Unknown person says he has packaged samples of chemtrail materials

reply to post by LightSpeedDriver


They see us as "sport". Wild goose chase anyone?

Perhaps the pay grade is determined by the number of posts.

reply to post by Witness2008

The reporter may have a very good reason for maintaining his/her anonymity. Perhaps they are in the loop.

There are any number of avid "chemtrail" believers on the Interwebs who would happily drool at the chance to get their hands on this so-called "evidence".

If it really existed...and this person would have every chance at completely anonymity, even to go so far as offer the "proof" via a second or third neutral party. But, this person chose to do a "drive-by" poop post on Metabunk (of all places)....a site devoted to science and skepticism. ('Science'....what a novel concept ......).

Instead, rather than investigate, the typical "khemtrail krowd" come in and make specious remarks about people's capacity to be able to write posts on ATS. With a "nefarious" implication that is ridiculously laughable.....and is the true definition of "baiting"....(unlike the OP of this thread).

So, the only "tool" left for them is that tactic.....again, instead of going out and finding the actual "proof" that I (and countless others) have been asking for.

Show the proof.....convince me. Then, I will convince everyone else.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, how prophetic (and descriptive) of the "chemtrail" believers:

reply to post by Witness2008

Wild goose chase anyone?

reply to post by ProudBird


I have no need to convince anyone. Why do you?

reply to post by ssupp


I have to agree. I still say that the purpose of chemtrails is to reduce solar effects on earth. Any harm to humans would be from an unavoidable coincidence.

reply to post by Magnificient

When I first began looking into the chemtrail issue I was leaning more toward geo-engineering, an attempt to protect the planet surface from sun effects, Global Warming. If you do a google search on William Teller and Global warming you should get some fairly informative links.

I am now thinking there maybe other uses to a heavy metallic canopy. The performance of space based weapons could be amped with the use of reflective materials.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

how about fronting up with evidence instead of spam....just for a change - I dare ya!

Is that what you did when you created this thread?

No Matty - what I did was highlight a claim that someone had seen actual materials and try to see if the person is on here and can actually identify when, where, what, etc.

That is to say I made an effort to identify verifiable evidcence.

What a joke.

A nice summation of you contribution trying to censor the search for verifiable evidence - how do you justify that??

Originally posted by Witness2008
reply to post by Magnificient

 

When I first began looking into the chemtrail issue I was leaning more toward geo-engineering, an attempt to protect the planet surface from sun effects, Global Warming. If you do a google search on William Teller and Global warming you should get some fairly informative links.

I am now thinking there maybe other uses to a heavy metallic canopy. The performance of space based weapons could be amped with the use of reflective materials.

But the question still remains:
Where are the chemtrails and where is the metal?

There is no evidence that the trails we see in the sky are anything other than normal contrails, and there is no evidence of increased heavy metal levels associated with trails.

On what are you basing your beliefs?

reply to post by Witness2008


Here is a thread post with photos of examples of Ground Level "contrails" (really, just condensation, but a similar principle at work).


Science....it matters.

reply to post by Witness2008

And most of us recognize a bait thread. You guys are novice at best.

So how is this a bait thread?

Looks more like the OP is giving you a chance to actually prove chemtrails if this evidence is legit,also who is the novice here the ones that show scientific evidence or the ones that cannot prove or show absolutely no evidence whatsoever to prove chemtrails exist?

reply to post by LightSpeedDriver

Fortunately these things are becoming a little more transparent, especially when ATS's most proficient poster (almost 3000 posts in 4 months? O RLY? ) joins the fray.

Could you please elaborate what the problem is with someone posting that much in that time period? Maybe if the evidence to prove chemtrails existed and proven to actually exist he wouldn't feel the need to educate chemtrailers on the truth. Strange how that works isn't it?

I don't understand why a person who claims to have evidence won't just deliver. If they want to be proven 'right' they should get some of it tested, photocopy the actual lab results and be done with it. If they could seriously provide evidence the true question of it is real would be debunked. If not we can continue looking until we can finally accept whatever answer is at hand.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


I tell you what post the evidence that you say is out there and we can go from there. Why don't you use what the OP has given you and then you may find the smoking gun,but I don't think you are really into doing a bit of research or you would have already posted the evidence.

Originally posted by BlackArrow
I don't understand why a person who claims to have evidence won't just deliver. If they want to be proven 'right' they should get some of it tested, photocopy the actual lab results and be done with it. If they could seriously provide evidence the true question of it is real would be debunked. If not we can continue looking until we can finally accept whatever answer is at hand.

I'd be interested in just what the packages were and wherw they were for starters.

There's obviously the possibility that there is an innocuous explanation - but unless they are identified we will never know one way or another.

And I think that this is how research should be conducted - a lead, that follows on to more evidence - the evidence is evaluated and lines of enquiry are followed until a conclusion is reached one way or another.

IMO the main problem with evidence so far (ie the last 15 or so years) is that hte people presenting it do not do this - they find something, leap to a conclusion far too soon and announce it to the world. Adn then get upset and surprised when someone does a better job of investigating and shows hat their conclusoin is not valid.

If there was better investigaion in the first place there would be a lot less need for debunking.

