(Assuming they are Real) What Are Chemtrails For?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by SPECULUM
 


There's another rub.
Anything placed into the atmosphere over my head/city/wherever will not settle onto my head/city/wherever. It will be dispersed and drift, going up in updrafts, sidewise by wind, down in downdrafts......and diluted by the rest of the atmosphere.
It's one of the reasons the whole "chemtrail" conspiracy makes no sense. To deliver something, anything, by way of "chemtrail" would be the most expensive, diffuse, and obvious plan around.




posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 04:39 PM
link   
Well, this thread has bitten the dust. It's turned into every other chemtrail thread out there, which is exactly what I thought would happen. The debunkers simply can't even allow the simplest of discussions about what if, why, and how. It's a shame that people aren't even able to relax a bit and allow their minds to examine the possibilities.
It was nice and interesting for the millisecond that it lasted.



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by stars15k
reply to post by SPECULUM
 


There's another rub.
Anything placed into the atmosphere over my head/city/wherever will not settle onto my head/city/wherever. It will be dispersed and drift, going up in updrafts, sidewise by wind, down in downdrafts......and diluted by the rest of the atmosphere.
It's one of the reasons the whole "chemtrail" conspiracy makes no sense. To deliver something, anything, by way of "chemtrail" would be the most expensive, diffuse, and obvious plan around.


yeah, just like the rain does

lets say i was spraying mercury, i wonder how long that would take to reach the ground????
lets say i was spraying into rain clouds or seeding for rainclouds with my added geo-engineering mix???

you act as if this is some impossible feat, and that the government would never consider ,but you're completely wrong. They have and are doing it

Its a developed specific science they know everything about from before the development and delivery of the first atomic bomb.
edit on 2-3-2013 by SPECULUM because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 06:19 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 06:21 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 


Just go to the United Nations' own website and run a search on "weather modification". There were too many results for me to search through them all(over 1000, but I'm going to keep on searching); there were other conferences and weather modification as a weapon was even included in a weapons treaty. Here's a link to one of the conference documents and a few paragraphs from the document.
www.un.org...

"Ms. PETERSON said that she was concerned about experimental weather modification programmes that were supposed to explore initiatives aimed at countering the effects of global warming, but which could, in fact, negatively impact a crop production or cause other problems. If mitigation efforts continued along those lines, particularly putting into the atmosphere chemicals that could reduce photosynthesis, growing seasons could be altered and pollinators could be affected. Another example was the use of solar panels to create conditions that extended the growth season of some crops. Similarly, she was concerned about persistent jet contrails, which science had shown could expand and spawn man-made “clouds” that trapped heat in the atmosphere. “How do you like your skies, natural or man-made?” she asked.

She went on to say that experimental atmospheric testing programmes, jet fuel pollution, emissions from geochemical plants and other so-called “solutions” employed to address the effects of global warming could leave us with a “pea soup” of chemicals in the skies and dying trees, mould-covered buildings and contaminated water on the ground and in the oceans. It was critical for non-governmental organizations to press their local Governments to promote the use of the technologies that were already available to deal with pollution, rather than putting more contaminates in the skies and waters."

I'm not sure if blocking solar radiation is the only purpose of these "persistent jet contrails" or chemtrails, but it seems to be one use(or at least they tell scientists that this is to protect the Earth from "global warming", meanwhile, they are they ones manipulating the environment).
Here's a link to Navy Research Laboratory article about the Navy using HAARP to create plasma clouds: www.nrl.navy.mil...
Maybe they could use this plasma cloud aspect of HAARP with the chemtrails to create some sort of plasma cloud field? Possibly blocking all satellite communication or any sort of electronic projectile from functioning properly? Who knows? One thing is for sure: chemtrails exist.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPECULUM
If it were I chemtrailing? within 24 hours i could have a 707 or newer super tanker nozzled up, chemed up, and pressurized spraying your city and that's without blowing it out the exhaust of the turbines...its nothing to achieve Either way, so don't attempt making it into more


Maybe. But to produce what people see everyday in the US, Europe and elsewhere you'd surely need hundreds of aircraft?

Anyway, to what ends? And why spray where you do?

That's another question for discussion: why does spraying seem to occur (assuming what people claime to be chemtrails are chemtrails) in the areas it does, and how does that fit with the presumed explanation for chemtrails?

Ignore the debunkers, there's LOTS to discuss
But unless there is a coherent, properly thought out, theory to support how can you support it and prove debunkers wrong?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by AndyMayhew
 


I'll bite ...

In this ATS thread HERE I gave my thoughts about what is going on in our skies.

I came to the conclusion that only idiots spray deadly chemicals over their parents, children, friends and themselves. Taking in account that there must be more than one person involved setting this spraying up...so, that motive doesn't fly. No pun intented...

The organisers and everybody "in the know" must be very convinced of the necessity or emergency to do it and keep it a secret. Then there is the observation that the spraying occurs over many different countries in the world and IMHO these countries are all friendly towards eachother. This makes it obvious possible that the reason for spraying is to ward off a threat directed towards to the population of these nations.

An other thing I noticed is the silence about the rapid decrease of the ozon layer. When I fit all those considerations together I come to the final conclusion that "they" are spraying something that will protect the population against some sort of radiation. Keeping it a tight secret is because the ozon layer is seriously damaged or dissolved.


EDIT: I would like to add that "they" are experimenting on the go with different compositions and that "they" know that the side-effects for organisms is downright bad. There is no "safe" solution and that is probably one reason why it is kept such a close to the chest secret. There is no time for debate or a democratic vote for spraying or not. It has to be done... that simple.

