Skeptics please watch this!!!!!!!

[largejack]

Chemtrails tested and traces of Barium found on mainstream news.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okB-489l6MI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infowars.com%2Fthe-government-is-already-geo-engineering-the-environment%2F&feature=player_embedded

[fuzzylogic]

Would you like a skeptic to tell you what their results really say?

[alzee]

Would you like a skeptic to tell you what their results really say?

all opinions are welcome here ^^

spit it out :p

[fuzzylogic]

They convert 68.8 ug/L incorrectly.

He says it's 6.8 ppm (parts per million).

But ug/L stands for micrograms (1 millionth of a gram) per litre. A litre is 1000 grams of water. So a millionth of a gram out of 1000 grams refers to parts per billion, not parts per million.

So 68.6 ppb works out as 0.0686 ppm.

Well below the recommended 2 ppm.

[revolutionary_jam]

"For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." - Stuart Chase

[anthony65]

"For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." - Stuart Chase

But there is loads of proof....

Which the skeptics simply choose to ignore...

Geoengineering?

Nothing new...

The NSA was proposing it back in 1992 FFS...

[revolutionary_jam]

i just meant of any sceptic to anything though

[anthony65]

i just meant of any sceptic to anything though

That applies to stuff that is based on belief rather than evidence, but chemtrails are real, to quote Denis Kucinich.

Do I need to prove that the sun is hot before I get a sunburn?

And suchlike obvious type things... :p

[fuzzylogic]

You don't get sunburn cos the sun is hot though.

[anthony65]

You don't get sunburn cos the sun is hot though.

:D

Ya got me Fuzzy! :eek:

But it's true though...

I don't need to prove that the sun is hot...

Just as I don't need to prove how high a plane is flying to observe that the trails stick...

What do you think of the Obama link to geoengineering?

And the fact that the NSA were proposing this already way back in 1992?

[fuzzylogic]

I don't need to prove that the sun is hot...
I'm not sure what point you're trying to get at.

Why don't you need to prove it? Because you are happy with science's explanation?

[fuzzylogic]

Just as I don't need to prove how high a plane is flying to observe that the trails stick...
Yes, a trail sticking is quite good evidence that the trail sticks :confused:

[anthony65]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to get at.

Why don't you need to prove it? Because you are happy with science's explanation?

No.

Because I know from experience that if I sit out in the sun all day, then I could get sunburn, depending on the time of year of course...

I don't need to know the official scientific explanation to know that the sun is hot.

I didn't make any link between the sun being hot and the sunburn by the way, I just wrote that I didn't need to prove the sun was hot if got sunburn.

Do I need to be able to know all the physical laws if I fall out of a tree?

Will I only fall if I can define gravity...

How about answering the question about Obama and geoengineering?

Here is the link to the NSA thread...

In 1992 the National Academy of Sciences 1992 recommended the spraying of reflective particles including aluminium in the stratosphere.

This is described in the very long document "Policy implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation and the Science Base".


http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49166

[anthony65]

Yes, a trail sticking is quite good evidence that the trail sticks :confused:

Typical Fuzzy.... :rolleyes:

I can't believe I wrote some nice words about you.... :(

Just as I don't need to prove how high a plane is flying to observe that the trails stick...

I was referring to your insistence in the past that we needed to know exactly how high the planes were flying...

*** Go on Fuzzy with your silly word games while Barack Obama and the NSA tell us that they want to block out the sun.

Something that they wrote about in 1992 and has been put forward numerous times since then...

But what's that to you eh Fuzzy...?

You're just here for entertainment, killing time, enjoying your juvenile word games and ignoring the magnitude of what geoengineering, Haarp, chemtrails etc means for all of us...

How sad... :(

[fuzzylogic]

Just as I don't need to prove how high a plane is flying to observe that the trails stick...

I was referring to your insistence in the past that we needed to know exactly how high the planes were flying...
When have I said that you need to know exactly how high a plane is flying in order to observe that the trail sticks?

I'm quite happy that if someone sees a trail stick then they saw a trail stick.

And I'm not aware that what Obama said is any different to all the patents that you've posted. I don't see it as proof that it's happening.

If you see it as proof that it's happening then you must also believe that there are artificial trees sucking carbon dioxide out of the air and that there are big mirrors in space reflecting sunlight.

[anthony65]

When have I said that you need to know exactly how high a plane is flying in order to observe that the trail sticks?

I'm quite happy that if someone sees a trail stick then they saw a trail stick.

And I'm not aware that what Obama said is any different to all the patents that you've posted. I don't see it as proof that it's happening.

If you see it as proof that it's happening then you must also believe that there are artificial trees sucking carbon dioxide out of the air and that there are big mirrors in space reflecting sunlight.

Troposphere / Stratosphere? :rolleyes:

Remember?

You even suggested looking somewhere in the Internet to check the heights of the planes...

So you don't take Geoengineering seriously?

[fuzzylogic]

Troposphere / Stratosphere? :rolleyes:

Remember?
You've misinterpreted what I said.

[anthony65]

You've misinterpreted what I said.

