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.
For about 20 years now, the people running the New Manhattan Project have been saturating our atmosphere and forcing us to ingest the witches’ brew coming out of the back of their airplanes.
It is not normal jet engine exhaust. Contrary to what the ignorant and deceptive propose, the most common chemtrail sprays have been found to consist of aluminum, barium and strontium in that order.
Probably hundreds of times, lab tests from around the world have confirmed this.
If you do not know what the New Manhattan Project is, please see the author’s previous article “Chemtrails Exposed: A History of the New Manhattan Project.”
I am confused.
I am so stupid I can not possibly tell the difference.
originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree
How do you tell the difference between jet exhaust and sprayed alumina trails? Have you ever tried?
If you can't tell the diff, then it's possible there are no alumina trails right?
The article is sourced well enough to prove that at least alumina is used in could seeding.
originally posted by: payt69
If there's any evidence for chemtrails, feel free to post a link to it.
I had a quick glance at the article. It seems to consider geoengineeringwatch and globalskywatch credible sources. That's kindof where things end for me.
I thought you were going to expose chemtrails in this thread, but it seems to be an exercise of regurgitating the same old long debunked stuff again. But I could be wrong.. if there's something new and compelling you're trying to direct our attention to, please do so.
ETA: here's a thread dealing with some of Peter Kirby's claims:
www.metabunk.org...
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: payt69
If there's any evidence for chemtrails, feel free to post a link to it.
I had a quick glance at the article. It seems to consider geoengineeringwatch and globalskywatch credible sources. That's kindof where things end for me.
I thought you were going to expose chemtrails in this thread, but it seems to be an exercise of regurgitating the same old long debunked stuff again. But I could be wrong.. if there's something new and compelling you're trying to direct our attention to, please do so.
ETA: here's a thread dealing with some of Peter Kirby's claims:
www.metabunk.org...
There's about 40 sources in the footnotes of one article.
originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: reldra
The article is sourced well enough to prove that at least alumina is used in could seeding.
What in the hell does cloud seeding have to do with so called chemtrails? Chemtarils are and look like contrails and happen at a height much higher than any cloud seeding is done.
Clouid seeding needs clouds so they can be seeded, hence cloud seeding, chemtrails are said to turn a clear blue sky (no clouds) into a cloudy covered sky.
The stupidity lately in a few recent chemtrail threads has me laughing like the crazy clown price of crime,The Joker.
Keep it up guys, its funny and worrisome at the same time.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree
Still waiting for a chemtrail believer to go test these supposed chemtrails for chemicals instead of just whining about how they are real day and night.
I'm also wondering how a narrow strip of cloud is supposed to blanket an entire area with chemicals...
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree
How do you tell the difference between jet exhaust and sprayed alumina trails? Have you ever tried?
If you can't tell the diff, then it's possible there are no alumina trails right?
If the OP can't tell the difference via naked eye it is possible there are none? That doesn't make any sense. The article is sourced well enough to prove that at least alumina is used in could seeding.
originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: payt69
If there's any evidence for chemtrails, feel free to post a link to it.
I had a quick glance at the article. It seems to consider geoengineeringwatch and globalskywatch credible sources. That's kindof where things end for me.
I thought you were going to expose chemtrails in this thread, but it seems to be an exercise of regurgitating the same old long debunked stuff again. But I could be wrong.. if there's something new and compelling you're trying to direct our attention to, please do so.
ETA: here's a thread dealing with some of Peter Kirby's claims:
www.metabunk.org...
There's about 40 sources in the footnotes of one article.
Yep. Yet not a single one that has evidence of chemtrails. Imagine that.
Most of the specific sources are patents and old documents about weather research from the 50s and 60s, and have nothing whatsoever to do with chemtrails. The website links are even more worthless, as they just take you to the main pages for seemingly random companies.
It was a nice attempt to look like there were a bunch of actual, legitimate sources and citations, but as always, there's no evidence to be found. I wonder why that is...
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree
Still waiting for a chemtrail believer to go test these supposed chemtrails for chemicals instead of just whining about how they are real day and night.
I'm also wondering how a narrow strip of cloud is supposed to blanket an entire area with chemicals...
Why do you say whining? It must be the OP sounds upset because anytime anyone wants to discuss this topic almost then same cast of characters show up to say it's stupid, silly and laughable.
I am wondering why people who believe chemtrails don't exist pop up in every thread and just mock the topic? Your opinion had been recorded many times. How many times can you ask that a chemtrail believer go and test the chemtrails? You have been presented, previously, with tests of what has dropped to the ground from chemtrails, as people watched. Not good enough for some reason. Do you want a chemtrail believer to grow wings and push a test kit into the chemtrail as it exits the plane?
originally posted by: yorkshirelad
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree
How do you tell the difference between jet exhaust and sprayed alumina trails? Have you ever tried?
If you can't tell the diff, then it's possible there are no alumina trails right?
If the OP can't tell the difference via naked eye it is possible there are none? That doesn't make any sense. The article is sourced well enough to prove that at least alumina is used in could seeding.
There we go linking chemtrail lunacy to cloud seeding. I think you will find every single person who does not believe in chemtrails will admit that cloud seeding occurs.....along with crop spraying. Why don't you pull in that little misdirection as well.
Pathetic.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree
Still waiting for a chemtrail believer to go test these supposed chemtrails for chemicals instead of just whining about how they are real day and night.
I'm also wondering how a narrow strip of cloud is supposed to blanket an entire area with chemicals...
Why do you say whining? It must be the OP sounds upset because anytime anyone wants to discuss this topic almost then same cast of characters show up to say it's stupid, silly and laughable.
It IS stupid, silly, and laughable. Chemtrail believers have the ability to test these clouds for actual chemicals, but they never do. That ALONE tells me they aren't intellectually honest enough to put their theories to the test and just want to believe things they read on the internet.
I am wondering why people who believe chemtrails don't exist pop up in every thread and just mock the topic? Your opinion had been recorded many times. How many times can you ask that a chemtrail believer go and test the chemtrails? You have been presented, previously, with tests of what has dropped to the ground from chemtrails, as people watched. Not good enough for some reason. Do you want a chemtrail believer to grow wings and push a test kit into the chemtrail as it exits the plane?
There are plenty of ways for someone to take an airplane up to a chemtrail and take a sample of it. Heck you could do it with a drone if you wanted to. I'm sorry, but I REFUSE to take this theory seriously until some damn intellectual honesty is practiced and SOMEONE tests these clouds. It's a simple request. How many times can I ask a believer that? Every damn time. It's called the scientific method. Not testing those clouds is just making an assumption without objective evidence and isn't scientific at all.