Pilot admits chemtrails and says they are a "necessary evil"........

reply to post by OneManArmy

Here is a sourced scientific paper on the subject.

Case Orange

Seriously the Belfort Group is what your going to use as a source?

Here you may want to read this...

www.metabunk.org...

smurfy
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Actually, OMA pointed you to a site which actually is specific and includes Quote, "The first subscale testing" in Solar radiation management.

then I apologise for missing it - and looking through his threads I do not see anything that looks like it nor can I find that wording on any of the links - can you identify it for me please?

If you mean SPICE then perhaps you aer unaware that it was been cancelled over a year ago.

the link does point out that lab tests are ongoing - however those are not "chemtrails" - and neither was SPICE!

It's probably thanks to a Mr Rowland's honest comments elsewhere that is now giving me a clue to other things going on, but I'll leave that until I get it all 'dusted' down.

by all means explain - in another thread if appropriate?

Heads Up

ATS is about the post, not the poster. Discuss the subject matter, not each other. The petty swipes at other posters stops now please. If it doesn't stop, then posts may be remove and individual abilities to post may be removed.

Hope thats clear. This isn't up for discussion and there won't be another warning.

Even if the rather silly idea that someone was being paid to debunk was true, it should not matter.

If a person posts something that can be shown to be wrong , deliberately nor otherwise, then it is simply a matter of showing why that information is wrong.

The frequency with which some believers post completely ignoring the topic at hand in order to 'denounce' someone personally merely serves to illustrate the lack of substance in this topic.

Even with this pilot's admission, I just don't see how this is a feasible way to deliver chemicals to a population if that was it's true intent and purposes; even if it were possible.

Just seems like there would be better ways of doing it, like adding fluoride to drinking water...

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by Blarneystoner

 

Anyone else notice that it's always the same three or four members who immediately jump into chemtrail threads to debunk? It's always the same arguments too; "where are the planes", "can't carry that much material", "the pilots who come forth aren't really pilots", etc...

They use the same tactics, same arguments, similar language, etc...

In the mean time, some officials in other countries are disclosing their country's involvment.

It's happening, regardless of what those guys say. It's definitely happening.

Other than complaining about who replies on these threads are you able to provide any evidence of these officials in other countries disclosing that it is happening.

Since your so sure it is happening please show the evidence to back it up....if you can.

Oh I'm not complaining, just making an observation. I do find it pretty humorous that you guys are so busy doing damage control. Y'all sure have a lot of time on your hands, it's almost like posting on ATS is your job.

Evidence has been presented to you in abundance but anything short of you actually boarding a plane and watching the chemtrails spew from the nozzles wouldn't be sufficient for you and the others.

...and beyond that, I have no interest in trying to convince you of anything.

majesticgent
Even with this pilot's admission, I just don't see how this is a feasible way to deliver chemicals to a population if that was it's true intent and purposes; even if it were possible.

Just seems like there would be better ways of doing it, like adding fluoride to drinking water...

I don't think it's about population control. It's climate control.

reply to post by Blarneystoner


Show me a peer reviewed paper, that includes samples of chemtrails that show more than just jet exhaust and ice crystals. I've said it repeatedly, I'll be the first to change my tune and believe in them. But no one ever has done it, despite having the money.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Google Scholar returns 2,070 results from the search term "Geoengineering peer reviewed". Which one would you like to see?

Here's one: An overview of geoengineering of climate using stratospheric sulphate aerosols


An excerpt:

We provide an overview of geoengineering by stratospheric sulphate aerosols. The state of understanding about this topic as of early 2008 is reviewed, summarizing the past 30 years of work in the area, highlighting some very recent studies using climate models, and discussing methods used to deliver sulphur species to the stratosphere. The studies reviewed here suggest that sulphate aerosols can counteract the globally averaged temperature increase associated with increasing greenhouse gases, and reduce changes to some other components of the Earth system.

There is an abundance of peer reviewed research on this subject (atmospheric delivery of aerosols to counteract climate change or global warming). The fact that you guys choose to ignore it is not my problem.

