This is why we "debunk" chemtrails.

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by htapath

 

So it's obvious, but not so obvious that you can elucidate on it. A chemmie asked for an explanation tries to look mysterious and wise by typing nonsense. Yadda yadda yadda, heard it all before

A quick look at the sky is all that is required at my location. Presently, there is a perfect grid laid out over this area. It's one thing to bury your head in the sand, but your head is somewhere else entirely.

Good luck with that strategy, and have a nice day.

Originally posted by htapath

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by htapath

 

So it's obvious, but not so obvious that you can elucidate on it. A chemmie asked for an explanation tries to look mysterious and wise by typing nonsense. Yadda yadda yadda, heard it all before

A quick look at the sky is all that is required at my location. Presently, there is a perfect grid laid out over this area. It's one thing to bury your head in the sand, but your head is somewhere else entirely.

Good luck with that strategy, and have a nice day.

sigh....
A "perfect grid" just means that planes leaving contrails flew in more than one direction.
It is not possible to be anything other than that, because no one can control the winds and drafts in the atmosphere.
That you don't know that, well......It's like the 2nd dumb nonsensical thing a "chemtrail" believer can say, the first being the projection of a "black chemtrail", which defies all things in the known universe.

reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012


You need to study the topic of geo-engineering a bit more. The people who study geo-engineering all state that cloud seeding is not within the realm.

And the reading comprehension I mentioned earlier still apply. The link you posted talks only of possible future plans, and discuss all of them, not just planes. There is nothing in the entire article that proves anything other than geo-engineering is just being studied.

There is nothing that states in any way that the persistent trails behind some aircraft in anyway are part of geo-engineering, or that there is any reason to think they are.
You yourself have claimed you know the difference between a contrail and a "chemtrail." You continue to insist that what you provide somehow shows the debunkers in error.
You are wrong, again, on both counts.
Fine if you "believe" and that is enough for you, but when you post falsehoods on a public, open forum, expect to be vigorously corrected.
The biggest difference is debunkers know facts, while a believer can only believe stories.
It's why we debunk...we want people to think, learn, and know facts, not just believe in stories.

Ok, oh enlightened one, why are grids not caused by normal traffic on different headings?

Is that the only thing you are looking for or is there some other visual clue that it's a Chemtrail?

reply to post by waynos


Even G. Edward Griffin, one of the Chemtrail "gurus" acknowledges that grids are nothing more than the result of air traffic:

Another point that needs to be understood is that there is a logical explanation for the checkerboard patterns often seen in the sky that does not necessarily support the conclusion that they are evidence of chemtrail spraying. There usually are significant movements of air at the altitudes where chemtrails appear. Let us assume that the wind is blowing at 30 miles per hour and that it is moving at 90 degrees to the direction of flight. Let us also assume that there is a new flight that moves along the same path every fifteen minutes, which is not unusual in heavily traveled flight paths. In that case, the trail left by a plane will be blown sideways by 7.5 miles by the time the next plane arrives along the same path. That creates two parallel trails 7.5 miles apart. When the third plane arrives along the same path, the wind will cause three parallel trails, and so on. The casual observer might conclude that three planes have traversed the sky parallel to each other or that the same plane flew back and forth in different sectors of the sky but, in truth, there were three planes following each other along the same flight path.

Now let's assume that the wind is blowing at 45 degrees to the direction of these planes and that their flight path is intersected by another flight path for planes traveling at 90 degrees to the first flight path. This, also is common. Of course, the two paths are separated from each other by a substantial difference in altitude but, to an observer on the ground, it may appear that they are at the same altitude.

If we imagine that the planes in the second flight path also are flying one after the other, we can see that they, too, will leave parallel trails but they will be at 90 degrees to the first set of parallel trails. The result will be a checkerboard in the sky that looks like the planes flew back and forth at various points but, in truth, the pattern can be created by multiple planes flying only two stationary paths that intersect each other.

If he keeps up with this reasonable examination of "chemtrails" then in a year or 2 (or 10 ) I expect him to admit they don't actually exist...

You cannot just "debunk" something based on how observers react on it. That is not denying ignorance.

The government does many things in the air, we cannot know if the next plane we see is just a normal passenger plane giving off contrails or a military plane giving off chemtrails.

reply to post by extraterrestrialentity

You cannot just "debunk" something based on how observers react on it. That is not denying ignorance.

No, but with scientific research and study you can debunk something which is the main way to deny ignorance, something that chemtrail believers do not seem to not understand.

reply to post by extraterrestrialentity


Yeah, we do know.
Any trail, behind any plane, flown by anyone, at any time, anywhere in the world is a contrail. Unless and until someone can prove that there is something more than the expected elements of burning jet fuel through a jet engine>
Since planes have been flying.
If you think differently without more evidence that "looking up", you are embracing ignorance, believing an internet-generated myth, and not thinking for yourself.

reply to post by htapath

It's one thing to bury your head in the sand, but your head is somewhere else entirely.

