New Chemtrail Evidence

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by smurfy
 


Except not one of those looked like any kind of KC currently in use by the US military (either the KC-135, or the KC-10), and the KC-767 is in use in such small numbers by other countries that they couldn't do much even if they were being used to spray something.


Except what? It's impossible to really tell anything from the video, other than four engines. I already said it was moot.




posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 


I couldn't identify specifics, but I could tell most of them well enough to get an idea of what types they could be. And I didn't see any of them that fit the tanker category.

But you're right, it is moot, since he lies and misleads in the entire video.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by smurfy
 


I understood the point entirely! I told you the Irish Potato Famine has absolutely zero to do with mythological chemtrails. I told you the all-powerful PTB have no concern whatsoever with my insignificant life or anyone else posting here. If they want us dead, the push a button or pull a trigger. Much more efficient. Why is it someone else's job to make sure you live or die?


No you did not, and to pretend so is complete idiocy, hark the words of Charles Trevelyan in the MIDDLE of the Irish famine, Trevelyan wrote that the famine was, "a mechanism for reducing surplus population" Charles Trevelyan was also partial to invoke God in his rationale, he also spent his civil service time previously in India, feck knows what really went on there in the cloud of fuzzy history, and you really do need to read between the lines in all things. I laugh at your inclusion of "mythological chemtrails" as an aside as a feature in this thread, when there is no clue visual or otherwise at all in the OP's link, why do you say that? You have told me nothing.



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 


smurfy, the OP is about chemtrails, not the potato famine. Got it?



posted on Dec, 2 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by smurfy
 


I couldn't identify specifics, but I could tell most of them well enough to get an idea of what types they could be. And I didn't see any of them that fit the tanker category.

But you're right, it is moot, since he lies and misleads in the entire video.


Yes, I have misgivings about the video, as for videoman, or secondhand uploader being a liar, i have no clue, but the reason it is moot, is because there is no way of telling in the information given, as you acknowledge, also being in the realm of not exactly knowing yourself..



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by totallackey
 

I was responding to the answer you gave another poster about what percentage would fire on Americans . Your responce about using a bullet was inadequate . It is far easier to disburse agents with total surprise . And this would likely be done at night at low altitude to control disbursal .



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


doing it at night, at low altitudes would probably raise suspicions and make filming easier.

do it in front of everyone's face and suspicion goes out the _ and how many pilots are going to film? and filming 30-40 thousand feet in the air from the ground is inconclusive, there are some decent videos from the air but we need more of them.

like someone else said, we need definitive high altitude air testing from directly within these trails for solid evidence.

all we have now are ground, sea level air, water, and snow samples and some samples taken off of cars etc.
many of which show barium strontium aluminum and the like in large concentrations.

still need more definitive proof. however the fact that they last nearly an entire day and expand is odd to me.
edit on 12/3/2012 by smarterthanyou because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by smarterthanyou

all we have now are ground, sea level air, water, and snow samples and some samples taken off of cars etc.
many of which show barium strontium aluminum and the like in large concentrations.

still need more definitive proof. however the fact that they last nearly an entire day and expand is odd to me.
edit on 12/3/2012 by smarterthanyou because: (no reason given)


So you get a sample that shows elevated barium, or elevated aluminum, and your first thought is the plane flying overhead at 34,000 feet?

Instead of looking at this as a possible source, or this, you look up? Does that even make sense to you? Every single chemical that is supposed to be found in chemtrails has a ground source that makes so much more sense, but people think that it comes from the plane flying overhead.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by smarterthanyou
 





like someone else said, we need definitive high altitude air testing from directly within these trails for solid evidence.


There are companies that do just that in fact here is one that specializes in that field of study...

www.dlr.de...

So you see there is nothing stopping true researchers from finding the truth except the fact that they can't profit off of the truth, which is that chemtrails do not exist.



posted on Dec, 3 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


So how many people have died directly from secret spraying at night as opposed to those who have died from a bullet or bomb? Are you freaking SERIOUS?



posted on Dec, 9 2012 @ 09:37 AM
link   
use of term chemtrail may be incorrect as applied
scientific experiments as explained here
climate-connections.org...



posted on Dec, 9 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by totallackey
 

It is far easier to disburse agents with total surprise .


It would seem that no surprise has been achieved, since we all know about it!


And this would likely be done at night at low altitude to control disbursal .


Apparently not.
edit on 9-12-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join