There's been a lot of FuzzyBollocks under the bridge, but we did discuss these things...

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=843298&postcount=370

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=843597&postcount=376

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=843638&postcount=377

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=843665&postcount=378

Misinterpreting what you said...

Oh for crying out loud we could be here till Christmas with your sily little word games and your latest achievement is to dismiss the news about Obama, the NSA and Geoengineering... :confused:

Do you dismiss HAARP too? :confused:

The UN Enmod treaty of 1977?

Apparently you've dismissed the 1992 NSA report...

Denis Kucinich and his Congress Bill The Space Preservation Act where he explicitly mentioned chemtrails...?

[fuzzylogic]

The whole height thing was in reference to people saying this plane was lower than that plane.

It's hard to judge these distances with eyes that are about 3 inches apart.

But we're getting off track as far as the thread is concerned.

If you don't mind I'll get back to being amused with how members of a forum that's so sceptical of the media just blindly accept some news report because it supports their belief regardless of the appalling science in the report.

If you would like to prove that 68.8 ug/L is really 6.8 ppm like the report says then feel free.

[anthony65]

The whole height thing was in reference to people saying this plane was lower than that plane.

It's hard to judge these distances with eyes that are about 3 inches apart.

But we're getting off track as far as the thread is concerned.

If you don't mind I'll get back to being amused with how members of a forum that's so sceptical of the media just blindly accept some news report because it supports their belief regardless of the appalling science in the report.

If you would like to prove that 68.8 ug/L is really 6.8 ppm like the report says then feel free.

You can easily see if a plane flies underneath or over an existing trail.

And you blindly dismiss all of the geoengineering references...

[fuzzylogic]

You can easily see if a plane flies underneath or over an existing trail.
OK
And you blindly dismiss all of the geoengineering references...
And you seem overly keen to try and discredit me rather than agreeing with my points on why evidence posted (like the video that starts this thread) is in fact false/disinfo. So call us square.

[revolutionary_jam]

But there is loads of proof....Anthony, I don't like talking about Chemtrails, know why?

Cos there is BUGGER ALL I can do about them!

If you really feel passionately about it, may I suggest you write a short and coherent article detailing the evidence and providing footnotes to where further information can be obtained on each point and sending it to your MP, MSP, MEPs, Local Councilor, and/or other reprisentative, (alternatively Senator, Congressman and Reprisentative)

here is a link:
www.writetothem.com
(sorry if you're american, i'm sure there is an equivalent)

you can email the article to your friends and get them to to the same

:) best of luck

[antinwo]

Bloody hell Large Jack, Marpat hasn't replied now that is a refreshing change:D

[anthony65]

Anthony, I don't like talking about Chemtrails, know why?

Cos there is BUGGER ALL I can do about them!

If you really feel passionately about it, may I suggest you write a short and coherent article detailing the evidence and providing footnotes to where further information can be obtained on each point and sending it to your MP, MSP, MEPs, Local Councilor, and/or other reprisentative, (alternatively Senator, Congressman and Reprisentative)

here is a link:
www.writetothem.com
(sorry if you're american, i'm sure there is an equivalent)

you can email the article to your friends and get them to to the same

:) best of luck

I managed to convince my dad about contrails, and he wrote immediately to his local MP. He didn't get a reply.

How did I convince him of chemtrails?

By showing him the difference in the skies where I live between the areas where I had gifted TV masts and mobile phone masts with orgonite and those without orgonite. We were lucky enough to sit under blue sky together and watch the trails stick just a few miles away.

Since then I've gifted a lot more towers in the area and the sky generally looks much better than it did.

*** On Easter Friday, together with a friend, we gifted another 18 masts, towers of different descriptions. We had pretty much a chemtrail free weekend.

So there is something we can all do.

Try it for yourself...

[anthony65]

OK

And you seem overly keen to try and discredit me rather than agreeing with my points on why evidence posted (like the video that starts this thread) is in fact false/disinfo. So call us square.

Hi Fuzzy,

I was a bit pissed off last week....

But I'm happy enough to try and start again...

I don't subscribe to everything that is published about chemtrails (or it's weather manipulating relative HAARP), but I do object to any flaws in arguments being used as straw men to ridicule the proposition that chemtrails are a real phenomenon.

I beleive that lots of solid evidence has been posted on this forum to show:

that chemtrails are scientifically feasible,

that they have already been described in geoengineering plans,

that the media, while dismissing their existence, simultaneously prepares us for their imminent (official) usage to combat "global warming",

that the UK and US governments have admitted spraying their own populations in the past

When you take all this (and more) together with the evidence of our own eyes, with the criminal record of our governments in areas such as GM foods, apartarme, depeleted uranium, flouride, etc. etc.

The fact that our governments were prepared to lie to the UN to start a war in Iraq (and murder and dissidents: see David Kelly)...

The statements by the globalist elitists regarding overpopulation, population reduction...

Add in a number of other factors...

"Chemtrails are real" Denis Kucinich...

[fuzzylogic]

but I do object to any flaws in arguments being used as straw men to ridicule the proposition that chemtrails are a real phenomenon.
And where have I done that in this thread?