And of course I have no solid evidence/ proof of that.....



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SPECULUM
 


Showing you need to learn a bit more about weather and physics.
First, rain falls from clouds much lower than contrails and cirrus clouds.
Second, it's not the weight of the aerosol, it's the size. The terminal velocity on something small enough to be in a contrail is going to be so very small, what I said was correct.....24 hours to earth, if it makes it to the ground at all.
And third, cloud seeding for rain is not considered either geo-engineering or "chemtrails." Cloud-seeding, rain-making, or whatever you choose to call it is a very localized, small, fleeting effect, if it works at all.
Come on, now. That is stated over and over again.
Either a "chemtrail" is the long, white, persistent lines behind high-flying jets or it's not. That is not cloud-seeding, crop-dusting, tracer dumps, chaff, sky-writing, Agent Orange, or anything else that is not a persistent trail behind a high-flying jet....unless they changed the rules to fit their theory within the past 24 hours....... I would not be surprised if someone does that at sometime. They already hijacked the term geo-engineering.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 

You just don't give up, do you? We get it. You don't believe they're spraying anything.
You're like a broken record trying to get this thread derailed. I'm sure there's another contrail/chemical trail thread somewhere that needs your scientific knowledge, so please go find it.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   
No probs with showing that a suggested reason for chemtrails is invalid - by a process of elimination maybe we can then reach a consensus on what they could be?

But be nice if everyone can, for the sake of argument, assume just for this thread that there are chemtrails



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by zatara
 


Yeah, and they ozone layer is dissolved because of using too much hairspray...not a series of declassified high-altitude thermonuclear detonations? Are you trying to justify or rationalize spraying poison in the atmosphere and suggesting only idiots would do that? I think you are partially right; uneducated, uninformed, and frightened people can be convinced to do almost anything--see all of history. However, behind those "idiots" as you put them are evil people who know full well what they are doing and have their own, not entirely revealed, agendas. No one knows the full picture, but realize that those who seek to rule the world do not have OUR best interests in mind.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by drockEst1983
 


I've read the entire report. A long time ago.
And no where does it mention a program like "chemtrails" is actually taking place.
Much of the things you bring up are ground-based pollutants, not something sprayed behind high-flying jets.
And they are talking about the possibilities of different proposed programs, not discussing things already done.
I don't know why the pro-"chemtrail" crowd cannot understand the difference between study, research, discussion, modeling, reviewing, proposal and the like and actually doing something now. Why is that? It is in all the real (as opposed to "chemtrail" professional) research out there. The scientists are being very careful, they want to do many, many things before anyone even suggests to begin using stratospheric aerosols from planes. In most reports I've read on the discussion of geo-engineering, the use of what you would call a "chemtrail" is the absolute last thing to do.....if it is done at all. It is the most expensive and most likely to have adverse effects of any of the other plans. It is also projected to need a continuous use.....requiring over 1,000,000 flights per year to accomplish the needed results.
Weather-modification, in terms of cloud-seeding, is not what are called "chemtrails." A cloud-seeding plane needs to find clouds with enough moisture to actually rain, which would not be cirrus clouds. They look for cumulus clouds a lot lower. The area they cover is very small, the effect of the seeding is very fleeting, and the results are not guaranteed. It's not considered geo-engineering because it doesn't affect the climate.
And another thing with the people who combine geo-engineering with "chemtrail" conspiracies. Geo-engineering is to somehow reverse global warming, yet studies so far show that persistent contrails raise the temperature. Why would they be doing something that has the opposite effect?
No one is that stupid on the real geo-engineering research and persistent contrail side. The only people who think that way are "chemtrail "believers.
Why is that?
Make up your mind.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 


Excuse me?
Why is an opinion opposite yours any less valid?
It's an open forum. If you don't like my answer, don't read or respond to them.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by stars15k
 

Oh, OK.
Then, why aren't you able to use your scientific knowledge to blow my theory out of the water?
If you're able to bend your mind for just a moment and assume that they are spraying metallic particles, please do tell us how HAARP couldn't use these particles to alter the weather or do other things associated with what has been speculated as to HAARP's true purposes.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Afterthought
 




please do tell us how HAARP couldn't use these particles to alter the weather or do other things associated with what has been speculated as to HAARP's true purposes.

How 'bout you tell us how it could. That would be a better place to start.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by stars15k
 

Oh, OK.
Then, why aren't you able to use your scientific knowledge to blow my theory out of the water?
If you're able to bend your mind for just a moment and assume that they are spraying metallic particles, please do tell us how HAARP couldn't use these particles to alter the weather or do other things associated with what has been speculated as to HAARP's true purposes.


Sorry, but I'm a linear thinker. So bending my mind to find ways to fit theories does not compute.
HAARP has nothing to do with "chemtrails", unless you believe in multiple conspiracies, with all the players working together. This makes logistics all the harder.....more people, more meetings to 'bend their minds", and more chance for someone to mess up the security.
HAARP does what it is made to do, for the reason it was made for, and nothing else. It's far too small to do what you claim. It is also far from being a closed secret......if you are in Alaska in the spring and summer, you can visit it. They even have open house events, complete with researchers to answer your questions. Heck, you can even email the people up there, when they are there, and ask them what is going on. During the winter, they have a local/locals go to the site everyday, unlock the building for a quick inspection to make sure the heat is still on. Hardly a big secret.
So why do you think otherwise? Conspiracy sites that speculate or real research from the people who work with it? I would only accept the latter.





new topics
 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join