It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I want to be a CHEMTRAIL DEBUNKER

page: 12
25
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by BrainWasher
 


1st you say, yes they are, but then you say they aren't spraying anything to cause those clouds to form?
Because it is the atmospheric conditions which causes the clouds to form. Just like they have since planes were first able to fly high enough.

The second German sighting occurred on May 9, 1919, when a pilot flying over Berlin at about 26,000 feet noticed the generation of a cloud stream that extended for about forty miles behind his plane. This stream eventually spread out to form a cloud layer that was about 3,000 feet thick. The pilot saw a similar phenomenon two days later.
www.questia.com...


With all due respect, but, HOW DO YOU KNOW (beyond a reasonable doubt) THEY'RE NOT spraying anything to cause those clouds to form?
Well, for one thing there is no evidence that they are. For another thing, it isn't necessary for them to.


when we know there are techniques that can create clouds; like cloud seeding.
Cloud seeding does not create clouds. If anything, it makes clouds go away.


There has to be something in those trails that attracts water causing them to make bigger clouds.
There is. Hot water vapor. But that's always there and it doesn't exactly "attract water". When it condenses it sort of "triggers" the water vapor that's already in the air to condense and freeze.
science-edu.larc.nasa.gov...

edit on 3/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrainWasher

With all due respect, but, HOW DO YOU KNOW (beyond a reasonable doubt) THEY'RE NOT spraying anything to cause those clouds to form?


Because there is no reasonable evidence to suggest that they ARE doing so


There has to be something in those trails that attracts water causing them to make bigger clouds.


Yep - there is. Frozen water - ice - is a perfectly good cloud condensation nuclei. Other CCN's in jet exhaust include soot and microscopic particles of metal from mechanical wear in the engine. But water is the "big one" AFAIK.

And we know that jet exhaust contains water - indeed it contains more water than the amount of fuel burned!! All combusion of hydrocarbons creates water like this - it is not new science - you can often see water dripping from exhausts of cars in cool weather, and of course condensation from exhaust pipes is also common until the engine "warms up".
edit on 4-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 
Honestly, sir, the only side i see scaring people, comes from the contrailers. Perhaps, contrailers believe there are deadly chemicals in those trails, more than the actual chemtrailers do. That's what i've get from these threads. Maybe, it's the word "chem" that have the contrailers confused. IMHO real chemtrail theorists believe more on the side of geoengineering and weather manipulation/modification, than they do deadly chemicals being sprayed on us. Contrailers are the one pushing that agenda.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


Some of it is the tactics used to “enlighten” that I think show weakness.
One of the greatest thing is knowing something someone else doesn’t and then teaching them. But to do it with distain and belittlement is wrong. To add “frankly - straight out stupidity” is a slap in the face to anyone just becoming aware of new knowledge.
No one wants to feel stupid and what better way to edge the sward then with instigation. This is wrong.
If I find legs on your side of the fence then be sure I will handle who ever comes after me with understanding that Knowledge can change ones views and understanding is devine.
thank...........................................................................................Painfulhead
edit on 4-3-2013 by Painfulhead because: spelling



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by BrainWasher

With all due respect, but, HOW DO YOU KNOW (beyond a reasonable doubt) THEY'RE NOT spraying anything to cause those clouds to form?


Because there is no reasonable evidence to suggest that they ARE doing so


There has to be something in those trails that attracts water causing them to make bigger clouds.


Yep - there is. Frozen water - ice - is a perfectly good cloud condensation nuclei. Other CCN's in jet exhaust include soot and microscopic particles of metal from mechanical wear in the engine. But water is the "big one" AFAIK.

And we know that jet exhaust contains water - indeed it contains more water than the amount of fuel burned!! All combusion of hydrocarbons creates water like this - it is not new science - you can often see water dripping from exhausts of cars in cool weather, and of course condensation from exhaust pipes is also common until the engine "warms up".
edit on 4-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)
And there is no REASONABLE evidence that says they're NOT! Unless, of course, you can show proof, by a source other than our government scientist, research, and documents; which have known to be false and altered.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by BrainWasher
 


Contrailers are the one pushing that agenda.

Interesting idea.

How does pointing out that "chemtrails" are no different from contrails push an agenda that there is any danger posed by them? Other than a possible slight effect on climate, persistent contrails ( "chemtrails") have no effect on anyone.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:08 PM
link   
can someone tell me why theses contrails are being intelligently made? why the planes only appear on certain days and why they fly in circles while seemingly turning on and off the trail as if they have a button? I also wonder the effects on agriculture? less direct sun =? this is a big issue where we should be having a serious discussion.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by BrainWasher
 




And there is no REASONABLE evidence that says they're NOT!

Ok. Here we go again. You want proof of a negative.
It doesn't work that way.

To put it another way, prove my neighbor's cat isn't a robot.

edit on 3/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by bluestorm
 


why the planes only appear on certain days
The planes are always there but they aren't very noticeable unless they are producing contrails.


why they fly in circles
There are various reasons for planes to "fly in circles", falling under the category of "holding patterns".


seemingly turning on and off the trail as if they have a button?
Because atmospheric conditions are not always homogenous. That's sort of like asking why we see scattered cumulus clouds instead of a solid deck.