I object to obvious lies being passed off as evidence that chemtrails are a real phenomenon. Which is exactly what this thread is doing.

It would be in the interests of the chemtrail theorists to correct people on this information too to save yourself the troubles of any straw men that it might create. But, I believe, that even the people who know it's false will still try and pass it off as evidence because there are people who don't know what ug/L actually means. People will fall for it too. Supposedly "awake" people 'n' all. That says a lot to me.

I also object to red text.

[alzee]

They convert 68.8 ug/L incorrectly.

He says it's 6.8 ppm (parts per million).

But ug/L stands for micrograms (1 millionth of a gram) per litre. A litre is 1000 grams of water. So a millionth of a gram out of 1000 grams refers to parts per billion, not parts per million.

So 68.6 ppb works out as 0.0686 ppm.

Well below the recommended 2 ppm.

fuzzy speaketh the truth - the program makers got that bit very wrong.

(in red text coz he likes it)

[anthony65]

And where have I done that in this thread?

I object to obvious lies being passed off as evidence that chemtrails are a real phenomenon. Which is exactly what this thread is doing.

It would be in the interests of the chemtrail theorists to correct people on this information too to save yourself the troubles of any straw men that it might create. But, I believe, that even the people who know it's false will still try and pass it off as evidence because there are people who don't know what ug/L actually means. People will fall for it too. Supposedly "awake" people 'n' all. That says a lot to me.

I also object to red text.

You object to red text, but do you object to HAARP? In blue, as a compromise..

In 2002 90 Deputies at the Russian Duma (Parliament) protested to Vladimir Putin about the US HAARP System.

The article below is from Interfax.

Here is a quote that really stands out...

"The significance of this qualitative leap could be compared to the transition from cold steel to firearms, or from conventional weapons to nuclear weapons. This new type of weapons differs from previous types in that the near-Earth medium becomes at once an object of direct influence and its component."

and

The USA plans to carry out large-scale scientific experiments under the HAARP programme, and not controlled by the global community, will create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines and have a negative impact on the mental health of people populating entire regions, the deputies said.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49167

You object to the video in this thread, but do you accept the validity of the fact that Denis Kucinich protested to the Congress against Chemtrails?

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50412

You object to the argument presented in this thread, but what about the fact that the UK government admitted to spraying it's own population with chemical and biological weapons up to 1979?

Do you take any of these facts seriously?

Do you find any of these facts a cause for concern?

[banjoreality]

TO FUZZY LOGIC, MARPAT AND CO....
THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE ON THIS SITE THAT BELIEVE IN: UFO S, TIME TRAVEL (montauk), hollow earth, etc....... so why don't you go and try to bash the hell out of them? the answer is simple: you are both pathetic shills working for the government.
It's not working, the information is coming out, your pathetic denial game is OVER.

[fuzzylogic]

You object to red text, but do you object to HAARP? In blue, as a compromise..

In 2002 90 Deputies at the Russian Duma (Parliament) protested to Vladimir Putin about the US HAARP System.

The article below is from Interfax.

Here is a quote that really stands out...

"The significance of this qualitative leap could be compared to the transition from cold steel to firearms, or from conventional weapons to nuclear weapons. This new type of weapons differs from previous types in that the near-Earth medium becomes at once an object of direct influence and its component."

and

The USA plans to carry out large-scale scientific experiments under the HAARP programme, and not controlled by the global community, will create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines and have a negative impact on the mental health of people populating entire regions, the deputies said.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49167

You object to the video in this thread, but do you accept the validity of the fact that Denis Kucinich protested to the Congress against Chemtrails?

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50412

You object to the argument presented in this thread, but what about the fact that the UK government admitted to spraying it's own population with chemical and biological weapons up to 1979?

Do you take any of these facts seriously?

Do you find any of these facts a cause for concern?
What does any of that have to do with KSLA finding 6.8ppm of barium in their sample?

You're the one creating straw men.

[anthony65]

What does any of that have to do with KSLA finding 6.8ppm of barium in their sample?

You're the one creating straw men.

** Do you want me to create a new thread for you?

Will you answer then?

You watched the video didn't you?

You heard them explain that at US Senate hearings in 1977 it was reported that between 1949 and 1969 239 populated areas in the USA were contaminated with biological agents.

You heard mention of the Rockefeller Report from 1994 where the US government admitted chemical tests against its own population.

I just checked the barium figures in the Internet and found some links that seem to confirm your statement about the PPM regarding ug/L conversion into PPM.

http://www.osha.gov/dts/chemicalsampling/data/CH_219900.html


http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts24.html

Has the federal government made recommendations to protect human health?
The EPA has set a limit of 2.0 milligrams of barium per liter of drinking water (2.0 mg/L), which is the same as 2 ppm.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has set Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs) of 0.5 milligrams of soluble barium compounds per cubic meter of workplace air (0.5 mg/m3) for 8 hour shifts and 40 hour work weeks. The OSHA limits for barium sulfate dust are 15 mg/m3 of total dust and 5 mg/m3 for respirable fraction.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/

The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), based in Atlanta, Georgia, is a federal public health agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. ATSDR serves the public by using the best science, taking responsive public health actions, and providing trusted health information to prevent harmful exposures and diseases related to toxic substances.

http://www.rense.com/general82/chemit.htm

[truthseeker1980]

For the sceptics, please watch a very interesting documentry called RAIN which was shown on BBC 4 last night.