And dude... please fix your avatar. Everytime you post something I have to scroll half way down the page to get past it.

reply to post by Blarneystoner


Dude, you massively missed the point. The papers you suggest are evidence, are discussing the

POSSIBILITY

of using all the different methods to combat climate change, global warming, polar bear farts, whatever.
None of it IS being used at this time unless you can show otherwise. There are even laws preventing the use of those things since the repercussions of using them is largely unknown.

Please read the things you think are proof, understand them, then see if you can come up with a valid reason to believe that the white lines in the sky left behind airplanes are anything other than ice crystals.


From your link;

The studies reviewed here suggest that sulphate aerosols can counteract the globally averaged temperature increase associated with increasing greenhouse gases, and reduce changes to some other components of the Earth system.

Suggest. Operative word.

Zaphod58
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

There are so many things wrong with that paper it isn't funny. It's been debunked many times.

Just saying its been debunked isnt good enough, at least have the decency to post links.
Besides I wasnt using the paper as evidence per say, more so the sources quoted in the paper.

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

Here is a sourced scientific paper on the subject.

Case Orange

Seriously the Belfort Group is what your going to use as a source?

Here you may want to read this...

www.metabunk.org...

I already read that while searching yesterday.

I would like to ask the debunkers what their scientific credentials are, I see a lot of criticism of the scientists like Dr. Coen Vermeeren of the Delft Institute of Technology, as if his being a UFO researcher has any relevance to this case. I would at least like to know that the people doing the debunking are at least "qualified" to do this "debunking". A 15 min search on the internet doesnt really qualify someone as an expert. Nor does it qualify a position to critique the "scientific method".

All I know is this, the patents exist, the scientific discussions exist on the future of this "technology" for geoengineering, the courses at Oxford University exist, the bioengineering companies exist. All this and the actual bioengineering doesnt? Really? Thats almost laughable. To claim that "no verifiable evidence exists to support chemtrails exists" is just a blatant lie. The term "chemtrails" was coined by the DoD in the 90's, in a course for the USAFA from both '91 and '92(Yes a long time ago). Conspiracy theorists didnt invent the term. And if you would like to be really pedantic, then contrails are chemtrails by the very fact that they are not simply condensed water, but rather water attached to particulates that are in the exhaust of jet engines, which isnt solely air, but also consists of other VERIFIABLE CHEMICALS including but not limited to sulfur and soot.
Hence the whole debate over the air industries contribution to global warming, if there was no evidence for that then there would be no debate at all.

Blarneystoner

majesticgent
Even with this pilot's admission, I just don't see how this is a feasible way to deliver chemicals to a population if that was it's true intent and purposes; even if it were possible.

Just seems like there would be better ways of doing it, like adding fluoride to drinking water...

I don't think it's about population control. It's climate control.

Exactly, population control is an "adverse" side effect of trying to save the world from global warming.
It becomes a question of whats more desirable, mass extinction, or a shortened lifespan?

All I know is that every time mankind tries to play God, he invariably messes it all up.
WE ARE NOT GODS and NEVER WILL BE. Someone just needs to get that small fact into our egomaniacal leaders and "scientists" heads.

reply to post by OneManArmy


There is no verifiable evidence of any nature to support the contention that what people commonly call chemtrails are anything but normal exhaust from normal jet engines, as studied by scientists for many decades.

Nor is there any verifiable evidence that any form of high altitude spraying of any substance for any purpose would appear, from the ground, to be what people commonly call chemtrails (or indeed, visible in any way whatsoever).

Aloysius the Gaul

OneManArmy

You accuse me of personal attacks then call me a "chemmie" - No Im an agnostic when it comes to geoengineering.

no you aren't - you have tried to provide "proof" that it is happening eg www.abovetopsecret.com...

And chemmie means nothing more than a believer in chemtrails - it is not better or worse than "debunker" - a statement of fact.

As for calling you a shill, thats just my assumption based on circumstantial evidence.

Exactly.

I havent done anything of the sort, if there was proof there would be no conspiracy theory it would be conspiracy fact. I have merely been providing supporting evidence, where you said absolutely none exists.

Stereotyping me as a "chemmie" and using statements like "how all chemmies blah blah blah" is simply applying a stereotype to me and trying to devalue my comments by associating me with a secret cabal of organized "chemmies" that all act the same way. No, im just a curious person.

Calling you a debunker isnt a derogatory term used to stereotype you, it is simply a description YOU use to describe yourself.