It's one thing to believe a youtube video from someone that denies science, but it is another thing to deny science altogether, which is what chemtrail believers seem to do.

reply to post by stars15k


Although cloud seeding itself does not technically fall under the definition of "Geoengineering", IMO it is a form of it for sure. Alteration of the atmosphere at anytime by anyone IMO is Geoengineering. It is NOT natural and is intended to alter the outcome of weather, the suns rays, etc, etc. BTW explain to me what part of that picture is just a small plane for spraying? That is a COUNTRY using a LARGE plane for spraying........it is also form 6 years ago. If they were doing it then what are countries doing now. Is every single plane that crosses the sky spraying....no...BUT ......is every single plane NOT spraying......NO.....some are. Proving which planes are is close to impossible obviously from the stories told of this being a "black ops" type operation. BTW stop telling me I need to learn more about the weather or geoengineering, I know plenty and if you don't like my opinion on the subject then don't respond to what I write. You act like you are Gods dedicated gift to the debunking chemtrails forum. The debunkers know facts huh? You have yet to post one single salient fact IMO.

reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012


If you can get all the chemmies to agree that chemtrails are just cloud seeding, I can get all the debunkers to agree with you and you can win. Just one stipulation, you cannot mention contrails in relation to chemtrials ever, ever again.

Fair enough?

reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012

Proving which planes are is close to impossible obviously from the stories told of this being a "black ops" type operation.

Why would cloud seeding be a "black ops" type operation as there is nothing secret about it?

reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012

The debunkers know facts huh? You have yet to post one single salient fact IMO.

Want to make a little wager on who can provide verifiable facts concerning chemtrails?

You see debunkers provide information that can be scientifically verified, but now can chemtrail believers do that?

I haven't seen it yet, but if you can do this I will say chemtrails are real...Also if you can prove they are real I will never post on this subject again..

Interested in this little wager?

Originally posted by SMOKINGGUN2012
You act like you are Gods dedicated gift to the debunking chemtrails forum. The debunkers know facts huh? You have yet to post one single salient fact IMO.

Tell you what, honestly, debating with you is like shooting fish in a barrel. I know the sites you are going to post as "evidence" and your entire premise is flawed. You and others like you cling to the misguided theory that you "know" stuff because of how it looks. You completely ignore science in favor of your religion which is chemtrails. It's like hearing the big picture of Scientology and then being asked to take is seriously.

More of a joke than anything else. But entertaining for sure.

reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012

You act like you are Gods dedicated gift to the debunking chemtrails forum.

We only supply the scientific evidence that those lines in the sky that you and a handful of others swear are chemtrails are nothing more than contrails that persist.

That is more on the informative and less as a god...or his gifts..

It is much wiser to accept your government as evil.

Once you believe everything they say is lies, and everything they do is evil, you will instantly be smarter.

Then again, I thought people knew that already.

They poison us.

Prohibition....remember? No?
Too bad.

I would like to ask a question to see if this might be feasible.

Could a person not take their laptop and go sit in a parking lot somewhere and film planes flying overhead
that are emitting "trails" and then cross refrerence them immediately on:

www.airliners.net...

openflights.org...

www.faa.gov...

www.flightstats.com...

www.flightview.com...

or some other site that gives all the details of flights, and see if they are identifiable?

If there was an aircraft that was chugging out a massive trail that was in question and it turned out to be an unidentifiable
commercial aircraft, it might make me wonder what is being exhausted up there.
It only takes one in question to have it tracked to it's destination and have photos taken to identify it, then we might have something to work with.

I see large exhaust trails everyday that don't seem "normal", but when I check them out they are just commercial aircraft
going into a large airport usually coming from the northeast.

I am not an expert and I don't "think" my opinion matters...

reply to post by extraterrestrialentity


Ok, but when all the originally proposed reasons for even thinking something called chemtrailing was occurring have been shown to be false, which they have, then continuing to believe in them because such a thing is theoretically possible is rather pointless, and continuing to come up with other reasons to think contrails might be real in the face of this knowledge is facile in the extreme.

Is there a reason to suppose they are occurring or not? All the evidence suggests very strongly that the answer is not.

reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012


Leaving aside the fact that I disagree with you regarding cloud seeding being a form of geoengineering, let's say that is the case, what geoengineering proposals propose leaving thick visible contrails in the sky? The link between chemtrails and GE is nothing more than an assumption made by people who saw contrails, read about chemtrails, then read about GE and decided they were the same thing with no reason whatsoever. Believers just seem to accept it as given, but where is this link?

reply to post by just1question


I have done this, I used to paste the flight data onto the image and post them on here, there are several threads with these pictures but you may find some on the pinned research thread at the top of this board, somewhere around pages 28-30. Sorry that's a bit vague but it was a while ago.

On more recent images I haven't posted yet I have copied the flight data into the image properties for future reference.