Weather Channel Founder Debunks Chemtrails

John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel, and something of a global warming skeptic, does a short piece debunking chemtrails. Particularly he notes that there IS photographic evidence of historical persistent contrails, and that meteorologists understand why contrails form and persist.

He's an old and trusted weather man. Hopefully it will make some people question their assumptions regarding "chemtrails".

reply to post by Uncinus


You know, I was beginning to think chemtrails were just jet exhaust until you posted this. Now I am back to wondering if this is propaganda. Now that the good ole USA is tasked with handing out propaganda films for it's citizens as per the house appropriations bill it would make sense that they would use the weather channel guy. He should be right up there with the Fox and Cnbc exec's who are tasked with making up stories about other countries every day to sway public opinion.

So you can see my confusion why this would be posted now instead of before the propaganda was made legal.

Originally posted by onecraftydude
reply to post by Uncinus

 

You know, I was beginning to think chemtrails were just jet exhaust until you posted this. Now I am back to wondering if this is propaganda. Now that the good ole USA is tasked with handing out propaganda films for it's citizens as per the house appropriations bill it would make sense that they would use the weather channel guy. He should be right up there with the Fox and Cnbc exec's who are tasked with making up stories about other countries every day to sway public opinion.

So you can see my confusion why this would be posted now instead of before the propaganda was made legal.

I imagine it's now because he finally got tired of chemtrailers bugging him. But there have been similar stories by weathermen since the start of the hoax.

The change in the law regarding propaganda does NOT legalize propaganda in the US. It just allows propaganda that was produced for an overseas audience to be used for non-propaganda purposes in the US. Clearly this does not qualify. See full explanation here:

metabunk.org...

reply to post by Uncinus


There is substantial proof for geo-enginerring and chemtrails.

www.lightwatcher.com...

www.youtube.com...

There is much much more.
And sorry I haven't yet learned to imbed properly.

Originally posted by coven83
reply to post by Uncinus

 

There is substantial proof for geo-enginerring and chemtrails.

www.lightwatcher.com...

www.youtube.com...

There is much much more.
And sorry I haven't yet learned to imbed properly.

Patents are proof of nothing. There are patents for moon bases. It does not mean there are moon bases.

Rosalie Bertell is simply repeating the oft debunked misunderstandings that are repeated by chemtrail believers.

reply to post by Uncinus


I'm a skeptic about chemtrails, but there are times I have to question it. I'm in my 50's and I have never ever seen contrails like this before. They never expanded as wide as the contrails you see today, nor did you ever see a multitude of crisscross patterns. The example they gave of a contrail in years past, looked nothing like the crisscross patterns we're seeing lately at an ever increasing rate. People just don't notice things unless they're out of the ordinary. These patterns definitely are.

When I was kid, there were many days when my buddies and I would lay in the grass and just gaze into the sky. The international airport was only a few miles away so we saw many contrails. Again none that spread out as wide as the current contrails you see today.

My wife and I went to lunch a couple of weeks ago, we were with a few other people that were the same age as us. There were contrails all over the sky, and I noticed one large jet with 4 engines flying at an extremely steep angle. I pointed this out to my wife and friends, and they were all quite startled at the sight of so many crisscrossed contrail patterns. We discussed what we saw while waiting for our lunch, and they all agreed, they never ever saw contrails like that in the sky when they were growing up. .

So my wife knowing I visit this site a lot says, well why don't you tell them what some people think they are. So of course I explained some of the thoughts behind them, and all of them thought considering the increase in temperatures around the globe, It was possible that the government could be trying to reflect sunlight away from our planet.

The conspiracy related to your thread can simply be the fact that a person knowledgeable in weather and the atmosphere, is a likely candidate to squelch public concerns. A good public relations campaign by our government could easily use these meteorologists to do their bidding. With me, the jury is still out.

reply to post by Uncinus


Okay here is one from your friends at the government.

www.gao.gov...

Only admits to small scale tests, but I would hope you can read between the lines.

Originally posted by onecraftydude
reply to post by Uncinus

 

You know, I was beginning to think chemtrails were just jet exhaust until you posted this. Now I am back to wondering if this is propaganda.

