Chemtrail Timelapse + Request for an Investigation of Documented Weather Mod

reply to post by DJW001

Chemtrails are Geo-engineering, but Chemtrails are not Geo-engineering.

Or in better terms a global " Catch 22 ".

tsurfer2000h

Here you go a way and a company that can do just that.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Ahh, good times. Offering them truth. You might as well be offering them a giant turd. They fear both.

But then, it's so much more fun to complain than it is to do something.

reply to post by network dude

Ahh, good times. Offering them truth.

Well you know the old saying...

" You can show a chemtrailer the truth, you just can't make them believe it. "

But it sure is fun trying.

reply to post by network dude


Network, actually, weather modification by aircraft as one method of achieving it IS happening and HAS BEEN happening for decades. Is it the 'official chemtrailing'? Well, I don't know. How do we define "official chemtrailing" as opposed to the Chinese or American governments dispersing particulate to cause atmospheric changes?

As my thread covered atop the United Nations planning sessions for chemtrailing on a global scale, was the very real, real world efforts that laid the ground work. One company advertises weather modification and experience with it over decades. China has ground based (Artillery units around the nation) and other means of seeding clouds, among other tactics. This was front and center as feature stories around the time of their Olympic Games. Do they use aircraft as well as firing shells into the clouds from below? Again, I'm not entirely sure. There is no good reason they wouldn't be, as I've read about all this ...

So definitively saying "Chemtrails absolutely do not exist" is as out of place and purely ignorant, in my opinion, as those that point to a specific contrail and say "THAT is a Chemtrail!!" because it "looks like it" or they "think it is". The world is full of mystery and we're finding new things we didn't know about daily. It's not a place well given to absolute statements, as this debate seems to attract entirely too much.

Neither side, on the far sides of this debate, has a case that holds water better than a Pasta strainer. Not the For...or the Against...but that's my opinion based on my own time and research on this matter, and as we know, opinions do vary. Sometimes, radically so.

CON-trail comments made by CON-artists.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I think you have fallen for the same trap as most. Cloud seeding is common knowledge. It can happen anywhere with a permit. But geo-engineering as in releasing particulates into the atmosphere is something that is banned by the UN. IF it was actually happening, then it would be a huge deal.

The chemtrail nonsense states that those white lines in the sky must be chemtrails if they last longer than "X" number of minutes. (X = whomever makes up the number for that day)

We, the debunkers here, are of the belief that those white lines in the sky that look just like contrails are probably contrails. And calling them anthing other than contrails with no proof is ignorant.

Knowing that, any proof that anyone is releasing anything into the air to geo-engineer anything would be monumental, as it would be against international laws.

Now, does that make sense?

WonderBoi
CON-trail comments made by CON-artists.

And in trying to have normal ADULT conversations about this topic tends to go in this direction.
It's sad, but when no proof exists, I guess the mentality must be dropped to this level.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Neither side, on the far sides of this debate, has a case that holds water better than a Pasta strainer. Not the For...or the Against...

That's not entirely true. There's plenty of documented evidence in favor of, than against. Contrails don't extend for miles and miles. That's ridiculous. And, let's clear up the misconceptions about "cloud seeding". Clouds are not required. Not sure why certain people insist, clouds are needed. The same CHEMICALS found in clouds, can be found in our atmosphere, at all times, so why the heck do they need a cloud?

There's not much of a debate because the other side is too busy saying, "that's not true".

network dude

WonderBoi
CON-trail comments made by CON-artists.

And in trying to have normal ADULT conversations about this topic tends to go in this direction.
It's sad, but when no proof exists, I guess the mentality must be dropped to this level.

There's PLENTY of proof. Actual FACTS. Too bad most adults don't look at facts, they're too busy listening to fools.

If you wanna debate....let's debate...with actual FACTS and not this baby crap. Let's see how long you can keep giving us your "facts", before you run out of excuses! Nah. You won't go there because in the end, you'll lose the debate; simply because the facts of chemtrails outweighs the facts for contrails. You can't win a debate based on facts; and you KNOW IT!

reply to post by WonderBoi

There's plenty of documented evidence in favor of, than against. Contrails don't extend for miles and miles.

And what makes you think chemicals sprayed from a plane will?

And because you like chemistry here you go...

chemistry.about.com...

reply to post by WonderBoi

You won't go there because in the end, you'll lose the debate; simply because the facts of chemtrails outweighs the facts for contrails. You can't win a debate based on facts; and you KNOW IT!

