, all had the nazi's in them. So they tought the you es how to make the people more dosile.


Take nothing you hear or read at face value.

What you said about Alex Jones could be said about the mainstream media, also. So do you automatically believe what Alex Jones said just because he said it. Do you automatically believe what you hear in the mainstream media, just because they say something? Or do you do you do what you should, and check the facts to see if they jibe with what is already known, or can be confirmed to be true.

If you don't take what mainstream media says at face value "just because they said it", then why would you do that with Alex Jones, or any information outlet (on TV, radio, internet, etc.)?

Don't be a sheeple. Don't automatically believe information you hear at face value.


edit on 11/20/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
(Yaawwnnn...) Excuse me, I've been in a coma for the last 20 years and I recently awakened only to discover that here in the 21st century there's these people who actually spend their days being frightened by streaks of water vapor in the sky. Is this correct? What next... Cargo-Cults? Where's the Jack Daniels? I need to go back to sleep.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
I realize those vested interests with military or private contractor allegiences don't like to discuss the enormous amount of weather mod (and other tests) on going daily around the planet, but it's impossible to deny with a straight face, I posted weeks worth of reading in the former links and it was found better to ignore it than discuss it.

from a previous link: (sourced above several times)

Just the tip of the tip of the tip of the (melting) iceberg

Just a few in the U.S.: (that are acknowledged)



United States Aeromet, Inc. (L-3 Communications) – U.S Department of Defense
BAMEX – Bow Echo and Mesoscale Convective Vortex Experiment
CALIPSO – CloudSat Validation Experiment
Delaware Department of Agriculture Cloud Seeding Program
Edwards Aquifer Authority
Federal Aviation Administration – Great Lakes Division
Gratiot Weather Modification Project
Illinois Weather Modification Projects
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – National Hurricane Center
Naval Surface Warfare Center
Nevada State Cloud Seeding Program
New Mexico BLAST (Burst Light and Stratus Transmission) Project
North Dakota Cloud Modification Project (NDCMP)
North Dakota Thunderstorm Project – North Dakota Atmospheric Resource Board
North Dakota Tracer Experiment – North Dakota Atmospheric Resource Board
Northeast Sampling Program – Sonoma Technology, Inc.
NSF/NCAR ICE-L Field Campaign
Oklahoma Weather Modification Project (OWMP)
Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District Rainfall Enhancement Program
Santa Barbara County Water Agency
Sonoma Technology, Inc.
Stanislaus Weather Modification Program
State of South Dakota – Department of Natural Resources Division of Weather Modification
Texas Central High Plains Rainfall Enhancement Program
Texas Experiment in Augmenting Rainfall through Cloud Seeding (TEXARC)
Texas Weather Modification Program
The University of North Dakota – US Environmental Protection Agency
University of Arizona – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Upper American River Cloud Seeding Project
Upper Payette River Basin Cloud Seeding Program
Upper Tuolumne River Weather Modification Program
Utah Division of Water Resources
Utah Division of Water Resources
West Central Texas Council of Governments Rainfall Enhancement Program
Western Dakota Water Development District – Black Hills Council of Local Government
Wyoming Weather Modification Pilot Program


edit on 21-11-2012 by Tecumte because: sp



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Here's a part of why we have these ridiculous threads here with ridiculous titles like... "chemtrail hoax" lol, whatever, and people engage in these silly exchanges to infinity, pretending to look, but not really,instead of engaging in bringing forward these topics, there is enough info on weather mod and tests to spend weeks if not months researching but instead the 'usual suspects' can't help but reverting back to the usual ways. Yawn...


* In the Las Vegas Tribune report, the U.S. Air Force on their website called chemtrails a “chemtrail hoax*

,” but “scientists working at Wright Patterson Air Force Base confirmed to the Ohio newspaper, Columbus Alive, that they were involved in aerial spraying experiments. One involved aluminum oxide spraying related to global warming and the other involved barium stearate and had to do with high-tech military communications.”


Yes those affilated with the Air Force have to take the 'official' posiition 'chemtrail hoax', and deny deny deny. I just found that part of the article interesting.

The rest of the article can be read here, maybe sensationistic, but I would think it entirely plausible many of these 'theoretical' weather mod chemicals used for these 'cloud projects' are finding their way to the ground and are being detected in sample analysis. I'm not sure yet of the proposed link in increase in neuro disease could be from lots of sources, but if aluminum is being used in large amounts, I would imagine not good.

www.theepochtimes.com...






edit on 21-11-2012 by Tecumte because: link and text added
edit on 21-11-2012 by Tecumte because: text added



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 





Here's a part of why we have these ridiculous threads here with ridiculous titles like... "chemtrail hoax" lol, whatever, and people engage in these silly exchanges to infinity, pretending to look, but not really,instead of engaging in bringing forward these topics, there is enough info on weather mod and tests to spend weeks if not months researching but instead the 'usual suspects' can't help but reverting back to the usual ways. Yawn...


Well I found this very funny when I visited your link...



and the description of the photo...


A woman looks up at the mass of contrails left by a jet aircraft crossing the sky above St. Michael's Tower near Glastonbury, England. (Matt Cardy/Getty Images)


www.theepochtimes.com...

Yet this is the title to the article...


“Chemtrails” rain aluminum nanoparticles on man, beast, and land.


Do you see what the problem here is?



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 


So this was from your link which you quote...


In the Las Vegas Tribune report, the U.S. Air Force on their website called chemtrails a “chemtrail hoax,” but “scientists working at Wright Patterson Air Force Base confirmed to the Ohio newspaper, Columbus Alive, that they were involved in aerial spraying experiments. One involved aluminum oxide spraying related to global warming and the other involved barium stearate and had to do with high-tech military communications.”


But I found something that was very interesting...


The documentary film What in the World Are They Spraying? produced by G. Edward Griffin, Michael Murphy, and Paul Wittenberger shows the impact on the environment of chemtrails. For instance, the snow on Mount Shasta normally has 7 parts per billion (ppb) of aluminum, but over the last four or five years it has increased to 61,000 ppb.


Well, that in itself shows the site is less than credible, but take a look at this concerning that movie..

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I would try and find a better source than that..





new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join