OneManArmy

Blarneystoner

majesticgent
Even with this pilot's admission, I just don't see how this is a feasible way to deliver chemicals to a population if that was it's true intent and purposes; even if it were possible.

Just seems like there would be better ways of doing it, like adding fluoride to drinking water...

I don't think it's about population control. It's climate control.

Exactly, population control is an "adverse" side effect of trying to save the world from global warming.
It becomes a question of whats more desirable, mass extinction, or a shortened lifespan?

All I know is that every time mankind tries to play God, he invariably messes it all up.
WE ARE NOT GODS and NEVER WILL BE. Someone just needs to get that small fact into our egomaniacal leaders and "scientists" heads.

How are you even concerned about any of this? First be sure it's actually happening. Hell, next thing you know, the chemtrail proponents will be naming names and trying to burn folks at the stake. Use some logic please. Proof first, then worry about who to blame and for what.

network dude

OneManArmy

Blarneystoner

majesticgent
Even with this pilot's admission, I just don't see how this is a feasible way to deliver chemicals to a population if that was it's true intent and purposes; even if it were possible.

Just seems like there would be better ways of doing it, like adding fluoride to drinking water...

I don't think it's about population control. It's climate control.

Exactly, population control is an "adverse" side effect of trying to save the world from global warming.
It becomes a question of whats more desirable, mass extinction, or a shortened lifespan?

All I know is that every time mankind tries to play God, he invariably messes it all up.
WE ARE NOT GODS and NEVER WILL BE. Someone just needs to get that small fact into our egomaniacal leaders and "scientists" heads.

How are you even concerned about any of this? First be sure it's actually happening. Hell, next thing you know, the chemtrail proponents will be naming names and trying to burn folks at the stake. Use some logic please. Proof first, then worry about who to blame and for what.

I have posted links to much "evidence" already, am I required to post it all again?

reply to post by OneManArmy


I think the validity of the "evidence" is the real issue here. Nothing posted explains that anything IS being done, only that there are proposals and ideas. It's almost like the chemtrail proponents don't actually read beyond the article title.

Seriously, this is a discussion board and as big as the chemtrail believer group is, one would think they could somehow support their fears. I, nor anyone else that I can see, don't say it couldn't happen, but we are saying that there is no proof that it is happening and the white lines behind planes look and act just like the ice filled contrails that they always have.

Now, if you have anything (that you have read and understand) that states that someone is spraying something that looks just like contrails, but is in fact some sort of chemical, then everyone here would be forced to change their tune. Good luck.

network dude

OneManArmy

Blarneystoner

majesticgent
Even with this pilot's admission, I just don't see how this is a feasible way to deliver chemicals to a population if that was it's true intent and purposes; even if it were possible.

Just seems like there would be better ways of doing it, like adding fluoride to drinking water...

I don't think it's about population control. It's climate control.

Exactly, population control is an "adverse" side effect of trying to save the world from global warming.
It becomes a question of whats more desirable, mass extinction, or a shortened lifespan?

All I know is that every time mankind tries to play God, he invariably messes it all up.
WE ARE NOT GODS and NEVER WILL BE. Someone just needs to get that small fact into our egomaniacal leaders and "scientists" heads.

How are you even concerned about any of this? First be sure it's actually happening. Hell, next thing you know, the chemtrail proponents will be naming names and trying to burn folks at the stake. Use some logic please. Proof first, then worry about who to blame and for what.

Was there "verifiable evidence" for the SR71 Blackbird or the Stealth Bomber before it was admitted?
Or the Atom Bomb before it was unleashed on Nagasaki and Hiroshima?
Or verifiable evidence of covert scientific operations testing nerve agents on civilians and soldiers before it was declassified?

Im sure I dont have to point out the meaning of covert or classified and TOP SECRET, and how they come under the umbrella of national security and official secrets acts.

network dude
reply to post by OneManArmy

 

I think the validity of the "evidence" is the real issue here. Nothing posted explains that anything IS being done, only that there are proposals and ideas. It's almost like the chemtrail proponents don't actually read beyond the article title.

I posted the links, challenge me, not "chemtrail proponents", im not a stereotype, and I did read not all but much of what I posted. I would suggest you do the same.