Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Declassified Docs Reveal Genocide Caused By Chemtrail Testing

page: 1
30
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+19 more 
posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 02:57 AM
link   
So here we have proof that they have been spraying people with chemicals and even radioactive particals since the 50's and 60's yet we still have a faction on this forum claiming there is no such thing as chemtrails and no evidence blah blah.. Yea of course the government would never experiment on the populace or spray us with anything harmful their just contrails.... ooh wait a minute... Sigh!




+5 more 
posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


This is the logical fallacy known as the non-sequitur.

That the Army sprayed serratia around doesn't somehow validate 'chemtrails'.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam
reply to post by hawkiye
 


This is the logical fallacy known as the non-sequitur.

That the Army sprayed serratia around doesn't somehow validate 'chemtrails'.


Yeah ok so the actual spraying of chemtrails doesn't validate chemtrails... Yeah right ok...
(and it was much more then serratia it helps actually watch the video)

edit on 26-3-2013 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)


+5 more 
posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:11 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Except, of course, it wasn't "chemtrails",it was low level spraying, done in some cases from roof tops.

But "chemtrails" sounds so much creepier. Oh, by the way, 'genocide' doesn't seem to cover the truth either, so it's sort of a double misnomer - no genocide, and no 'chemtrail testing'.


+2 more 
posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Are you for real?! This proves absolutely nothing about chemtrails. All this proves is that the US army intentionally droppped chemicals on a couple of US cities to measure their effects during the Cold War. I'm sure that not many will be surprised by this. A conspiracy? Yes of course, proof of chemtrails? Fail!

It also doesn't prove that it has been happening SINCE the 50's, it proves that it happened IN the 50's.

If you can specifically link this to today's commercial airliners all over the world then my eyes are wide open to your reply.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:14 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:15 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by fiftyfifty
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Are you for real?! This proves absolutely nothing about chemtrails. All this proves is that the US army intentionally droppped chemicals on a couple of US cities to measure their effects during the Cold War. I'm sure that not many will be surprised by this. A conspiracy? Yes of course, proof of chemtrails? Fail!

It also doesn't prove that it has been happening SINCE the 50's, it proves that it happened IN the 50's.

If you can specifically link this to today's commercial airliners all over the world then my eyes are wide open to your reply.


Oh yea another one who says dropping CHEMICALS on cities has nothing to do with Chemtrails and then asks me if I am for real
Yeah buddy of course they only did it this one time and never did anything like that again and Dropping chemicals from planes couldn't possibly be chemtrails... Sigh! Can I interest you in some prime everglades land in Florida... Geeze did a bridge collapse somewhere?

edit on 26-3-2013 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:32 AM
link   
I fail to see the "genocide"



+6 more 
posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:35 AM
link   
No genocide.
No Chemtrails.



Go back to Flouride in the water, GM Foods, Vaccines, or some other scare monger fear factor nutter nonsense.



DDT was far more toxic than anything anyone claims is in this whole chemtrail fiction.
DDT actually WAS at one time sprayed too.

In 1962, Silent Spring by American biologist Rachel Carson was published. The book catalogued the environmental impacts of the indiscriminate spraying of DDT in the US and questioned the logic of releasing large amounts of chemicals into the environment without fully understanding their effects on ecology or human health. The book suggested that DDT and other pesticides may cause cancer and that their agricultural use was a threat to wildlife, particularly birds. Its publication was one of the signature events in the birth of the environmental movement, and resulted in a large public outcry that eventually led to DDT being banned in the US in 1972.


Chemtrails though?
Nope.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:41 AM
link   
Wow its up to 3 now claiming the spraying of chemicals on people from the sky are not chemtrails... Yeah ok and and someone peeing on your back is really it's just raining out...
This confirms a bridge must have collapsed somewhere...

As for the genocide thing I just copied the title of the video so sue me, but hey is there an official number somewhere of what constitutes genocide?



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by fiftyfifty
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Are you for real?! This proves absolutely nothing about chemtrails. All this proves is that the US army intentionally droppped chemicals on a couple of US cities to measure their effects during the Cold War. I'm sure that not many will be surprised by this. A conspiracy? Yes of course, proof of chemtrails? Fail!

It also doesn't prove that it has been happening SINCE the 50's, it proves that it happened IN the 50's.

If you can specifically link this to today's commercial airliners all over the world then my eyes are wide open to your reply.


While I agree with your point about this having nothing to do with "chemtrails," because OP let's be honest, they're spraying chemicals, not "chemtrails." Chemtrails is a coined term related to the trail an airplane leaves in the sky, and these were being sprayed from buildings.

But what I'm not understanding is how you can so blatantly disregard the fact that the military was poisoning it's own people, without consent, and you'd rather argue about semantics. How is it possibly "okay" that our own military is willing to experiment on it's own unwilling participants? War time or not? I believe that was the point the OP was trying to make.

Using words like "genocide" and "chemtrails" was probably not the right approach for the OP, but at least argue what's important. I find the fact that our military used a populated city as guinea pigs, without telling them, far more offensive than the OP's misuse of terminology.


Cheers,
Nos



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Nostalgic
 


No they were sprayed from Airplanes mostly... Watch the video... Sigh!



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
Wow its up to 3 now claiming the spraying of chemicals on people from the sky are not chemtrails... Yeah ok and and someone peeing on your back is really it's just raining out...
This confirms a bridge must have collapsed somewhere...