I wonder why you avid disbelievers doubt these things *would* be taking place without our notice or consenting approval.

Haven't you ever seen or heard of the book "Clouds of Secrecy" (has a Foreword written by a Senator & can be checked out of most libraries)???
It has a wealth of completely documented information about our Army, Navy and USAF conducting secret experiments -many different programs, taking place over decades- where they released all manner of biological and chemical agents over the people of the United States and Canada.

It wasn't found out until the 1970's which was 2 decades after it began. In the book they lay out other programs that took place in the 1980's. All of the sources who contributed to this research are entirely confirmed credible and they have documents with our gov'ts admissions and statements by the Army about these projects, admitting guilt.

They have been mass-scale experimenting on un-knowing Americans for a very long time and that is not something we can debate. It's a simple, proven God-honest fact that they do it and don't EVER tell us. To think you WOULD know is so naive and foolish, that it shows either total ignorance to the world, or implicit denial.

Look at Operation LAC where they researched airborne dispersement of chemicals and aerosols that were sprayed from airplanes (yes, with NOZZLES). This was in the 1950's and 60's.
The technology has existed for a very long time and the research you debunkers say wasn't done, was.
And that's fact. Will you face fact? Or dodge it like you guys always do?

What you guys are talking about with chemicals is nothing. What we really need to be concerned about is the GNA-based synthetic bio-tech which combines the 3 domains of cellular organisms: Eukarya, Archaea, and Bacteria.

The problem is the Archaea, because they are indestructible. They live in volcanic vents, acid pools, ice shelves etc... by fusing in Archaea, they end up with a form of cell that doesn't photo-degrade and which stays preserved, resembling a dead red blood cell (Eukarya).

Morgellons patients have been removing microscopic metallic objects that, under magnification, appear to be some form of nano semi-conductors. They have discovered various different types of devices, some supposedly determined to be piezo-electric pickups. As with other piezo-electrics, they transmit voltage from a frequency input.

Ray Kurzweil is a very brilliant author, futurist, virtual-reality pioneer and general technology expert. His technological predictions (timelines) always ring true and he's an authority on Nano-tech.
His movie Transcendent Man is a must see, if you wish to understand the direction Nano-Science plans to take the human race... With or Without consent.

Do you think you'll be seeing it on the 5 o'Clock news before they plan to implement these types of changes?
If so, you're an ignorant child and nobody should ever take your advice on anything.

reply to post by LeonoraTenen


Hello (fairly new) ATS member....

To answer all of your "questions"?

Umm.....there is no PROOF of so-called "chemtrails".

But IF you could provide some evidence.....ANY at all, that is verifiable, well then.....YOU would be a hero!!!

Come on....just a bit of "evidence"?

Please??

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by LeonoraTenen

 

Hello (fairly new) ATS member....

Hello to you. Thank you.

Originally posted by ProudBird
To answer all of your "questions"?

Umm.....there is no PROOF of so-called "chemtrails".

But IF you could provide some evidence.....ANY at all, that is verifiable, well then.....YOU would be a hero!!!

Come on....just a bit of "evidence"?

Please??

Prepare to have a new hero...
Have you ever heard of, or read the book which I mentioned??

"Clouds of Secrecy: The Army's Germ Warfare Tests Over Populated Areas"
by Leonard Cole
Forward by Senator Alan Cranston

books.google.com... s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GNw1T-_UJ8aRiQLiiMzUCg&sqi=2&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=clouds%20of%20secrecy%20leonard%20cole&f=false

The reports in this book prove that our military (w/ gov't consent) has conducted top-secret aerial spraying experiments, testing human immunity, biological weapon threats.. and all sorts of other things... for decades, and when the book was written, it was still occurring.

Is this not proof? I assume that when the Army admits to it, you can say it's proven, right?
So I wanna hear you say it. Who's your Hero Proud Bird??
Will you deny this proof?

It seems to me that proving it was, and has been going on since the 1950's is the first issue here which needs proving. Then we can go ahead and hope & wait for proof that it still IS happening.

I don't see why you think it would be necessary or possible to prove it IS happening, when you can clearly see that it has always been happening, in SECRECY. Which means, you can't actually provide proof (adequate enough for a skeptic to accept it as truth) until they actually come right out and admit it.

My question now for you is this:
What is the logical reason for us to think they've STOPPED doing it?

Operation LAC (means "large-area coverage") is proof of chemtrails. They used Zinc-Cadmium Sulfide, which is a Chemical.

en.wikipedia.org...

Operation LAC's dispersants were known to have included bacterial agents, (like Serratia Marrescens) which have been known to cause a range of infections in humans. Death has occurred as a result of infection with this bacteria. At least one wrongful death lawsuit was filed, but it is much too difficult to provide direct evidence.

en.wikipedia.org...
(you should note that the bottom of this Wiki page mentions Operation LAC's use of this toxic bacteria).

You guys who are being so harshly demanding about evidence, -for something SO admittedly DIFFICULT to provide sufficient evidence for, on a forum of this nature- seem disingenuous to me. It is an inappropriate way to react to an issue such as this.

You shouldn't be acting so demanding and entitled about being given something, which is so nearly impossible to provide. It's cavalier and arrogant. It makes you seem like an unfair bully.

Click here for more information.