Well, then when and where did you find these so called facts on chemtrails that outweigh the fact for contrails?

It is awfully hard to debate something that is already known such as cloudseeding, and impossible to do it with you.

reply to post by WonderBoi


You actually go to show the side opposite Network for the position and intractable nature of it. You're absolutely certain, beyond question or doubt that they exist by what I've read. You're even sure what they are, why they exist, what is being attempted in long term goals and what is NOT to be considered a part of....what many still insist doesn't exist at all.

It makes debating a speculative topic near impossible when, again, both ends of the topic are standing on absolutes for position. It absolutely DOES exist and IS happening today, for this..this..and this..reason or is absolutely DOES NOT exist, isn't happening and it's naive to believe it is.

There is a world of middle ground ..and likely the full truth of things...laying between those two positions. The problem is stepping down from either absolute to explore the mix which forms the truth, IMO.

reply to post by WonderBoi

Clouds are not required.

When was the last time you saw it rain without clouds?

You do understand what the word cloud stands for in cloudseeding don't you?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

what many still insist doesn't exist at all.

But you can ask a debunker and they will tell you that it is possible chemtrails could exist, but the evidence being presented as chemtrails has never been shown to be anything other than what they are contrails.

That is why many insist they don't exist.

reply to post by network dude


If you read that thread I did on the UN conference in Peru, you'll see that cloud seeding was a topic for discussion along side and intermixed with extreme high atmosphere particulate dispersion and low atmosphere dispersion with and without 'seeding' being included as a specific method, in it's own right.

The international community, as evidenced by the International Panel on Climate Change (made up of official reps from the world's nations) consider and discuss these matters without significant distinction between them to say they are so unrelated as to not fit within the same written outline and conference agenda. Seeding is one form of Geo-engineering, as defined by those international experts. Direct dispersion of carbon and sulphur particulate is another.

People are working very very hard to draw lines of distinction which even the science and experts have long since stopped trying to draw. These are methods to achieve the same end results for atmospheric and climate change or adaptation, failing actual change being accomplished. That end result seems, to me, to be the most critical thing for debate and not being lost in the details of method ....as they can easily shift methods, if airplanes prove a problem for some reason.

Method isn't the problem, despite being the focus all too often. End result and goals are, if anything.

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by WonderBoi

 

Clouds are not required.

When was the last time you saw it rain without clouds?

You do understand what the word cloud stands for in cloudseeding don't you?

I didn't know every cloud produced rain. Do they need to make it rain, or just block out the sun or perhaps, do both??? hmmmmmmm.....

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

what many still insist doesn't exist at all.

But you can a debunker and they will tell you that it is possible chemtrails could exist, but the evidence being presented as chemtrails has never been shown to be anything other than what they are contrails.

That is why many insist they don't exist.

Ok then, from now on, we'll call them "contrails mixed with chemicals". lol And, in case you didn't know, salt is a chemical compound; and so is water.

In chemistry, salts are ionic compounds that can result from the neutralization reaction of an acid and a base. They are composed of related numbers of cations (positively charged ions) and anions (negative ions) so that the product is electrically neutral (without a net charge).

You need to put down the raid can. lol

Although I beleive that some spraying may occur, To outfit all these planes with nozzles and chemicals would be a huge undertaking, which would require many people to do the job. You would need the chemicals, delivery, maintance, logistics on where to spray, and I just dont think any of this is in place in the commercial sector of aviation. Maybe the Air Force could pull this off, but personally I just dont see this occuring day in and day out, without someone spilling the secrets.

reply to post by Glassbender777


Even in the Air Force realm that's a Depot level project, which means engineering teams, modification teams, flight testing teams, etc. That's a lot of people getting involved, considering the number of aircraft that would be involved.

Glassbender777
Although I beleive that some spraying may occur, To outfit all these planes with nozzles and chemicals would be a huge undertaking, which would require many people to do the job. You would need the chemicals, delivery, maintance, logistics on where to spray, and I just dont think any of this is in place in the commercial sector of aviation. Maybe the Air Force could pull this off, but personally I just dont see this occuring day in and day out, without someone spilling the secrets.

It can be done from the fuel they use. Sure, they say it's regulated...but "they" are the ones who make the rules. People need to understand, this stuff is happening on a molecular level; which is smaller than this dot ---> .