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.

 

Here is what I have to say about my experience

page: 12
16
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:07 AM
link   
It talked about everything from HAARP to the planes and aerosols




posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 


I found that last summer in july i showed a few people here who did witness it. after we found it a few days later it got 404d



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


Im talking about chemtrails may actually being real not the other way around.This is why i dont like online talks or texting haha



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 


What do you mean by "here"? Who witnessed what?



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 


Let me tell you haha. few friends and family saw the documents that im talking about. "We" were going to print it out and let people know what we found. By "here" i mean in farmington new mexico haha. but it was 404'd
edit on 27-5-2013 by D3AD537 because: spelling



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 


What do you remember posting and where? You said it, not me.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:44 AM
link   
FOUND IT

There it is i found it. It was 404d on the cftc website it originally was on. Remember this was on a .gov website. the document was a lot longer than this one is now



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 





Hmm i remember as well posting something about our own government admitting to using HAARP and chemtrailing somewhere.


Well so far the only post I can find from you concerning HAARP and not even chemtrails is in this thread here...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Where you posted this...



......or it could all be HAARP......research that


So other than that post and this thread where did you post anything about HAARP and chemtrails where the government admits this?

I am interested as to where this was supposedly posted.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:52 AM
link   
::palms face:: No no no i was saying i posted some articles about haarp in this thread. this is my first thread other than my intro thread. I posted some resources talking about haarp. Theyre linked up to other links within those pages. It'll take you there just read haha



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 





There it is i found it. It was 404d on the cftc website it originally was on. Remember this was on a .gov website. the document was a lot longer than this one is now


Well again your research is flawed...and here is why..



You may want to check into the bill that was introduced by Mr. Kucinich concerning those weather weapons.

contrailscience.com...

BTW there is nothing on that report that says anything about chemtrails or HAARP, or am I missing something here?

As I said before you are not presenting anything new that hasn't already been discussed on this topic.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 


No no no, you said


Hmm i remember as well posting something about our own government admitting to using HAARP and chemtrailing somewhere. its documented proof just as well as yours is documented.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Getting tired of pulling on this tooth. Where did you post this proof?



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 





No no no i was saying i posted some articles about haarp in this thread.


No, no ,no you specifically stated this...



Hmm i remember as well posting something about our own government admitting to using HAARP and chemtrailing somewhere.


Now if it was this thread why would you state you posted something somewhere and not say it was in this thread?

Nice try, but your starting to contradict yourself.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Did you bother reading the entire thing plus all of the information its gives out. It takes a few days to thoroughly read everything. how could you possibly read all of it process all that info unless youre a bot haha



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
 





Getting tired of pulling on this tooth.


This is one tooth that just refuses to come out...Sooner or later it will just fall out such as the evidence being presented about the existence of chemtrails.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:08 AM
link   
I've read that article as well. not trying to be rude or anything. Im telling you all the info you all have so greatly given me i've read and i re read in the past few days again. have you taken the time to read anything i've provided or are you just going to continue to have your scientists do the thinking for you.



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 





Did you bother reading the entire thing


What entire thing? Why is it so difficult to get you to answer one simple question about what you say you posted?

Where is it?



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by tsurfer2000h
 


My mistake i simply forgot to add "in this thread" but i thought we were on the same page (haha get it) now since thats fixed. are you going to really read any of this info i've provided or just worry about how im missing words here and there??



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 





Did you bother reading the entire thing plus all of the information its gives out. It takes a few days to thoroughly read everything. how could you possibly read all of it process all that info unless youre a bot haha


Just as I have stated before in this thread alone...

The evidence your presenting has been discussed so many times it is ridiculous..

So do you have anything new to present, or are you going to rehash old debunked evidence?



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 


You are new to research, aren't you?
And you believe everything anyone says as long as it confirms your belief in "chemtrails", but will dismiss anything that does not. Got that part.
Much of what you are talking about now has been answered; your continued statements no one is actually reading your sources show you haven't done enough reading of similar posts here.

Including the document you posted on this post.
I am familiar with this document. I've read it before. Here is what you don't understand about researching.

Anything sent to the government is documented. I could send in a recipe for brownies and, given the time it takes to go through the channels, it will someday be documented on a .gov site as a non-sensitive document.

What you posted is one of these.

It is a document sent to a governmental agency/person. It went through many stages before being posted. It would have been first screened to make sure it was not physically harmful, like a bomb or bio-weapon, like has happened with anthrax. From there, it would be further screened to assure it is going to the right department, the right office, the right person....and then, because it is a communication with someone in the government, it will go in the right file for safe keeping until it has been indexed into the system electronically to preserve it for all time, and made available online for all to see.

It is not a document produced by anyone in the government.

Therefore it is not something someone who understands document research would accept as proof of anything other than the government gets all kinds of junk mail.
edit on 27-5-2013 by stars15k because: spelling error



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by D3AD537
 





My mistake i simply forgot to add "in this thread" but i thought we were on the same page (haha get it) now since thats fixed.


Fixed, all you did is move the goalposts a bit farther back once you were called out on your statement, so nothing has been fixed.

Or maybe you have a different definition of fixed than I do.
edit on 27-5-2013 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join