About 3/4 of the way through they start talking about cloud seeding and weather modification, they even show planes spraying metallic particales into the sky to try and make it rain.

Now if that's not enough proof that THEY SPRAY stuff from planes into our skies, then carry on living the LIE.

You must be very small minded sheep that cant think out of the box, even when the evidence is given to you numerous times on here and not forgetting the thing you have in your head which is supposed to be a brain, which remembers things from the past, which quite clearly doesn't work for you as it just pastes over old memories of BONEFIDE CONTRAILS from the eighties, even a propoganda machine like the BBC virtually admit that it goes on and show a plane secreting metallic particles into the sky.

But we'll still get an arguement back, like what did MARPAT used to say, cloud seeding has gone on for years. So if you admit to yourself, that they do spray what is it you cant comprehend about CHEMTRAILS??? As this cloud seeding leaves the same patterns in the sky as CHEMTRAILS.

Defies any common sense logic really, if you cant get your head around it. But then again they are here to disrupt aint they, so carry on dusrupting we know who you are.

[banjoreality]

fake clouds all over barcelona today, floating eerily, wispy, demonic, pointy shapes.
can anyone tell the difference between a real cloud and a fake? I see the nice big (natural) cumulus' being herded away with regularity, like giant white mammoths.

[fuzzylogic]

About 3/4 of the way through they start talking about cloud seeding and weather modification, they even show planes spraying metallic particales into the sky to try and make it rain.

Now if that's not enough proof that THEY SPRAY stuff from planes into our skies, then carry on living the LIE.
There were crop dusters before cloud seeders that proved that they spray stuff from planes.

I'm not sure that anyone is denying that planes can spray stuff.

Are crop dusters proof of chemtrails?

Neither are cloud seeders.

[anthony65]

There were crop dusters before cloud seeders that proved that they spray stuff from planes.

I'm not sure that anyone is denying that planes can spray stuff.

Are crop dusters proof of chemtrails?

Neither are cloud seeders.

As I asked earlier...

You object to red text, but do you object to HAARP? In blue, as a compromise..

In 2002 90 Deputies at the Russian Duma (Parliament) protested to Vladimir Putin about the US HAARP System.

The article below is from Interfax.

Here is a quote that really stands out...

"The significance of this qualitative leap could be compared to the transition from cold steel to firearms, or from conventional weapons to nuclear weapons. This new type of weapons differs from previous types in that the near-Earth medium becomes at once an object of direct influence and its component."

and

The USA plans to carry out large-scale scientific experiments under the HAARP programme, and not controlled by the global community, will create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines and have a negative impact on the mental health of people populating entire regions, the deputies said.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49167

You object to the video in this thread, but do you accept the validity of the fact that Denis Kucinich protested to the Congress against Chemtrails?

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50412

You object to the argument presented in this thread, but what about the fact that the UK government admitted to spraying it's own population with chemical and biological weapons up to 1979?

Do you take any of these facts seriously?

Do you find any of these facts a cause for concern?

and also (mentioned in the video)

You heard them explain that at US Senate hearings in 1977 it was reported that between 1949 and 1969 239 populated areas in the USA were contaminated with biological agents.

You heard mention of the Rockefeller Report from 1994 where the US government admitted chemical tests against its own population.

Your comments?

[fuzzylogic]

It would be a lot easier if everyone decided what they believed chemtrails were with all this stuff because then you can put it into context and start to see where one decision has an impact on other decisions.

For example, Dennis Kucinich and his talk of weapons. If you believe that chemtrails are a fight against global warming then that is not a weapon so would not come under what Kucinich is talking about.

Another example would be on/off trails. If you believe that the chemicals are in the fuel, how do you explain on/off trails?

But when it's so open and so easy to move the goalposts it's difficult to discuss.

I have no sound on this pc so haven't watched any of the videos.

[truthseeker1980]

There were crop dusters before cloud seeders that proved that they spray stuff from planes.

I'm not sure that anyone is denying that planes can spray stuff.

Are crop dusters proof of chemtrails?

Neither are cloud seeders.

Your twisted argument can be taken apart just as easily as you take apart real evidence.

We have never said we know what CHEMTRAILS are, there are reports that they contain metallic particles, including barium and other metals.

Now what does cloud seeding involve?

http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/wxfacts/Cloud-seeding.htm

Erm....

C'mon what does cloud seeding involve?

Lost for words?

Your argument makes NO SENSE whatsoever.


1. You say there is no such thing as CHEMTRAILS, that they are normal naturally occuring contrails, formed by condensation from the heat of the jet engines.

2. You then say that you know they cloud seed, which involves SPRAYING metallic particles from planes into the sky. Which creates long CHEMTRAIL like patterns in the sky.

Now just take a step back and actually listen to your madness.

