I think I know What Chemtrails are... and it's worse than you can imagine!

waynos
reply to post by alienDNA

 

The thing is, those of us who have followed and taken part in this thread from its beginning WERE trying to have a serious discussion,

Be honest... re-read your own threads in the third person...

All you, along with this little turret of debunkers has done is take the opposing view without seriously considering any of the evidence or discussion points. It's just an absolute resounding negative.

The moment something of substance comes to the fore you all jump around whooping like crazies mischievous monkeys.

It's very entertaining actually.

If you do not want to believe in chemtrails and choose to ignore all the evidence or attempt to see from a different point of view then that's your choice, but don't expect me to react to your jumping and whooping with anything other than delight...

Korg.

Korg Trinity

waynos
Korg trolling has been apparent throughout the thread but it took him over 60 pages to admit it. What a loser.

I didn't say I was trolling. I said you reap what you sow... in other words if you had wanted to engage in serious discussion about the subject matter then the discussion would not have spiraled into the gutter.

You mean like repeatedly asking you to explain how your hypothesis could possibly work? That kind of thing?

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by alienDNA

 

The thing is, those of us who have followed and taken part in this thread from its beginning WERE trying to have a serious discussion,

If you do not want to believe in chemtrails and choose to ignore all the evidence or attempt to see from a different point of view then that's your choice, but don't expect me to react to your jumping and whooping with anything other than delight...

Korg.

See above. When we've tried you've fallen flat on your face.

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by alienDNA

 

The thing is, those of us who have followed and taken part in this thread from its beginning WERE trying to have a serious discussion,

If you do not want to believe in chemtrails and choose to ignore all the evidence or attempt to see from a different point of view then that's your choice, but don't expect me to react to your jumping and whooping with anything other than delight...

Korg.

See above. When we've tried you've fallen flat on your face.

Hahaha I told you whooping and jumping only brings a smile to my face.

You're entitled and welcome to your opinion.

From my perspective thus far no one has shown a single shred of evidence that chemtrails could not be the cause of global dimming.

As such the thread is still alive based upon that.

Now if someone were to state it is impossible and improbable because of X... then that would be a different story.

Korg.

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by alienDNA

 

The thing is, those of us who have followed and taken part in this thread from its beginning WERE trying to have a serious discussion,

If you do not want to believe in chemtrails and choose to ignore all the evidence or attempt to see from a different point of view then that's your choice, but don't expect me to react to your jumping and whooping with anything other than delight...

Korg.

See above. When we've tried you've fallen flat on your face.

Hahaha I told you whooping and jumping only brings a smile to my face.

You're entitled and welcome to your opinion.

From my perspective thus far no one has shown a single shred of evidence that chemtrails could not be the cause of global dimming.

As such the thread is still alive based upon that.

Now if someone were to state it is impossible and improbable because of X... then that would be a different story.

Korg.

From my perspective you haven't brought a shred of evidence that there is global dimming.

Those are actually nanobots being sprayed. See they put them in the water supplies for all major cities and towns. but what about the rural people plus people that only drink bottled water? Well that's what the spraying is for. To ensure everyone gets some nanobots in there system. The nanobots will remain dormant. But then if you start to a raise any kind of problems in society they can flick a switch, turn them on and they'll end up killing you in what looks like a typical heart attack. That's one part. The other part is that at some point when they want to reduce the population they'll turn on all of them. That will wipe out most of humanity leaving only the 500 million people left n the planet.

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by alienDNA

 

The thing is, those of us who have followed and taken part in this thread from its beginning WERE trying to have a serious discussion,

If you do not want to believe in chemtrails and choose to ignore all the evidence or attempt to see from a different point of view then that's your choice, but don't expect me to react to your jumping and whooping with anything other than delight...

Korg.

See above. When we've tried you've fallen flat on your face.

Hahaha I told you whooping and jumping only brings a smile to my face.

You're entitled and welcome to your opinion.

From my perspective thus far no one has shown a single shred of evidence that chemtrails could not be the cause of global dimming.

As such the thread is still alive based upon that.

Now if someone were to state it is impossible and improbable because of X... then that would be a different story.

Korg.

From my perspective you haven't brought a shred of evidence that there is global dimming.

Ahh but that's just it isn't... I didn't need to, I made an assertion... a hypothesis based upon many sources and posted on ATS...

What I discovered is that based upon the reaction of the debunkers whether on a payroll or not is additional evidence and it was exactly that reaction I was looking for.

The turret of debunkers and nothingtoseeheres have only proven by their very reactions to the idea that there is something to it...

This has been a giant game of cat and mouse, but I have news for you it was my sandbox with my defined boundaries and you all just completely didn't see that.

For every time you scoffed and attacked and diverted, it only worked to highlight further the subject. If you realize the truth of it then you have but two moves to make.... one... stop posting but to do so would highlight the truth of my words here... or Two.... continue to post and further highlight the fact I've touched a nerve.

Have fun wrestling with that one!

