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.

 

Success for the Chemtrail program?

page: 11
6
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   

sunnynights
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


I would answer you but it is clear that you are not really interested, just wanting to distort what ever and who ever is not of your same opinion.
Not interested but thanks for your offer.


I'm interested in discussion.

However, I fully disclose the fact that I am approaching any discussion from the side of persistent trails simply being contrails. I'm fully prepared to hear the other side of the argument (that those fluffy white trails are intentionally-sprayed chemicals done so for secret purposes), but just be aware that I think those trails are simply vapor contrails -- i.e., water-ice clouds created from the hot wet exhaust of jet engines condensing the moisture out of the atmosphere.

The reason why I think this is because the contrail-production process is understood by me, and it fits in with what I have learned about science nature over my lifetime.

The idea that these contrails are really chemtrails does not (yet) fit with what I know about science and nature. If you have additional evidence about the formation of chemtrails that can prove those things that I call contrails are really a government program of secretly spraying chemicals, then please present this evidence to the discussion.




posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 10:07 PM
link   

PlanetXisHERE
The chemtrail program, in effect for the past 10-15 years or so, was done subtly so as not to arouse suspicions in the public, but it was done too subtly and wasn't working as evidenced by the warmest year in 2012.


You call your theory of flying GIANT commercial jets with alleged dispensers for chemicals "not to arouse suspicions in the public" and "subtle"?

It's obviously not, I mean this discussion proves it, right? (Not that there is any validity to the claims anyway).

But do you think "the government" would not have TRULY secret and proven ways to "alter the weather" as to "not to arouse suspicions"... say, why not fly classified military missions like they could've done w/ the former space shuttle or military rockets and dispense tons of tons of "chemicals", no many ever would even KNOW about it since it would be under "classified" in the same way as the countless spy satellites etc. launched where no layman knows any specifics about.

Secondly, the "not to arouse suspicions" theory is...excuse me.....silly...because there is not even a reason to do that. Don't you think that IF such a chemtrail (which now seems to be "climate altering") project existed that the government and media would advertise it as extremely beneficial, we would all know about it and would be convinced it's a good thing.

The other problem with the idea in general of a "climate altering project" is how incredibly, incredibly ineffective it would be on the background of other global events, say, volcano eruptions, sand storms, Sahara sand are dispersed over Europe, fires in the rain forests etc...etc...where a number of planes "spraying" would not have ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER....respective whatever alleged effect they have would be ridiculously small compared to other events normally going on.
edit on 62014RuSaturdayAmerica/Chicago09PMSaturdaySaturday by NoRulesAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 02:26 PM
link   

sunnynights
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


I would answer you but it is clear that you are not really interested, just wanting to distort what ever and who ever is not of your same opinion.
Not interested but thanks for your offer.


If there is actually any illicit spraying going on then as an aviation professional I would want to know about it and see it shut down.

However the half-baked nonsense that passes for chemtrail "evidence" around here only supports some unkind thoughts as to het gullibility of the people spreading it.

Real evidence is welcome. Fantasy posturing is the problem.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   

sunnynights
reply to post by waynos
 


Once you go away we can have a truthfully discussion. Untill then it is futile!


So you are only capable of having a "truthfully (sic) discussion" with people who already agree with you, and you are not prepared to actually examine evidence for credibility, truth, relevance?

That's not seeking truth - that is seeking censorship and enforcement of your own "line" at he expense of freedom of speech and thought!



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Soylent Green Is People

sunnynights
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


I would answer you but it is clear that you are not really interested, just wanting to distort what ever and who ever is not of your same opinion.
Not interested but thanks for your offer.


I'm interested in discussion.

However, I fully disclose the fact that I am approaching any discussion from the side of persistent trails simply being contrails. I'm fully prepared to hear the other side of the argument (that those fluffy white trails are intentionally-sprayed chemicals done so for secret purposes), but just be aware that I think those trails are simply vapor contrails -- i.e., water-ice clouds created from the hot wet exhaust of jet engines condensing the moisture out of the atmosphere.

