I want to be a CHEMTRAIL DEBUNKER

page: 2
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Painfulhead
 


The reason they are spraying is the "holy enigma" of a question that everyone wants the answer too.

However, i have already deducted it, by going in the backdoor, calculating what the result will be by seeding the atsmosphere with various lighter than air particles and metals such as Aerographite.


Also, the newly constructed material absorbs light rays almost completely. One could say it creates the blackest black.”


If you are intelligent enough to deserve the answer, i will give you a hint by asking a question for you to answer "What would be required to have earths atmosphere fly out into space?"

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




posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Painfulhead
 





i have and i did and will again. like my wild imagination said the people behind the spraying could be thinking generations in the future. They may have taken the steps to see spraying themselves as no big deal. good post sir........Painfulhead


I suppose they could have "sacrificed" themselves........so how do you think they are doing with the chemtrail genocide?

Anyone feeling ill yet?



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:01 PM
link   
The only thing that is up for debate is whether man-made contrails are strategically placed. The thing that isn't up for debate is the fact that when contrails are overhead they reduce surface temperatures below. Even the weather people admit 'high wispies' lower the temps.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
People also think that pilots wouldn't poison their own people, spraying over their own cities, yada yada.

You're also under the impression that pilots would poison their own families. I guarantee there's not one single pilot that would poison their own friends, families.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by Painfulhead
 


The reason they are spraying is the "holy enigma" of a question that everyone wants the answer too.


not so.

A lot of people would prefer to get an answer to "Are they spraying at all?"


However, i have already deducted it, by going in the backdoor, calculating what the result will be by seeding the atsmosphere with various lighter than air particles and metals such as Aerographite.


Also, the newly constructed material absorbs light rays almost completely. One could say it creates the blackest black.”


If you are intelligent enough to deserve the answer, i will give you a hint by asking a question for you to answer "What would be required to have earths atmosphere fly out into space?"


someone stupid enough to think that it was a good idea and try to make it happen?

You do understand that "lighter than air" does not mean "will fly into space", let alone "will cause the atmospehre to fly into space"??


For example "lighter than air" airships are only "lighter than air" when the air is dense enough so that they displace a heavier weight of air than they actually weight - so they have a service ceiling - they do not fly into space.

And this new material is eth same - it is not anti-gravity, so it is only lighter than air as long as it displaces a volume of air that is heavier than its own weight. If it rises it will get to an altitude where the air is less dense so the weight of air that it displaces will be equal to its own weight - and at that point it will not longer be lighter than ai.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Painfulhead
 


BTW, there is no such thing as a "chemtrail debunker"

The correct term is "chemtrail denier".



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Gibraltarego
 


The thing that isn't up for debate is the fact that when contrails are overhead they reduce surface temperatures below. Even the weather people admit 'high wispies' lower the temps.
Nope.
Current understanding is that high clouds (cirrus and contrails, which are essentially cirrus) have a net warming effect.
edit on 3/3/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


cool BoneZ
I would like to respond to more of your post but as i said I am a slow ass on the keyboard. but i would like to say one thing about the first photo you put up. you have posted this before and i have seen it. to me this is what 'contrails' should look like. you will notice at the top and bottom of the photo the contrails are dissipating. this is what it would look like if there was an area of contrail conducive airspace. all the contrails in the photo are darkest in the middle and lighten twords the ends. This is what I think it should look like. that’s why this photo is no help to my tipping point....... thanks Painfulhead



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


this is my understanding as well. Yet this is a stumbler because of the whole ‘Carbon Tax’ deal. Sell the heating of the earth to the people make a lot of money. Not heating fast enough help it a long for a while. Greed is ulgy and know no boundaries. Thanks Phage………………..Painfulhead



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Thank you for accepting my challenge. You are correct so far. I will now give you the next clue.

The next qustion you need to find the answer to is, "If seeded into the atmosphere, in which layer would aerographite end up residing?"

And as a bonus "What would happen with the air from the lower layer, when this layer gets exhastuively seeded by this material to the point where it´s overall density changes(locally) to be the same as the layer below it?"

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



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by fireyaguns
 


Thanks for the kind words.
(remember this when I land firmly on the other side,,,,, kidding of course)



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Painfulhead
 




Not heating fast enough help it a long for a while.

Persistent contrails form without any help.
As long as the conditions are right for it.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
People also think that pilots wouldn't poison their own people, spraying over their own cities, yada yada.

You're also under the impression that pilots would poison their own families. I guarantee there's not one single pilot that would poison their own friends, families.


See, it's easy to nitpick posts to make points, while disregarding the rest. Did I not say there is no shortage of people spraying pesticides? Aren't there plenty of people willing to grow toxic GMO's, spray them with toxic pesticides, then sell it for human consumption? Is there a shortage of lemmings willing to add fluoride to our water supply? Aren't they and their families collateral damage? It would be no different with pilots. The poisoning is everywhere and it is quite clear to see.

It's not like they're walking up to their kids and families and pouring toxins in their milk. It's indirect and people seem to just have a disconnect to it all.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Your simple statement is exactly what is at question. Yet it helps neither side. Yes they can persist and of course the conditions have to be right for them to form. But logic and science say the atmosphere is dynamic and changing. This does not lend its self to trails going on for miles and miles with out interruption or changes to visual density. It is this no change that stumps me.
thanks again Phage................ Painfulhead



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Thank you for accepting my challenge. You are correct so far. I will now give you the next clue.