I also wonder the effects on agriculture? less direct sun =?
Reasonable point.




edit on 3/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


so we have an effects on the climate, effects on agriculture, lets also add effects on our moods, im just not as happy on fake overcast days as i am on blue sky days! although the first two points alone are big enough reasons to be having a real conversation about what the hell is happening the third one also deserves attention

edit on 4-3-2013 by bluestorm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by bluestorm
 


so we have an effects on the climate,
Effects which are being closely studied.


effects on agriculture
Possible effects. You may want to look for research being done on it. I'm not aware of any, off hand.


lets add effects on our moods
It could be worse. You could live in Portland, Oregon.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrainWasher
And there is no REASONABLE evidence that says they're NOT!


Yes there is - given the overwhelming evidence of absence it is perfectly reasonable to conclude they are not.


Unless, of course, you can show proof, by a source other than our government scientist, research, and documents; which have known to be false and altered.


1/ this is called argument from ignorance
2/ what scientists, research and documents are known to be false and altered?

I notice you also completely failed to acknowledge my point that water from the exhaust acts as cloud condensation nuclei.
edit on 4-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: spelling



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Painfulhead
To add “frankly - straight out stupidity” is a slap in the face to anyone just becoming aware of new knowledge.
No one wants to feel stupid and what better way to edge the sward then with instigation. This is wrong.


Problem is that some of it is straight out stupidity. There is no other explanation for it.

For instance - the "barrels on a plane" photo that is famous in the genre. Its been explained countless times what it is - a ballast test rig on a new aeroplane. And yet it gets paraded over and over as "evidence" of chemtrails - alot of the time by the same people because they refuse to believe people who actually know what it is. What is that, if not stupidity?

What is seeing iridescence in a cloud - something that everyone equates easily with rainbows - and suggesting it is "chemtrail" just because its light reflecting through a cirrus cloud formed by water vapour by product of a jet exhaust - if its not ignorance?

What is making a claim that something from five miles up in aerosol form can hit the ground in seconds or minutes, when it most obviously can't?

Do you see what I mean?



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
ask and you shall receive...

persistent contrails / geo engineering and agriculture


youtu.be...

www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org...

persistent contrails = less vitamin D for me, less solar power production, less photosynthesis , less crop production, warmer temps!!!

Huge issues!!
edit on 4-3-2013 by bluestorm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by BrainWasher
 




And there is no REASONABLE evidence that says they're NOT!

Ok. Here we go again. You want proof of a negative.
It doesn't work that way.

To put it another way, prove my neighbor's cat isn't a robot.

edit on 3/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
How do you know those contrails don't have chemicals or something we can't see, in them. You can't say, with 100% certainty that anything spewing out of those planes is good for the environment. Carbon monoxide can kill a person, yet it pumps out of car exhausts 24-7-365. You want proof for the chemtrail theory, but how do we KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt, that contrails is nothing more than frozen water; or whatever terminology you want to use. After the lies that were fed to the population about 911, i don't believe ANYTHING tptb have to say. Nothing!



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by bluestorm
 


ask and you shall receive...
I was thinking more in terms of quantitative studies rather than unsubstantiated statements like:

Now the Direct Sunlight reaching the Earth is being obscured by various geoengineering projects falling under the name of "Solar Radiation Management".

www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org...

What geoengineering project would those be? Sorry, that's a "chemtrail" site. No science there.

Yes, I see the papers about the effects of vitamin D deficiencies. I see none that indicate it being attributable to persistent contrails.



edit on 3/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by BrainWasher
And there is no REASONABLE evidence that says they're NOT!


Yes there is - given the overwhelming evidence of absence it is perfectly reasonable to conclude they are not.


Unless, of course, you can show proof, by a source other than our government scientist, research, and documents; which have known to be false and altered.


1/ this is called argument from ignorance
2/ what scientists, research and documents are known to be false and altered?

I notice you also completely failed to acknowledge my point that water from the exhaust acts as cloud condensation nuclei.
edit on 4-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: spelling
What documents are known to be false and altered? The 911 official story. Heck, we can't even get the Sandy Hook shooting right. Please, sir, don't be so naive and gullible.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by BrainWasher
 


Why is it that 911 inevitably appears in "chemtrail" threads. Presented as if it is evidence that "chemtrails" are anything other than "contrails?" You have exhibited what is called the straw man logical fallacy. It is a diversionary tactic undertaken when someone has no logical argument for their case.

But he was talking about the scientific papers about contrails which go back decades. Can you point out which of them are falsified? All of them?
edit on 3/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by bluestorm
 





phage i live in the foothills of colorado, they make FAKE clouds over my house early mornings that end up floating over the greater population in the front range unsuspectingly, they just look like a gray sky by then, and i have 20/15 vision i watch the skys and we dont ever have plane traffic like this, ever, seriously call them what you want the point is someone wants the sky to be unnaturally overcast in my neck of the woods!!


Correct me if I am wrong, but I think the airport in Denver is one of the major hubs in the US...



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by BrainWasher
 


Why is it that 911 inevitably appears in "chemtrail" threads. Presented as if it is evidence that "chemtrails" are anything other than "contrails?" You have exhibited what is called the straw man logical fallacy. It is a diversionary tactic undertaken when someone has no logical argument for their case.

But he was talking about the scientific papers about contrails which go back decades. Can you point out which of them are falsified? All of them?
edit on 3/4/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Why does 911 appear in these threads? Maybe because the same government scientists that say these are contrails also said that fire melts steel. They are constantly changing the rules and rewriting the books. It's also called establishing credibility. The governments of the world are not credible witnesses because of their past lies! History books have been re-written, science books have been re-written and in today's education system, everything is based on indoctrination.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join