I think I know What Chemtrails are... and it's worse than you can imagine!

reply to post by Zaphod58


That is really good. I really hope it is correct information and that I can put it to rest.

reply to post by exiteternity


It was taken directly from flight trackers, and airport historical data. It's correct.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Ok that's great. It's a load of my mind that video is debunked I never wanted to belive it in the first place. And I'm glad it wasn't true.

reply to post by exiteternity

What do you mean these people can't tell a difference?
They don't even believe they exist so how could they?

Well, because there isn't a difference.

That is why I am asking you to show us how you tell the difference by just looking up?

Which btw is an impossibility.

reply to post by exiteternity

No. It is just a matter of looking in the sky. It is very clear how contrails work and look. I don't see why you would need a link to information regarding contrails.

I asked for a link because you said this...

A contrail will always fade from start to end never leaving a consistent trail

A chemtrail most always ends up in one big consistent trail that doesn't fade until over a very long time.

And I am interested in where you got this information from?

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


there is a HUGE difference. anyone can see it. even you.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


sir you seem to be in some sort of mind loop. ive answered these questions already, two times now, i will not do it a third time.

reply to post by exiteternity


But that's just it. I see dozens of trails, day in and day out, and I have yet to see a difference. I've seen every type of trail imaginable, and a few that would have you freaking out if you saw them, but nothing that would be labeled a "chemtrail" by me. They all looked exactly like persistent contrails.

reply to post by Zaphod58


allright, i dont know what to tell you if you cant see it.
maybe one day you and the other person will se the difference like i and many others who waked up see.
im sorry if you really are not shill, and you really are just a normal person trying to see the reality for what it is.
im sorry then you seem like a nice person.
but i cant put my eyes in your mind.
i cant show you more than point to sky.
if you dont see it, you dont. i guess thats that then.

i have explain thorough what is the difference. i cant do any more than that. i cant explain it twice or three time.

reply to post by exiteternity

sir you seem to be in some sort of mind loop. ive answered these questions already, two times now, i will not do it a third time.

Now, I see you can't answer the question, so I guess your final answer is you just look up, is that correct?

One last thing...there is no reason to be afraid of clouds...

reply to post by exiteternity

i have explain thorough what is the difference. i cant do any more than that. i cant explain it twice or three time.

But that is just it you haven't explained the difference.

Saying a chemtrail lasts longer and looks different than a contrail is not evidence chemtrails exist.

You may want to google persistent contrails then tell me contrails don't last as long as so called chemtrails.

A contrail can last for many hours and go from horizon to horizon so that doesn't prove it is a chemtrail.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


im not sure what u try to pull but i allready tried my best to explain what the difference is, i even tried two times to say it.
but as ive told the other person here i guess i cant do more than point to sky and say "look!"
but if u dont see it i hope one day soon you will see it.

because the difference is very big. im sorry.

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by exiteternity

 

A contrail can last for many hours and go from horizon to horizon so that doesn't prove it is a chemtrail.

but sir, it is my very specific opinion that , what you are refering to there can NOt be a contrail.
i agree it doesnt "prove" its a chemtrail either.
its just a theory.

but a contrail im pretty sure it is not. therefore in my mind, the chemtrail theory is for me about 65-75% or so. which means most definately probable.

for you it is probably close to 1% wich means "silly" as ive explained earlier in this thread.

we are just in different phases of this theory, and im sure with time, even you might shift into the 50% or so category which would be something like "feasible".
but i will of course welcome a complete debunking of this theory. trust me, noone would be happier but me if i could just put this thing to rest. but i cant.

reply to post by exiteternity

im not sure what u try to pull but i allready tried my best to explain what the difference is, i even tried two times to say it.

I don't think you understand what I am asking here..

I am asking for evidence to back your personal observations that is all. Heck I look up and see contrails on almost a daily basis that still doesn't convince me that chemtrails exist and your just look up doesn't either.

reply to post by exiteternity

but sir, it is my very specific opinion that , what you are refering to there can NOt be a contrail.
i agree it doesnt "prove" its a chemtrail either.
its just a theory.

That is exactly my point.

And why can it not be a contrail, there is more than enough science to prove it is a contrail.

Again google persistent contrail and you will see it is just a contrail that can last for hours and go from horizon to horizon.

reply to post by exiteternity


The first persistent contrail (lingering and spreading out into cloud cover) occurred in 1915 (it was reported in 1918). They have been seen to do this almost as long as man has been flying, and have happened more as jet engines have evolved into what they are now. With the new engines that are in testing, you are going to see it happening even more than ever before over the next 10-20 years.

to both of u since u said same thing.

but if it is so obvious, that it is just contrails, why is many people saying chemtrails
why documentarys are made
why sub forum on ATS
why alex jones talk about it on international radio
why it is full on youtube about it

why people say it contain Aluminum, barium etc

why scientest come forward admitting chemtrails

why scientest speak of it but call it geo engineering



why all of these, if it is just plain contrails. im sorry but i just dont buy it . im sorry guys, i wont buy it so easy...
with enough overwhelming proof that chemtrails dont exist, yes i will buy it. but now, it is too many questions out there that i dont think can be answered with "its just contrails"


sorry. :/

reply to post by exiteternity

we are just in different phases of this theory, and im sure with time, even you might shift into the 50% or so category which would be something like "feasible".

Nobody is saying it can't happen, there is just no evidence to prove it is happening which is what debunkers will tell you.

reply to post by exiteternity


Aluminum and Barium can come from any number of ground sources, including the earth crust itself.

The scientists coming forward that I've seen have been misquoted, or weren't scientists at all.

They are making movies and talking about them because they get money from it. It's a good industry for some.

There are three of us that I know of for sure that have over 30 years either working in aviation, or following aviation. Not one of us has ever seen anything that didn't appear, and act just like a persistent contrail, but we have people that couldn't tell the difference between a 747 and a 737 telling us how wrong we are, and we don't know what we're talking about.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h

yes i agree with that. i dont have any proof.
but that doesnt mean that i should just ignore the thesis.

proof should never be a factor in construding a theory.
but over time, if there wont be any proof, then yes, it is wise to remove the theory.
but as it stands right now, for me there is enough loose evidence at least on some level, to suggest a grande conspiracy is at foot.
i dont think proof could even be asked.
because if any of us had proof, and the conspiracy happens to be real - well then, we would either be killed instantly or we would be able to rebel and kill the nwo dead.
so asking for definate proof for such a grande conspiracy i think is not very sensical.