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Yep, you're right about that. I chose my words poorly. What I meant was more in the line of discussing something theoretically is all fine and dandy. You're right thats how scientific progress are made.
However to discuss a theory of global dimming, and the use of chemtrails to do so - would first require to prove there are chemtrails.

Sorry for not making that clear.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Well if you think that and it makes you feel better, that's ok.

In posting a nonsense postulation, when people asked you to explain it and pointed out it was nonsense you were really 'winning'.

Congratulations.

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by alienDNA

 

The thing is, those of us who have followed and taken part in this thread from its beginning WERE trying to have a serious discussion,

If you do not want to believe in chemtrails and choose to ignore all the evidence or attempt to see from a different point of view then that's your choice, but don't expect me to react to your jumping and whooping with anything other than delight...

Korg.

See above. When we've tried you've fallen flat on your face.

Hahaha I told you whooping and jumping only brings a smile to my face.

You're entitled and welcome to your opinion.

From my perspective thus far no one has shown a single shred of evidence that chemtrails could not be the cause of global dimming.

As such the thread is still alive based upon that.

Now if someone were to state it is impossible and improbable because of X... then that would be a different story.

Korg.

From my perspective you haven't brought a shred of evidence that there is global dimming.

Ahh but that's just it isn't... I didn't need to, I made an assertion... a hypothesis based upon many sources and posted on ATS...

No global dimming then so no chemtrails. Gotcha.

Korg Trinity

For every time you scoffed and attacked and diverted, it only worked to highlight further the subject. If you realize the truth of it then you have but two moves to make.... one... stop posting but to do so would highlight the truth of my words here... or Two.... continue to post and further highlight the fact I've touched a nerve.

Have fun wrestling with that one!

Korg.

Thats not it at all. If someone was to read the last 40 or so pages of the thread, it would go like this.

You: Prove that chemtrails arent real.
We: That isnt possible.
You: How can you deny the possibility of chemtrails?
We: We never once said that.
You: Ah so there are chemtrails!
We: No. Where is the proof?
You: Show me proof there arent any chemtrails!

And repeat. This is the process of the thread. Many people have tried different tactics to make you realise your logical fallacy, but it seems it is impossible. You are extremely close minded and "set in your ways" that any logic pointed out to you, seem to go completely over your head.

And now at the end of thread, at least what I suspect is the end - you claim it is all a game played by your rules and that we are all playing into your hands.
Ah, the ego!

Does that confession mean this thread is destined for the hoax bin?

PS I suppose "this thread has been a game of cat and mouse" and " I got the reaction I was looking for" is also not an admission of trolling either

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by alienDNA

 

The thing is, those of us who have followed and taken part in this thread from its beginning WERE trying to have a serious discussion,

If you do not want to believe in chemtrails and choose to ignore all the evidence or attempt to see from a different point of view then that's your choice, but don't expect me to react to your jumping and whooping with anything other than delight...

Korg.

See above. When we've tried you've fallen flat on your face.

Hahaha I told you whooping and jumping only brings a smile to my face.

You're entitled and welcome to your opinion.

From my perspective thus far no one has shown a single shred of evidence that chemtrails could not be the cause of global dimming.

As such the thread is still alive based upon that.

Now if someone were to state it is impossible and improbable because of X... then that would be a different story.

Korg.

From my perspective you haven't brought a shred of evidence that there is global dimming.

Ahh but that's just it isn't... I didn't need to, I made an assertion... a hypothesis based upon many sources and posted on ATS...

No global dimming then so no chemtrails. Gotcha.

Nope I've got you....

Patterns of surface solar radiation dimming and brightening at the turn of 21st century

In the present study, we investigate the evolution of GDB for the period 2000-2007 using a spectral radiative transfer model with input data from global satellite (International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project, ISCCP; Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer, MODIS) and Reanalysis projects (National Center for Environmental Prediction/National Centers for Atmospheric Research, NCEP/NCAR), with the aim to provide local, regional and hemispherical aspects of the phenomenon and to identify possible causes.

An overall global dimming (based on coastal, land and ocean pixels) is found to have taken place on the Earth under all-sky conditions, from 2001 to 2006, arising from a stronger solar dimming in the SH (
SSR = -3.84 W m-2 or -0.64 W m-2/yr) and a slight dimming in NH (
SSR = -0.65 W m-2 or -0.11 W m-2/yr), thus exhibiting a strong inter-hemispherical difference. Dimming is observed over land and ocean in the SH, and over oceans in the NH, whereas a slight brightening occurred over NH land, with the SSR tendencies being larger in the SH than
in the NH land and ocean areas

I suggest you research further.

Korg.

waynos
Does that confession mean this thread is destined for the hoax bin?

PS I suppose "this thread has been a game of cat and mouse" and " I got the reaction I was looking for" is also not an admission of trolling either

edit on 25-10-2013 by waynos because: (no reason given)

Doesn't that sort of thing get you banned from ATS? I don't indulge in it myself so I wouldn't know.

waynos
Does that confession mean this thread is destined for the hoax bin?

