History 101 of the Chemtrail Hoax

page: 9
20
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
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?




Yes, I see the problem quite well. We have a very finite but powerfully connnected group of people who want to play god with the entire earth , and the rest of the 99.999999% of humanity that want to be left alone. Nothing much seems to change except the technology and means for 1000s of years.




posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 


Try again - there is a serious problem immediately visible in the photo - and it has nothing to do with the tower leaning!!


think about the inconsistancy between "chemicals raining down"...and "chemtrails" persisting.....



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
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..


Would you really? Well how have your efforts panned out? Can you list some usefull sources you've found, regarding weather mod., that can help us take this discussion forward???

Weeks of reading material links posted and all we get are the usual methods by the usual suspects. I don't think the word 'chemtrails' does justice to the vast amounts of weather engineering/ mod going on, but neither do I find the usual suspects, only working to derail and never adding anything of value, to be very effective. Our air, like our water, and our food, and our soil, and our DNA, are being intentionally modified. I would hope people would work to add to the discussion, rather than the 'usual methods', it will end up affecting us all, regardless of just how 'protected' anyone feels. Got something usefull???



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 


There is little difficulty finding informatino around the web about weather modification that is factually based - from the wiki article to articles from the early days of the activity such as this one from 1967 discussing the international legal implications



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 





Yes, I see the problem quite well. We have a very finite but powerfully connnected group of people who want to play god with the entire earth , and the rest of the 99.999999% of humanity that want to be left alone.


Well that isn't what I was talking about, but hey your way sounds more conspiratorial than what I was talking about.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
reply to post by Tecumte
 





Yes, I see the problem quite well. We have a very finite but powerfully connnected group of people who want to play god with the entire earth , and the rest of the 99.999999% of humanity that want to be left alone.


Well that isn't what I was talking about, but hey your way sounds more conspiratorial than what I was talking about.


I'm sure it does, it's not really a 'conspiracy'. as such (but you have to research a bit) just a science based business model.Who is going to Own The Weather??? And how will they use that control once achieved...? for Order out of Chaos scenarios that will help bring them the desired outcomes??? Stay tuned..lol.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 09:00 AM
link   
So who is going to "Own The Weather" in the end? And who will they be accountable to?

www.zengardner.com...



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Keep reading, watching,learning and sharing what you find. Yes the earth's atmosphere is being intentionally modified daily. These constant weather modification efforts are not just seeding for rain (flooding) but more so for directing precipitation which also means creating drought over acres of otherwise productive farmland. Betting successfully on weather outcomes means big financial payouts changing hands, allows for corporate buyouts of farmers parched and scorched (or drowned) farmland, allows for commodity price manipulation and aids in the Agenda 21 restructering of land use.

www.geoengineeringwatch.org...



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 





www.geoengineeringwatch.org...


Why don't we take at a few things on that site shall we...



How many times does this video need to be thrown out there...Btw it's not really chemtrails you see...



And they also are hocking these two jems...



And thyen we have this...



www.chemtrailforecast.com...

Not much credibility there..



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 


Who will own the weather you ask?
In the 80's a Russian author wrote a book called "weather wars". He stated in the near future countries would attack each other with weather weapons and the people would not be allowed to know about it because it would cause widespread panic.
Things that make you go hummmm.



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by supergravity
reply to post by Tecumte
 


Who will own the weather you ask?
In the 80's a Russian author wrote a book called "weather wars". He stated in the near future countries would attack each other with weather weapons and the people would not be allowed to know about it because it would cause widespread panic.
Things that make you go hummmm.


While it appears localities, private individuals, counties, states, and national govs/militaries are all working to own the weather, supranational bodies (UN etc.) may be playing an even geater role in dicatating who gets rain, who doesn't, who gets drought, who get's tropical storms lessened. who get's 'urban renewal' though weaponized storms/flooding, who gets an excess of food, who get's famine etc., all the while blaming this on the poliically usefull 'global warming'.

As these unelected (behind the scenes) bodies stretch their tenacles deeper around the destruction of nation states and work to impose their will on the 'future of mankind', and as their ability to manipulate by stealth increases so will it's use.



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 



When viewing sites related to discovering projects that many are still hesitant to openly discuss (and others who are employed as intentional stumbling blocks) I realize there will indeed be speculation as there has to be. But I'm much more focused on just how these cloud building and seeding programs are being carried out and their results, so much info already posted on that but none of it barely touched. Rather than trying to find the fly on the camels @ how about let's help others learn just how many of these programs are ongoing around the globe and how competing interests owning the weather are doing just that.

From another link with perhaps some usable info (make sure to read the comments at the end, such as the one quoted, the entire net is awakening to this constant weather mod. despite the attempts of those who wish to play 'god' in the shadows.)




Pikaplookie on 11/09/2012 at 9:55 pm said:
They don’t even try to hide it here in Texas. Though when I questioned about what was in the crap they are spraying I get this response: “I can only tell you what is being used in Texas for rain enhancement (cloud seeding). The attachment is a listing of the ingredients used in pyrotechnics (or flares) to disperse seeding materials.”

“I can only tell you what is being used for rain seeding” as if there are other projects he’s not allowed to discuss with the public.

Here is the info he sent me:
Composition of the RS-3 pyrotechnic (flare) manufactured in San Angelo and used in the Texas cloud seeding program:
AgIO3 62 percent
KClO4 15 percent
NH4ClO4 8 percent
Gilsonite 8 percent
Epoxy resin 7 percent

State website brags about the project: www.license.state.tx.us...


www.zengardner.com...


edit on 23-11-2012 by Tecumte because: link added



posted on Nov, 26 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Thats what I thought,,,LOL

You guys really need to stop.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 


From your own quoted post...