I (fuzzy and MARPAT) dont believe in chemtrails but i know they spray metallic particles into the sky to modify weather. But i know CHEMTRAILS dont exist coz they are really contrails, even if i get shown . It's absolute madness your view on this, it really is.

Now this caught my attention, what kind of radar does MARPAT the camoflage person work on for the MoD?

A doppler radar wasn't it?

Hmmmmmmm!!!!!!!
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/wxfacts/Doppler-radar.htm

[fuzzylogic]

Your twisted argument can be taken apart just as easily as you take apart real evidence.
It's not real evidence if it's taken apart. Evidence proven false is surely disinfo.
We have never said we know what CHEMTRAILS are, there are reports that they contain metallic particles, including barium and other metals.
I have never said you said you know what chemtrails are. In fact it's bloody obvious that no one knows what they are. Just that they aren't real contrails.

Where are these reports? One of them was in this thread but it's been proved false? So where exactly are these reports that let you state that the trails include aluminium and barium?
Now what does cloud seeding involve?

http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/wxfacts/Cloud-seeding.htm

Erm....

C'mon what does cloud seeding involve?

Lost for words?

Your argument makes NO SENSE whatsoever.
My argument was that proving that planes can spray stuff is not proof that chemtrails exist. If that doesn't make sense then nothing will.
1. You say there is no such thing as CHEMTRAILS, that they are normal naturally occuring contrails, formed by condensation from the heat of the jet engines.
I wouldn't use those exact words.
2. You then say that you know they cloud seed, which involves SPRAYING metallic particles from planes into the sky. Which creates long CHEMTRAIL like patterns in the sky.
I'm not aware that it leaves chemtrail like patterns in the sky.

I am aware that they don't cloud seed at the altitudes that we see chemtrails at.
Now just take a step back and actually listen to your madness.

I (fuzzy and MARPAT) dont believe in chemtrails but i know they spray metallic particles into the sky to modify weather. But i know CHEMTRAILS dont exist coz they are really contrails, even if i get shown . It's absolute madness your view on this, it really is.
I'd rather you didn't put words in my mouth, but seriously where have I been shown?

[truthseeker1980]

It's not real evidence if it's taken apart. Evidence proven false is surely disinfo.

I have never said you said you know what chemtrails are. In fact it's bloody obvious that no one knows what they are. Just that they aren't real contrails.

Where are these reports? One of them was in this thread but it's been proved false? So where exactly are these reports that let you state that the trails include aluminium and barium?

My argument was that proving that planes can spray stuff is not proof that chemtrails exist. If that doesn't make sense then nothing will.

I wouldn't use those exact words.

I'm not aware that it leaves chemtrail like patterns in the sky.

I am aware that they don't cloud seed at the altitudes that we see chemtrails at.

I'd rather you didn't put words in my mouth, but seriously where have I been shown?

I Anthony and many on here have told you to look through old posts, this site started 2 years ago, start from the begining, as this is getting quite tedious for us who have been on here since early 2007, both you and marpat always ignore the evidence you dont even usuallly comment, you just wait a while until more posts have superseeded the post with evidence in.

I dont know why i rise to it, i know why you come on here and so does anthony and most the older members.

[anthony65]

It would be a lot easier if everyone decided what they believed chemtrails were with all this stuff because then you can put it into context and start to see where one decision has an impact on other decisions.

For example, Dennis Kucinich and his talk of weapons. If you believe that chemtrails are a fight against global warming then that is not a weapon so would not come under what Kucinich is talking about.

Another example would be on/off trails. If you believe that the chemicals are in the fuel, how do you explain on/off trails?

But when it's so open and so easy to move the goalposts it's difficult to discuss.

I have no sound on this pc so haven't watched any of the videos.

It would be a lot easier if everyone decided what they believed chemtrails were with all this stuff because then you can put it into context and start to see where one decision has an impact on other decisions.

Who is everyone?

There is no everyone here.

Lots of people with their own ideas, experiences and theories.

Therefore this request has no validity.

For example, Dennis Kucinich and his talk of weapons. If you believe that chemtrails are a fight against global warming then that is not a weapon so would not come under what Kucinich is talking about.

So you acknowledge that Denis Kucinich mentioned chemtrails in his Bill.

That is enough.

Have you heard of the ENMOD treaty, mentioned several times recently on the forum. This UN treaty from the 70's banned the offensive usage of weather modification.

Wouldn't you classify artificial drought as a weapon.

I would say that chemtrails are multi-purpose.

Denis Kucinich had his reasons for adding them to his list.

Another example would be on/off trails. If you believe that the chemicals are in the fuel, how do you explain on/off trails?

Different people have different theories.

How would you explain it?

But when it's so open and so easy to move the goalposts it's difficult to discuss.

Who is moving goalposts?

I'm in favour of going through all the evidence piece by piece.

And again, this is a forum where many different opinions are represented.

It's not Fuzzy against the rest.

I might agree or disagree with some of the other opinions given by other posters, but there is a consensus I believe that chemtrails are feasible, real, documented, that geoengineering is real, that documents exist which show the intent to use chemtrails as part of geoengineering, HAARP is real, weather modification is real, the threat of weather as a weapon is real, and our governments have a real history of spraying and poisoning their own people...