PS I suppose "this thread has been a game of cat and mouse" and " I got the reaction I was looking for" is also not an admission of trolling either

edit on 25-10-2013 by waynos because: (no reason given)

you can take it whatever way you want. I stand by my OP and the hypothesis, the reaction of the debunkers and nothingtoseeheres only adds further weight that I have touched on a subject that at least has some truth to... Or there would be no need to fiercely contest the idea.

This thread would have died a death a long time ago, there is no hoax involved.

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


When someone posts bunk, then the reaction of debunking is to be expected. Why do you want people to believe in bunk? Why do you need bunk for your hypothesis to stand up?

That is a hoax.

waynos
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

When someone posts bunk, then the reaction of debunking is to be expected. Why do you want people to believe in bunk? Why do you need bunk for your hypothesis to stand up?

That is a hoax.

Ahhh you see that is where you are going wrong. It's your Opinion that is bunk... yet I supplied enough supporting evidence to make the case.

No one has supplied evidence to the contrary.

An example of this is your comment a few posts ago about there being no global dimming... yet I show you there has been with data to back it up...

Yet to you it's all a hoax. Nope it isn't... it's just you disagree with the idea. I have no problem about people disagreeing with my hypothesis.

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


No Korg.

That you can tell chemtrails exist just by looking up is bunk.
That contrails do not spread into cloud cover is bunk.
That vast clouds drawn from seawater sprayed vertically upwards from ships proves contrails are chemtrails is bunk.
That a German video talking about chaff is talking about chemtrails is bunk.

That is not opinion.

These are just some of the SIMPLE things that you posted that are completely wrong. Debunking is just pointing out that fact but you take offence at it.

The more bunk you use as a basis for your hypothesis, the sillier it looks.

I don't remember offering an opinion on global dimming at all, where did I do this?

waynos
reply to post by Korg Trinity

 

No Korg.

That you can tell chemtrails exist just by looking up is bunk.
That contrails do not spread into cloud cover is bunk.
That vast clouds drawn from seawater sprayed vertically upwards from ships proves contrails are chemtrails is bunk.
That a German video talking about chaff is talking about chemtrails is bunk.

That is not opinion.

These are just some of the SIMPLE things that you posted that are completely wrong. Debunking is just pointing out that fact but you take offence at it.

The more bunk you use as a basis for your hypothesis, the sillier it looks.

I don't remember offering an opinion on global dimming at all, where did I do this?

edit on 25-10-2013 by waynos because: (no reason given)

Again all above are either your words or my words taken out of context.

So I guess you refute the findings of many many papers among many mnay other sources...

such as this....

Public Engagement onGeoengineering Research

reliminary Report on theSPICE DeliberativeWorkshops

Korg.

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

mrthumpy

Korg Trinity

waynos
reply to post by alienDNA

 

The thing is, those of us who have followed and taken part in this thread from its beginning WERE trying to have a serious discussion,

If you do not want to believe in chemtrails and choose to ignore all the evidence or attempt to see from a different point of view then that's your choice, but don't expect me to react to your jumping and whooping with anything other than delight...

Korg.

See above. When we've tried you've fallen flat on your face.

Hahaha I told you whooping and jumping only brings a smile to my face.

You're entitled and welcome to your opinion.

From my perspective thus far no one has shown a single shred of evidence that chemtrails could not be the cause of global dimming.

As such the thread is still alive based upon that.

Now if someone were to state it is impossible and improbable because of X... then that would be a different story.

Korg.

From my perspective you haven't brought a shred of evidence that there is global dimming.

Ahh but that's just it isn't... I didn't need to, I made an assertion... a hypothesis based upon many sources and posted on ATS...

No global dimming then so no chemtrails. Gotcha.

Nope I've got you....

Patterns of surface solar radiation dimming and brightening at the turn of 21st century

In the present study, we investigate the evolution of GDB for the period 2000-2007 using a spectral radiative transfer model with input data from global satellite (International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project, ISCCP; Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer, MODIS) and Reanalysis projects (National Center for Environmental Prediction/National Centers for Atmospheric Research, NCEP/NCAR), with the aim to provide local, regional and hemispherical aspects of the phenomenon and to identify possible causes.

An overall global dimming (based on coastal, land and ocean pixels) is found to have taken place on the Earth under all-sky conditions, from 2001 to 2006, arising from a stronger solar dimming in the SH (
SSR = -3.84 W m-2 or -0.64 W m-2/yr) and a slight dimming in NH (
SSR = -0.65 W m-2 or -0.11 W m-2/yr), thus exhibiting a strong inter-hemispherical difference. Dimming is observed over land and ocean in the SH, and over oceans in the NH, whereas a slight brightening occurred over NH land, with the SSR tendencies being larger in the SH than
in the NH land and ocean areas

I suggest you research further.

Korg.

OK so there's no chemtrials over land in the northern hemisphere?