NASA admits chemtrails – 10 July 2013

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 06:35 PM
link   
On 'what is a chemtrail?'...I like the NASA guys' definition: a chemical release (into the atmosphere.)




posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by abe froman
 


You are preaching to the choir of debunkers. We know there is chemicals all over. It's when people think because the soil or water contains minerals because of "chemtrails" but have not a single clue that those same chemicals are in the ground anyway that the debunkers come in.

The usual suspects mentioned are aluminum and barium. Al is the most common metallic mineral in the ground. Ba is the 14th most abundant element. They are both everywhere, and both are used in industry, construction, agriculture, transportation...all of which will add both into the environment. But no way can it be traced back to visible plumes behind planes. To make such an extraordinary claim, extraordinary evidence needs to be produced. So far, any attempt at evidence has been far from extraordinary; most tests are sloppily sampled, misinterpreted, or overstated.

When an average human body contains 300 ppb by weight of Ba, a reading of anything less is not exactly toxic. One particular test often produced as evidence of "chemtrails" is both misstated and misinterpreted. The report shows the barium to be 68.8 ppb/L. Less than a human body, less than what the EPA considers to be bad, and way below anything toxic. But most believers will only believe things they read on "chemtrail" sites, without researching on their own. And these same "chemtrail" sites continue to use the story ignoring the errors. That is dishonest.

That is what makes debunkers concerned. Bad information should be corrected.



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by luxordelphi
On 'what is a chemtrail?'...I like the NASA guys' definition: a chemical release (into the atmosphere.)


So we all breath chemtails.....

Whopppeee do.

Of course htis is just another attempt by chemmies to broaden the "definition" to include something that DOES actually exist, so they can hen say "See - chemtrails are real and so we've been right all along.."

It happens from time to time when they try to say that top dressing or rocket exhaust or cloud seeding is "chemtrails"....never mind that none of them:

1/ are done by aitliners
2/ look exactly like contrails
3/ come from engines with a gap between the engine and the trail

It is just dishonesty on their part - to them getting the word "Admitted" is actually more important than having any actual evidence for their fantasy hoax.

That plus the subject is already covered in a thread that is not very old thus illustrating the typically appalling lack of actual research ability.....www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 07:51 PM
link   
As stated in the above post... there is already a thread! Please post further comments to it.

Thread closed.





 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join