That's not bad for starters is it?

[fuzzylogic]

I Anthony and many on here have told you to look through old posts, this site started 2 years ago, start from the begining, as this is getting quite tedious for us who have been on here since early 2007, both you and marpat always ignore the evidence you dont even usuallly comment, you just wait a while until more posts have superseeded the post with evidence in.
Yes, just look at me ignoring the evidence in this thread :rolleyes: (not including Anthony's threadjacking)

All there is here is posts of people describing (badly) what they see in the sky.

That's not evidence of aluminium or barium.

All I ask for is one piece of evidence to back up your claim of there being aluminium or barium in the trails? If such evidence exists then it won't have originated here and you should easily be able to link me to it. It's not that much to ask.
i know why you come on here and so does anthony and most the older members.
That's cos I've told you.

[fuzzylogic]

So you acknowledge that Denis Kucinich mentioned chemtrails in his Bill.

That is enough.
Before you start posting that Fuzzy acknowledges that Dennis Kucinich mentioned chemtrails in his bill (which you have done with some acknowledgment I made of chemtrails being feasible), can I please make it clear that I do not necessarily believe that the chemtrails that Dennis Kucinich refers to are the same chemtrails you refer to.

[anthony65]

Yes, just look at me ignoring the evidence in this thread :rolleyes: (not including Anthony's threadjacking)

All there is here is posts of people describing (badly) what they see in the sky.

That's not evidence of aluminium or barium.

All I ask for is one piece of evidence to back up your claim of there being aluminium or barium in the trails? If such evidence exists then it won't have originated here and you should easily be able to link me to it. It's not that much to ask.

That's cos I've told you.

(not including Anthony's threadjacking)

:eek:
You mean because I mentioned other aspects of weather modification and spraying just as they did in the video.

Have you planted the Fuzzy Flag of Straw on this thread! :eek:

Barium only!

No other topics allowed!

You brute! :p

[anthony65]

Before you start posting that Fuzzy acknowledges that Dennis Kucinich mentioned chemtrails in his bill (which you have done with some acknowledgment I made of chemtrails being feasible), can I please make it clear that I do not necessarily believe that the chemtrails that Dennis Kucinich refers to are the same chemtrails you refer to.

Not the same Chemtrails! :confused:

You think he was referring to Cumtrails.... :eek:

Nasty!

[fuzzylogic]

(not including Anthony's threadjacking)

:eek:
You mean because I mentioned other aspects of weather modification and spraying just as they did in the video.
If I hadn't of mentioned it you'd've come down on me like a ton of bricks :D

This thread is about that video as far as I'm concerned. I can't be bothered going through all that other stuff today. It's the day after bank holiday, and I just can't be arsed.

[anthony65]

If I hadn't of mentioned it you'd've come down on me like a ton of bricks :D

This thread is about that video as far as I'm concerned. I can't be bothered going through all that other stuff today. It's the day after bank holiday, and I just can't be arsed.

I do weigh about a ton.... :D

The video has some interesting references to other stuff, which I will take as the basis to create new threads...

You can't be arsed.... :eek:

Ahhh Fuzzy....

You'll get me liking you again! :confused:

Bastard! :p

[truthseeker1980]

i'll try with an anolgy of how your arguments are only to disrupt and confuse.

Right imagine there was a big skid mark on the road, quite a wide one.

We would all say that a car of some sort did it, some would say it was a normal Ford Focus, some would say it was a Ford Focus with 18 inch alloys due to the width, some would say it was a van due to the width of the mark, some would say it was a truck due to the width.

No-one would doubt that some sort of car did the skid.

But here you and MARPAT are blatantly saying you agree they spray stuff in the sky and u agree they cloud seed, but you dont believe in CHEMTRAILS.

WTF!!!! it defies all logic.

What would you say did the skid mark on the road, a push bike, coz it has tyres aswell?

[fuzzylogic]

i'll try with an anolgy of how your arguments are only to disrupt and confuse.

Right imagine there was a big skid mark on the road, quite a wide one.

We would all say that a car of some sort did it, some would say it was a normal Ford Focus, some would say it was a Ford Focus with 18 inch alloys due to the width, some would say it was a van due to the width of the mark, some would say it was a truck due to the width.

No-one would doubt that some sort of car did the skid.

But here you and MARPAT are blatantly saying you agree they spray stuff in the sky and u agree they cloud seed, but you dont believe in CHEMTRAILS.

WTF!!!! it defies all logic. What would you say did the skid mark on the road, a push bike, cozi t has tyres also?
You mean you'll ignore me like you accuse me of ignoring you?

I'd say you're about as good at anologies as you are at providing evidence.

[truthseeker1980]

You mean you'll ignore me like you accuse me of ignoring you?

I'd say you're about as good at anologies as you are at providing evidence.

I dont provide evidence to questions which have been previously answered and questions which are unnecessary to the point or aspect being portrayed or brought across.

