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.
Not really, there is a lot of science which the MSM ignores (when it doesn't get it completely wrong). The effect on climate, according to the studies which have been done, is if anything a very slight warming effect. Cirrus clouds have occurred since long before there were airplanes. Planes do add to the amount of them, but compared to the vast expanses of land and ocean which are not affected (where I live for example), not so much.
Even if this is from airplane exhaust alone, don't you think the fact that the sun is being dimmed and we are being covered in cirrus clouds would have some impact on climate change and we would hear some discussion of it in the mainstream media?
The effect on climate, according to the studies which have been done, is if anything a very slight warming effect.
originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: 3danimator2014
Ah, but when I was a child in the 60's, contrails never lingered. Never.
originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: 3danimator2014
Ah, but when I was a child in the 60's, contrails never lingered. Never.
originally posted by: AVoiceOfReason
David keith on geo engeneering.
theres no reason to try to debunk this anymore,
its being done. its not a secret.
the UN has recognized it,
Russia has recognized it,
we know how and why it is being done and by whom it is being done. david keith is as far as you gotta look.
Did you see any special "spraying" apparatus?
Many years ago I worked line service for a medium size airport.
That having been said, there was one occasion when a jet flew overhead near my home with a very large and obvious chem-trail behind it. Within a few minutes there was particulate matter coming down.
Because that is more or less where "chemtrails" form. The only thing I've seen produce trails at lower altitudes are crop dusters and aerobatic aircraft leaving smoke. Neither fits the definition of "chemtrail" and only one leaves something that falls to the ground.
And what led you to believe that it was six miles overhead? There are two major airports within a 30 minute drive from my home. Planes going over and much lower than six miles.
It's not a nitpick at all. It calls into question the validity of your observation or your connecting it to "chemtrails." You stated unequivocally that you had been sprayed by a jet leaving a "large and obvious chem-trail", something that was not fuel.
Of all the stupid things posted on this site you chose that to nit-pick about?
Now let me ask you this: does the absence of proof forego the possibility of its existence?
I answered you and asked a similar question in return.
I asked does the absence of proof forego the possibility. Meaning - does a lack of proof mean it is impossible, or just not proven yet?