So, you think this is 'propaganda' why? Because you have studied the science and facts discussed in the video and have come to the conclusion they are untrue?

Or just because rejecting it as 'propaganda' is an easy way to ignore uncomfortable data?

Originally posted by coven83
reply to post by Uncinus

 

Okay here is one from your friends at the government.

www.gao.gov...

Only admits to small scale tests, but I would hope you can read between the lines.

Can you point out which specific bit of info in that link proves to you that the completely normal condensation trails are 'chemtrails?

Because I dont see it in their anywhere. And I'd bet five bucks you dont either.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by coven83
reply to post by Uncinus

 

Okay here is one from your friends at the government.

www.gao.gov...

Only admits to small scale tests, but I would hope you can read between the lines.

Can you point out which specific bit of info in that link proves to you that the completely normal condensation trails are 'chemtrails?




Because I dont see it in their anywhere. And I'd bet five bucks you dont either.

"Experts identified only one SRM field experiment with published results--a 2009 Russian experiment that injected aerosols into the middle troposphere to measure their reflectivity. Experts, as well as relevant studies, identified several major uncertainties in need of further investigation for CDR and SRM. Federal agencies identified 52 research activities, totaling about $100.9 million, relevant to geoengineering during fiscal years 2009 and 2010. GAO's analysis found that 43 activities, totaling about $99 million, focused either on mitigation strategies or basic science."




SRM = Solar Radiation Management = deflecting solar rays = chemtrails

and I challenge anyone to find a published government document with the word chemtrail used in reference to geo enginnering. That is a word used by the public. again read between the lines.

Originally posted by coven83


SRM = Solar Radiation Management = deflecting solar rays = chemtrails

But the claim here is that the 'contrails' we see are actually 'chemtrails. You have not proven that. You have merely showed that governments have tried using different methods of spraying chemicals in thr air for various types of Geo-engenerring (something very few people would say is untrue).

Saying the sun exists is one thing. Saying that because it exists proves its actually a government-created entity is something entirely different.

reply to post by Uncinus

This video gave me more respect for you,
when you explain it,
at least you don't sound that stupid.

does't explain the sprayer patents

did he test the rainwater for aluminum ?

he's a skeptic who makes his living telling the weather

and I think a reason for chemtrails is to slow down global warming so the big boys can still sell oil, so the fact he's a sketic on global warming but doesn't see the connection is telling to me

For me, there is ZERO doubt.

Consistently over the last few years, days with trails are days with large numbers of planes.
Days without trails are days with very few planes.

It is catagorical to me.

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
For me, there is ZERO doubt.

Consistently over the last few years, days with trails are days with large numbers of planes.
Days without trails are days with very few planes.

It is catagorical to me.

All that shows is these trails come from planes. It equally proves they are CONDENSATION TRAILS.

You want to prove those lines you see coming from planes are 'chemtrails'? Then do testing to prove the chemicals they are spraying out into the atmosphere exist. Seems like that would be pretty easy to do. Why has no one (credibly) done it yet?

Originally posted by syrinx high priest


and I think a reason for chemtrails is to slow down global warming so the big boys can still sell oil,

That doesnt make sense. If they are spraying the sky to mitigate the suns rays warming the planet durring the day, then woudlnt these same chemicals insulate the earth at night?

I love the big lie at 4.19 in the video,
it is not exhaust emissions, it is not carbon dioxide.

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
I love the big lie at 4.19 in the video,
it is not exhaust emissions, it is not carbon dioxide.

It's not? Can you prove this?

Condensation exhaust is a proven fact.

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
I love the big lie at 4.19 in the video,
it is not exhaust emissions, it is not carbon dioxide.

It's not? Can you prove this?

Condensation exhaust is a proven fact.

I know its not,
you prove to me there is no chemicals in a contrail.
So you are willing to close the doors on the aircraft hanger, start the planes engines, and breath the fumes,
and prove me wrong.
Please don't.
I may disagree with you,
but do not want to see you die over it.

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket

you prove to me there is no chemicals in a contrail.

No. You prove to me there ARE. That's how it works here in reality.