You ask questions like, with the car anolgy, you bring things in to disrupt and make the mind wonder off the original topic, but if you bothered to do your own research or let other people do so before throwing garbage or disinfo into the equation, you would see where we are coming from, we aint here to prove anything to you, most people on here came here to discuss and try and work out what these things are, not to have some agent or sad lonely person who gets kicks from taking quite feasable evidence to peices without actually looking for themselves. Or gving any other answer for it, other than CONTRAILS, when we all know what we talk about are not bloody CONTRAILS.

You are clearly here for either your own entertainment (sad) or to disrupt.

[marpat]

Bloody hell Large Jack, Marpat hasn't replied now that is a refreshing change:D

Why ask question when there are no answers, at least no good ones

[marpat]

i'll try with an anolgy of how your arguments are only to disrupt and confuse.

Right imagine there was a big skid mark on the road, quite a wide one.

We would all say that a car of some sort did it, some would say it was a normal Ford Focus, some would say it was a Ford Focus with 18 inch alloys due to the width, some would say it was a van due to the width of the mark, some would say it was a truck due to the width.

No-one would doubt that some sort of car did the skid.

But here you and MARPAT are blatantly saying you agree they spray stuff in the sky and u agree they cloud seed, but you dont believe in CHEMTRAILS.

WTF!!!! it defies all logic.

What would you say did the skid mark on the road, a push bike, coz it has tyres aswell?

Have you been taking something. I said it would not suprise me if weather manipulation did develop.

I think the chemtrail theories defy logic. If they didnt then you could give answers. I have seen some partial trails recently, persisting but not spreading out and only over a mile or so. They were broken as well. So what would that mean to you? consdiering the weather was nice it doesn seem to support the idea of covering the sky with clouds. Maybe they wanted to shade somebodies duck pond :D

Some of the chemtrail theories pushed in here are contradictory

[marpat]

Your twisted argument can be taken apart just as easily as you take apart real evidence.

We have never said we know what CHEMTRAILS are, there are reports that they contain metallic particles, including barium and other metals.

Now what does cloud seeding involve?

http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/wxfacts/Cloud-seeding.htm

Erm....

C'mon what does cloud seeding involve?

Lost for words?

Your argument makes NO SENSE whatsoever.


1. You say there is no such thing as CHEMTRAILS, that they are normal naturally occuring contrails, formed by condensation from the heat of the jet engines.

2. You then say that you know they cloud seed, which involves SPRAYING metallic particles from planes into the sky. Which creates long CHEMTRAIL like patterns in the sky.

Now just take a step back and actually listen to your madness.

I (fuzzy and MARPAT) dont believe in chemtrails but i know they spray metallic particles into the sky to modify weather. But i know CHEMTRAILS dont exist coz they are really contrails, even if i get shown . It's absolute madness your view on this, it really is.

Now this caught my attention, what kind of radar does MARPAT the camoflage person work on for the MoD?

A doppler radar wasn't it?

Hmmmmmmm!!!!!!!
http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/wxfacts/Doppler-radar.htm

Actually I dont work on a doppler although I am fully aware of how they work and what they are used for. How about yourself? you got any experience or have you just read about it on the internet?

Have you got proof of metal particles being sprayed? have you actually got off your arse, went outside and collected any? I put my money on you not having done anything except watching vids and getting excited at pics.

You are also making false claims. Find any of my posts where I claim I dont believe. I said I will keep an open verdict until I see adequate proof. I am not like you, who is content to believe in such things although you have no intention of proving the theory are actually doing anything about it?

Have you been protecting yourself against them by wearing anything? I think you have got Buzz Lightyear syndrome, where you think you are choking because of what you believe

[cruise4]

Why do planes fly in figures of eight, grid patterns, circles and crosses? They aren't holding patterns. ALL these things can be seen in the Sky at the same time when on high ground overlooking a large plain, such as coming out of Bristol and heading into somerset.

3 identical planes with Orange tail fins, 1 spraying, 2 not, all together, same height.

Of course chemtrails are real. Even if they weren't chemtrails and only contrails (which can also be seen alongside the above effects at the same times), they want grounding. They are an environmental disaster visibly let alone anything else.

Does anyone REALLY think pilots don't know what's going on? How could you miss it. They are liars!

[marpat]

Why do planes fly in figures of eight, grid patterns, circles and crosses? They aren't holding patterns. ALL these things can be seen in the Sky at the same time when on high ground overlooking a large plain, such as coming out of Bristol and heading into somerset.

3 identical planes with Orange tail fins, 1 spraying, 2 not, all together, same height.

Of course chemtrails are real. Even if they weren't chemtrails and only contrails (which can also be seen alongside the above effects at the same times), they want grounding. They are an environmental disaster visibly let alone anything else.

Does anyone REALLY think pilots don't know what's going on? How could you miss it. They are liars!

You are just guessing. What about training flights?

How can you tell what height aircraft are at just by looking? they may be thousands of feet apart.

Got any real proof, by which I mean have you collected anything yourself?

I guess it is eay to be one of the crowd, just accept belief, then pour scorn on those who ask questions.