The reason why I think this is because the contrail-production process is understood by me, and it fits in with what I have learned about science nature over my lifetime.

The idea that these contrails are really chemtrails does not (yet) fit with what I know about science and nature. If you have additional evidence about the formation of chemtrails that can prove those things that I call contrails are really a government program of secretly spraying chemicals, then please present this evidence to the discussion.




As I said, one can only comprehend to one’s ability.

Maybe you could look into how Hamburg was attacked in 1943 ? Project ``Window” and then onto Project ``Cirrus”. The internet will help you research these two projects.

Then for a bigger bite matbe look into Operation ``Storm Fury”

Then Operation ``Popeye” weather weaponry.

I hope this helps.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by sunnynights
 


None of those are new of unknown - window is chaff - aluminium strips to confuse radar. It has nothing to do with weather modification or geoengineering at all - although it can confuse weather radars just as easily as military ones.

Stormfury was an attempt to "steer" hurricanes - it was abandoned in the 1970's IIRC. (actually 1983 the plug was pulled) - it achieved nothing at all beyond the study of hurricanes.

Popeye was cloud seeding in Vietnam - the US though it might have increased precipitation over the Ho Chi minh trail reasonably significantly - but it was still just cloud seeding.

Since then the US has signed an international treaty prohibiting the use of weather as a weapon- the US ratified the treaty so it you have any ACTUAL evidence of anyone doing so today then you have evidence of a war crime!!

However mentioning stuff that happened 30-60 years ago isn't that evidence!!

none of these are news, none of them are actually evidence that show that chemtrails are being sprayed today - heck chaff is actually visible to the naked eye when it lands on the ground - the fibres can be centimeters or even inches long!

What is it you think you are demonstrating here??



edit on 9-2-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: Add link to weather convention



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by sunnynights
 



There already are threads about operation cumulus (Link to Thread) and a very active thread (started just last month) about Project Popeye (Link to Thread), so I don't want to get off topic for this particular thread.

The topic of this thread is "did a chemtrail spraying program cause the extreme winter weather some parts of the U.S. experienced on occlusion this season"?"


Having said that...I know about those projects you mentioned, and there has been a lot of discussion on both sides of the debate. Nothing can be positively concluded either way, in my opinion, but there is no really good reason to suspect anything but a natural flood. The idea that the cloud seeding of Operation Cirrus definitely led to the floods is still debatable. There is no way of knowing whether the flooding rains would have come without the seeding experimental programs going on around that time. BUT, I suppose considering there were some experiments in cloud seeding happening around the general timeframe of the floods, there is no way to absolutely conclude anything.


And, by the way, instead of just listing a few weather modification experiments and telling me to "look them up", could you please add your two cents about what makes YOU feel these are important enough for me to look up. That's the way ATS works -- we're a discussion community. Part of your job in this community is to tell us what YOU think about these various experiments. Why do YOU feel the conspiracy theories surrounding these programs merit further discussion by ATS members.

For example, what specifically about Operation Cirrus makes you believe that the cloud seeding experiments led directly to the flooding of Lynmouth? Why do you doubt it was simply a natural rain event that coincided with the general timeline of cloud seeding experiments that went on for a few years? Cloud seeding had not historically been very successful before or after that, so what makes you think it was the cause of the flooding?

It's not fair to us other ATS members for you to say "Operation Cirrus -- look it up", then run away and await our response. What specifically do you want me to respond to? ALL of Project Cirrus in its entirety? You need to be a bit more specific than that.



edit on 2/9/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


You asked for it. Didn't you say

(The reason why I think this is because the contrail-production process is understood by me, and it fits in with what I have learned about science nature over my lifetime).

So I am now starting to kindly show you how it all began and eventually we will end up to nows manipulation.

So are you saying that because we have evidence of military projects like project popeye in the past, this would be not possible that other projects alike maybe happening now.

We have evidence of then that these projects were, we have evidence still now, you have no evidence that they did not exist, you can't prove these projects did not happen, Right!
You have no evidence now that they don't still happen today yet we do agree that past does has left evidence.

Asking for what you know has ready been presented here over and over again is childish at least.