Pikaplookie on 11/09/2012 at 9:55 pm said:
They don’t even try to hide it here in Texas. Though when I questioned about what was in the crap they are spraying I get this response: “I can only tell you what is being used in Texas for rain enhancement (cloud seeding). The attachment is a listing of the ingredients used in pyrotechnics (or flares) to disperse seeding materials.”


You do understand why they don't try to hide cloud seeding don't you?

Cloud seeding has been going on for over 60 years and is nothing new.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Tecumte
 



“I can only tell you what is being used for rain seeding” as if there are other projects he’s not allowed to discuss with the public.


OR, he can only tell you the stuff he knows about. It is a perfectly reasonable response from, for example, someone who may be familiar with cloud seeding that is being questioned about aerial spraying in general.

You appear to be presenting speculative interpretation as proof. Perspective is a good thing.

Also, there is nothing in the link that lends any credibility to chemtrails. I see an article that declares the chemtrail threat exists, with contrail photos to illustrate, but no attempt to show why they arent contrails, then tries to justify that position by listing known wrongdoings of the past that arent, themselves, anything to do with chemtrails, with a photo of Nazi uniforms thrown in for alliterative resonance just in case the reader isn't picking up the vibe. What in there do you consider useful?
edit on 27-11-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


You think you know more than a member of the intelligence committee?



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by supergravity
 


And read the history on that. He never even read the bill. It was written by an environmental group and introduced by him as a political favor to someone.


One of the more pervasive myths regarding “chemtrails” is that 2008 presidential hopeful Dennis Kuchinich tried to have them banned by an act of congress, but was pressured by the government to modify the act to remove the mention of “chemtrails”.

So what really happened? In a nutshell, Kucinich did not write the bill (or read it, until too late), the focus of the bill is nothing to do with chemtrails, it was written by UFO enthusiasts Alfred Webre and Carol Rosin, who were trying to:

Nullify a vast conspiracy by the “military-industrial complex”
Allow the use of suppressed alien technology for free energy
Avoid accidentally shooting down (or scaring away) visiting aliens.
They listed a bunch of weird weapons, including mind control, tectonic weapons and (very briefly) chemtrails. The bill was re-written several time in less unusual language to give it chance of passing, but ultimately fizzled in committee.

The specific act was HR 2977, the “Space Preservation Act of 2001″, the stated goal of which was:

“To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons.”



So what’s Kucinich’s involvement in this? It’s difficult to say. Kucinich is anti-war, so perhaps that’s his motivation. He does have a lot of new-age, UFO-believing, friends, but he’s also running for president. When he was made aware of the nature of the “exotic weapons” language in the bill, it was re-written, and when questioned about it, he said

“I’m not into that. Understand me. When I found out that was in there, I said, ‘Look, I’m not interested in going there.’”

Kucinich’s motivations are perhaps revealed by his speech to the house on May 18th, 2005, introducing a newer version of the bill:

“What has happened to our country? Why are we projecting fear and paranoia to such heights? Have we so lost our way and our faith that we are prepared to transform the heavens into hell? If the kingdom and the will of God is to be done on earth as it is in heaven, what is to happen when the United States takes nuclear fire up to the gates of heaven?
“Such an offense against humanity could bring the wrath of God upon this nation.”

contrailscience.com...
edit on 11/27/2012 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by supergravity
 


What Zap said.

It seems you have gleefully grasped this at face value without reading up not just what it says, but also how it came about and what subsequently happened to it.

The thing about evidence is that you need to examine it properly before you start waving it about, because you can be sure somebody else has.

PS Don't government officials always tell lies?
edit on 27-11-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
reply to post by Tecumte
 


From your own quoted post...




Pikaplookie on 11/09/2012 at 9:55 pm said:
They don’t even try to hide it here in Texas. Though when I questioned about what was in the crap they are spraying I get this response: “I can only tell you what is being used in Texas for rain enhancement (cloud seeding). The attachment is a listing of the ingredients used in pyrotechnics (or flares) to disperse seeding materials.”


You do understand why they don't try to hide cloud seeding don't you?

Cloud seeding has been going on for over 60 years and is nothing new.



Not true as I'm sure your aware. The weather mod of today is vastly different than 60 years ago and I posted weeks worth of reading at the links. You and your buddies work so hard to try and downplay this and keep it out of the public eye but I think you're wasting your time.



posted on Nov, 27 2012 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by Tecumte
 



“I can only tell you what is being used for rain seeding” as if there are other projects he’s not allowed to discuss with the public.


OR, he can only tell you the stuff he knows about. It is a perfectly reasonable response from, for example, someone who may be familiar with cloud seeding that is being questioned about aerial spraying in general.

You appear to be presenting speculative interpretation as proof. Perspective is a good thing.

Also, there is nothing in the link that lends any credibility to chemtrails. I see an article that declares the chemtrail threat exists, with contrail photos to illustrate, but no attempt to show why they arent contrails, then tries to justify that position by listing known wrongdoings of the past that arent, themselves, anything to do with chemtrails, with a photo of Nazi uniforms thrown in for alliterative resonance just in case the reader isn't picking up the vibe. What in there do you consider useful?
edit on 27-11-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)


Waynos,your not paying attention. I posted weeks worth of reading at the links, and virtually all ignored.(naturally) You're still hung up on this 'chemtrails' thing. Were talking about creating clouds through use of intentionally applied aerosols to manipulate weather and using directed energy as a stimulus. Were not talking about the 'cloud seeding' methods of 60 years ago, it's 2012, you guys need to get up to speed.





new topics
top topics
 
20
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join