It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Elliot
reply to post by mrthumpy
With regard to the Guardian newspaper article and Norman Baker's forcing the government to admit chemical testing on the population, this was not a 'claim' but this was an admission of guilt by the UK government. They did not say they would not 'drop' chemicals or germs for testing on the UK population ever again however.
Originally posted by stars15k
reply to post by RoScoLaz
Provided that the winds and all other air currents are obeying their devious plans.
Because anything released at that altitude in an aerosol is not going to be easy to control just where the "stuff" is going to land.
How do you think they overcome this little obstacle?
Or is controlling wind and gravity just another part of the "chemtrail" lore?
... Why would the government write stuff like "controlling the weather by the year 2025"?
and yes the technology exists to redirect a hurricane, to kill or strongly diminish it's power or even start one.
That's old news.
I would really like someone on the "chemtrails are real" side to answer this.
Physics and air currents seem to get in the way of "chemtrails" being any kind of a delivery system...at least one that makes sense.
Originally posted by Antinazi
Never seen any persistent contrail the first 50 years of my life.
Originally posted by Antinazi
[Never seen any persistent contrail the first 50 years of my life.
I don't live in the USA or Britain where the government has been conducting experiments since WWII by the way.
Millions were in germ war tests
Much of Britain was exposed to bacteria sprayed in secret trials
Originally posted by PLAYERONE01
until you have seen 2 jets fly side by side one with a con trail and one with a chem trail then you ask questions.
Originally posted by binkbonk
reply to post by fireyaguns
But wouldn't they be spraying themselves, their children, their cousins, their friends and nieces and nephews and other people they potentially care about?
I've never understood this part... And what for?
Originally posted by flyswatter
There is nothing wrong with hypothesizing and saying "maybe they are doing this" or "maybe they are doing it for this reason". The problem occurs when those people go from "maybe they are doing this" to "they ARE doing this". There's a big difference, and the line between the two often gets blurred by "chemtrail" believers. Without proof (beyond your ideas of what a trail might be), it just makes them look ignorant.
edit on 21-3-2013 by flyswatter because: (no reason given)
Ignorance is rife on both sides of the fence
Originally posted by MysterX
Then there's no difference whatsoever to people saying "they ARE NOT doing this"..is there?
Ignorance is rife on both sides of the fence.