As for the genocide thing I just copied the title of the video so sue me, but hey is there an official number somewhere of what constitutes genocide?


Yes, a genocide is defined. I will not quote wikipedia, you may look it up for yourself if you want to.

Anyway, without having seen the video (what is it always with "LOOK! PROOF! VIDEO!" - what about naming the author, giving an abstract and such things without pressing me to see some youtube-thingie?), there were tests with cities. Even with chemicals today considered as extremely dangerous.

Where is the connection to the *-trails you see today in the sky?

"They" denotated a lot of nuclear bombs in those years, too. Is that happening today, too?
Because, following your logic, what they did then would be nothing compared to the things they would do today, right?



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:52 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ManFromEurope

Originally posted by hawkiye
Wow its up to 3 now claiming the spraying of chemicals on people from the sky are not chemtrails... Yeah ok and and someone peeing on your back is really it's just raining out...
This confirms a bridge must have collapsed somewhere...

As for the genocide thing I just copied the title of the video so sue me, but hey is there an official number somewhere of what constitutes genocide?


Yes, a genocide is defined. I will not quote wikipedia, you may look it up for yourself if you want to.

Anyway, without having seen the video (what is it always with "LOOK! PROOF! VIDEO!" - what about naming the author, giving an abstract and such things without pressing me to see some youtube-thingie?), there were tests with cities. Even with chemicals today considered as extremely dangerous.

Where is the connection to the *-trails you see today in the sky?

"They" denotated a lot of nuclear bombs in those years, too. Is that happening today, too?
Because, following your logic, what they did then would be nothing compared to the things they would do today, right?


Key words: "Anyway, without having seen the video" First of all I did not say it was directly related to today the source is a government declassified documents there has been plenty of evidence posted in this forum proving chemtrails that all the serial deniers deny.

Second please anyone explain to me how Spraying chemicals on people buildings what ever from planes or on the ground are not chem trails? It seems all the bridge dwellers want to do is try and obfuscate by trying to focus on some tiny factoid but you're all not very good at it now are you...
I mean come on trying to say spraying chemicals on people from planes or even from buildings are not chemtrails or this was back in the 50's so it doesn't count
Is that the best you all can do?


edit on 26-3-2013 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:56 AM
link   
Is it only 'genocide' if you are shot, bombed or macheted to death, or can it be 'genocide' if you are exposed to a 'slow kill product'?

Is it 'genocide' if you are told that the world is 'heating up' and 'you' are the cause as you are human therefore fuel for heat must become unaffordable, when in reality the world temperature and cold winters are increasing and the 'slow kill' is helping to 'remove' too many human breathers?



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nostalgic


But what I'm not understanding is how you can so blatantly disregard the fact that the military was poisoning it's own people, without consent, and you'd rather argue about semantics. How is it possibly "okay" that our own military is willing to experiment on it's own unwilling participants? War time or not? I believe that was the point the OP was trying to make.


I don't think so - the title is pretty specific -


Declassified Docs Reveal Genocide Caused By Chemtrail Testing


Nothing there about the immorality of testing on and unsuspecting populace.


I find the fact that our military used a populated city as guinea pigs, without telling them, far more offensive than the OP's misuse of terminology.


Which is perfectly reasonable and in fact the person you were relying to did not say it was OK.

However it is, as you have pointed out, not genocide, and not chemtrails.

So let's look at some reasons why it isn't "chemtrails":

1/ Not coming from aircraft engines
2/ not leaving lasting trails in the sky
3/ not done at high altitude
4/ used a material that was specifically designed to be detectable - zinc cadmium sulphide is fluorescent and was chosen so it would be easy to see how far it had spread.

Of course it also wasn't designed to create rain or otherwise change the weather, reduce population, alter the world's climate or hide Niburu!


We know what it would have looked like because the British did similar experiments and film of them is now available and has been put on Youtube:

edit on 26-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: quoting



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by Bedlam
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Except, of course, it wasn't "chemtrails",it was low level spraying, done in some cases from roof tops.

But "chemtrails" sounds so much creepier. Oh, by the way, 'genocide' doesn't seem to cover the truth either, so it's sort of a double misnomer - no genocide, and no 'chemtrail testing'.


Wow guess you missed the part about them using jets.... Isn't their a bridge missing you somewhere? ... Sigh!


Who's bridge?

You've completely lost me now.

And why would a bridge miss someone. Insane.

Yeah, keep trying to redefine what a chemtrail is (as opposed to what this is) like every other chemtrailer who can't grasp the concept..

One day, if you guys keep at it, everyone you know will be dead from old age and all that will be left are people who are in agreement.

Who will stop you then!!!! Huh? Who!!

Until then, may their bridge find whoever it is they've seemingly lost.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Nostalgic
 



I fully accept that the video in the OP is proof that the government did inhumane things to their own people in the cold war. In fact, I think that it does deserve a thread. I fail however to see the link with Chemtrails and even more so to genocide. It is not a case of 'semantics'. The OP clearly has his/her own agenda with regards to chemtrails and desperately wants to try and prove that this is evidence.

This was a case of chemicals being sprayed by aircraft at low altitude and from buildings and trucks. This in no way can be linked to chemtrails... unless of course we start to adjust the definition of a 'chemtrail' to suit in the same way the end of the world date keeps changing. I would define this as biological warfare testing rather than chemtrailing.





new topics

top topics



 
30
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join