You guys do this to every thread.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by sunnynights
 


No one is saying that it can't happen because hit happened in the past.

"We" are saying that evidence that it happened in the past is not evidence that it is happening NOW.

If you believe that evidence from 40 years ago proves something is happening now then you presumably believe we're still in the 70's or something - it's just nonsense.

"We" "do this to every thread" because there is nothing new here - there is no actual evidence showing anything is being done NOW.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



However mentioning stuff that happened 30-60 years ago isn't that evidence!!


You would like that to be true wouldn't you


You know also that because it was done in the past does not mean it is not STILL GOING ON!

An emu or outrage would be more appropriate don't you think? You know the head in the sand thing



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by sunnynights
 


Certainly the fact that is was happening 40 years ago doesn't mean it isn't going on now - never said otherwise.

However before I decide to believe that it IS going on now I would like to see some evidence of that.

Thanks for het ad hom - it's what chemtrail "evidence" usually comes down to so I guess we aren't going to get anything actually verifiable from you either.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Innocent until proven guilty right?
You have the proof but you can not prove its not happening now can you


So we have better credibility than you here because we are wary of the past and you seem to think Snow White and the seven dwarfs are in charge.


:goDOD:



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 09:32 PM
link   

sunnynights
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Innocent until proven guilty right?
You have the proof


What proof do I have??



but you can not prove its not happening now can you


Indeed - and pointing that out as part of your own argument is called argument from ignorance


So we have better credibility than you here because we are wary of the past and you seem to think Snow White and the seven dwarfs are in charge.


:goDOD:


Given that chemtrails are so far proving a fantasy, yeah - I figure they probably are in charge of the whole programme!!


edit on 9-2-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Aloysius the Gaul

sunnynights
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Given that chemtrails are so far proving a fantasy, yeah - I figure they probably are in charge of the whole programme!!


edit on 9-2-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



Given that chemtrails are so far proving a fantasy, yeah - I figure they probably are in charge of the whole programme!!
edit on 9-2-2014 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)





edit on 9-2-2014 by sunnynights because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-2-2014 by sunnynights because: wrong button



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Here you are again not following your own advise.

Where is you proof? that's right, you have none.
We have proof that projects like Popeye did infact happen and you say we have no proof of anything happening now, yet you offer no proof that nothing is happening. Where is your proof



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by sunnynights
 


All the things you listed left an evidential trail. There are documents, there was a physical manifestation. There were people involved who have spoken and written about them. They are all traceable.

So why is there nothing but supposition to support the idea that a huge global programme has been running for years?

Maybe a more pertinent question instead of the usual back and forth would be why do you believe in chemtrails?

I don't mean as in "my eyes are open and I've evaluated the evidence" that's a generic answer that could be given on any conspiracy at all. I mean specifically, Why do you believe in this one?
edit on 10-2-2014 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 03:11 AM
link   

sunnynights
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Here you are again not following your own advise.

Where is you proof? that's right, you have none.
We have proof that projects like Popeye did infact happen and you say we have no proof of anything happening now, yet you offer no proof that nothing is happening. Where is your proof




I do not have proof that "nothing" is happening - but in he absence of any proof that SOMETHING is happening, I think that "nothing" is happening.

This concept is called "evidence of absence" - if "something was happening there would b some evidence of it....and given the total and complete lack of any such evidence (apart from you complaining about the lack of evidence) I believe that it is likely that nothing is happening, and that chemtrails are a myth.

Given you apparently didn't read or understand the previous link I gave to argument from ignorance I'd like to thank you for providing me another opportunity to point out how silly your "argument is".



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


It’s not about what I believe it’s about the evidence, yes?

You have none do you



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 





I believe that it is likely that nothing is happening, and that chemtrails are a myth.


Well then it's clear, you are addicted to trolling the net with no evidence what so ever of your own opinion but you shove it down everyone’s throat anyway.
You are debunked here.



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by sunnynights
 





It’s not about what I believe it’s about the evidence, yes?


And you have something other than what you believe to be evidence to present that proves chemtrails are some nefarious plan by the gov't, or anybody for that matter.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join