The next qustion you need to find the answer to is, "If seeded into the atmosphere, in which layer would aerographite end up residing?"


The density of aerographite is 0.18mg/cm^3.

The density of air at IUPAC standard temperature and pressure (0 °C and 100 kPa), dry air has a density of 1.2754 kg/m3, which is 1.2754 mg/cm^3.

I have no idea what altitude air has this density at.


And as a bonus "What would happen with the air from the lower layer, when this layer gets exhastuively seeded by this material to the point where it´s overall density changes(locally) to be the same as the layer below it?"


A nonsensical question. Air "seeded" with anything that doesn't disolve into it does not change in density - the material beign seeded behaves according to its own density.

And if air does become more or less dense (for any reason) then it moves - as it has always done - that is what makes windsand updragunghts and downdraughts.




No doubt you think yuo aer on to something amazing and Are trying to lead me to your conclusion so I will see the light myself.

however I am not interested in playing "20 questions" with you - if yuo have a point then by all means make it.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Painfulhead
reply to post by Phage
 


Your simple statement is exactly what is at question. Yet it helps neither side. Yes they can persist and of course the conditions have to be right for them to form. But logic and science say the atmosphere is dynamic and changing. This does not lend its self to trails going on for miles and miles with out interruption or changes to visual density. It is this no change that stumps me.
thanks again Phage................ Painfulhead


Welll the obvious answer is that the atmosphere is not as violent and turbulent at those altitudes where contrails persist, but rather almost statical and non-moving over extended periods of time. Their persistence is the proof.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 
hopeing you would coment on this



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by Merlin Lawndart
People also think that pilots wouldn't poison their own people, spraying over their own cities, yada yada.

You're also under the impression that pilots would poison their own families. I guarantee there's not one single pilot that would poison their own friends, families.


See, it's easy to nitpick posts to make points, while disregarding the rest. Did I not say there is no shortage of people spraying pesticides?


And how many of them spray their own families?


Aren't there plenty of people willing to grow toxic GMO's


I do not know of anyone who grows tixic GMO's


, spray them with toxic pesticides, then sell it for human consumption?


Indeed - and yet spraying a crop with toxic materials is not the same as spraying families - somehow little or none of that toxic material actually makes it to peopel these days


Is there a shortage of lemmings willing to add fluoride to our water supply? Aren't they and their families collateral damage?


no - adding fluoride at levels often found or even exceeded in nature has no knwon toxic effect at all.


It would be no different with pilots. The poisoning is everywhere and it is quite clear to see.

It's not like they're walking up to their kids and families and pouring toxins in their milk. It's indirect and people seem to just have a disconnect to it all.


No - your examples simply do not stack up at all - you are using scaremongering disinfo to try to replace your lack of any actual evidence

That is quite a reprehensible tactic.

If you stuck to the facts and admited that there is just no evidence for this hoax then you could move onto something that perhaps does actually exist and where you might be able to have some beneficial effect.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   
I've seen the videos, read hundreds of documents, studied the proposals, heard first hand witness accounts, followed the politics of governance and researched the science behind both sides of this debate.

I could provide you with an overwhelming amount of documentation to go through going back for decades.

In my opinion, the following article is one of the more convincing and important pieces of evidence to read and understand regarding this debate.

Global Warming - Geoengineering : Main Link



Option 1: Increasing Sulfur Content of Jet Fuel in Commercial Fleet

Option 2: Direct Injection of Sulfur Dioxide Gas Using Dedicated Fleet of Jet Aircraft

Option 3: Direct Injection of Sulfur Dioxide Gas Using High Altitude Jet Aircraft

Option 4: Direct Injection of Ammonium Sulfate Aerosol Using Dedicated Fleet of Jet Aircraft

Option 5: Running Commercial Jet Engines with Richer Fuel to Air Ratio

Option 6: Running Dedicated Fleet of Jet Engines with Richer Fuel to Air Ratio

Option 7: Running High Altitude Aircraft Jet Engines with Richer Fuel to Air Ratio

Prioritization of Sulfur/Soot Release Strategies

Closing Remarks


Follow the links at the bottom of each section. There is more than just one page to each category.

You will find that there are methods and techniques described that do not contradict the "official story" and explanations given by the chemtrail deniers. But these methods also fully meet the criteria for implementing and accomplishing a geoengineering scheme.

There are many other proposals and methods that are being discussed. Using various materials. But under the current system and the current evidence being provided. These schemes appear to match best what we are presently witnessing take place. These schemes also avoid any issues with global governance and public disclosure.

I recommend you read this information and will suggest you continue to research this topic. If you like I can provide you with additional materials for you to read and research.



posted on Mar, 3 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by MagicWand67
In my opinion, the following article is one of the more convincing and important pieces of evidence to read and understand regarding this debate.

Global Warming - Geoengineering : Main Link



Option 1: Increasing Sulfur Content of Jet Fuel in Commercial Fleet


...etc...

Indeed - but what is it evidence OF??

It all looks like studies and proposals to me - and there has never been any argument that people are not studying the possiblities.
edit on 3-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
25
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join