[fuzzylogic]

I dont provide evidence to questions which have been previously answered and questions which are unnecessary to the point or aspect being portrayed or brought across.

You ask questions like, with the car anolgy, you bring things in to disrupt and make the mind wonder off the original topic, but if you bothered to do your own research or let other people do so before throwing garbage or disinfo into the equation, you would see where we are coming from, we aint here to prove anything to you, most people on here came here to discuss and try and work out what these things are, not to have some agent or sad lonely person who gets kicks from taking quite feasable evidence to peices without actually looking for themselves. Or gving any other answer for it, other than CONTRAILS, when we all know what we talk about are not bloody CONTRAILS.

You are clearly here for either your own entertainment (sad) or to disrupt.
I ask you to provide evidence because regardless of your opinion of the question being answered, this thread proves that there's a strong chance that the question has not been answered. In fact a search of threads by title for barium only finds 3 threads, each with this video in them and people happily accepting the evidence provided. More fool them!

If you want to say that trails have been tested for aluminium and barium then it's up to you to show where you obtained that information from. The fact that you won't supply the information speaks volumes.

Please point out where in this thread I have taken quite feasable evidence apart without actually looking for myself?

That post is so hypocritical it's not even funny.

[anthony65]

I ask you to provide evidence because regardless of your opinion of the question being answered, this thread proves that there's a strong chance that the question has not been answered. In fact a search of threads by title for barium only finds 3 threads, each with this video in them and people happily accepting the evidence provided. More fool them!

If you want to say that trails have been tested for aluminium and barium then it's up to you to show where you obtained that information from. The fact that you won't supply the information speaks volumes.

Please point out where in this thread I have taken quite feasable evidence apart without actually looking for myself?

That post is so hypocritical it's not even funny.

"More fool them!"

Back to normal service today I see. :(

Fuzzy has his arrogant hat on again.

I did a bit of research and found an excellent forum where someone kindly confirmed Fuzzy's calculation:

Pure water has a density extremely close to 1 kg/L at 4 °C, and pretty close up to 20 or 25 °C. Dilute solutions of anything in water are also close to this number. So your value is very close to 68.8 µg/kg or 68.8 parts per billion. This is 0.0688 ppm. Depending on temperature, the last digit might vary 1 or 2, but it would round to 0.069.

http://forum.onlineconversion.com/showthread.php?p=61193&posted=1#post61193

This means that the laboratory mentioned in the video made a mistake when calculating the barium levels ppm.

It doesn't mean that the man in the video was aware of this error.

And the same applies to the TV company.

In this case, we can chalk one up to Fuzzy logic.

The video does, however, mention a couple of interesting reports that haven't been highlighted on this forum yet.

I will add them!

** What Fuzzy has successfully debunked are the lab findings for a chemical analysis.

Let Fuzzy have his moment of glory!

** Not you Marpat! Artifical snow? :D Earthquakes? :D

[anthony65]

You are just guessing. What about training flights?

How can you tell what height aircraft are at just by looking? they may be thousands of feet apart.

Got any real proof, by which I mean have you collected anything yourself?

I guess it is eay to be one of the crowd, just accept belief, then pour scorn on those who ask questions.


Marpat takes the moral high ground! :p

Artificial snow Marpat? :p

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=915114&postcount=161

Earthquakes? :p

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=60762

And a list of other information regarding geoengineering, chemtrails, HAARP, etc. that you duck and dive like a flyweight on speed...

All coming soon to the Marpat Chemtrails Thread so that anytime you get on your high horse and demand facts, other posters can point you in this direction... :D

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59981

[fuzzylogic]

[COLOR="red"] Fuzzy has his arrogant hat on again.

It doesn't mean that the man in the video was aware of this error.

And the same applies to the TV company.
Can you blame me when I'm faced with the crap in that post?

There have been numerous calls for Jeff Ferrell/KSLA to correct their mistake. No one has done anything and in fact the original report still exists on their website -> http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?s=7339345

[anthony65]

Can you blame me when I'm faced with the crap in that post?

There have been numerous calls for Jeff Ferrell/KSLA to correct their mistake. No one has done anything and in fact the original report still exists on their website -> http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?s=7339345

Don't you get it sometimes Fuzzy that people here are rather pissed off at the very bad things that are going on in the world (and have been for a long time).

I mentioned a while ago that you're a clever bloke. No doubt.

But you have the sensitivity of a woman....

Margaret Thatcher... :D

I don't know much about KSLA. I'm glad they brought attention to the story.

I'd blame the labs for the test result!

Same goes for Jeff Ferrell. Good for him!

I suppose he's a target for lots of very nasty people, including genuine and hobby shills of assorted mental disorders...

And what is really the significance of this video compared to the heaps of evidence that our governments have sprayed us before, that they have considered spraying as part of global warming, that they are constantly pushing for geoengineering...

And they are proven warmongering lying evil SOBs...

The barium result test was wrong.

What about the other issues?

[fuzzylogic]

I'd blame the labs for the test result!
There is nothing wrong with the result.

It's the interpreatation of the result that's the problem.

Who interpretted the result?

[anthony65]

There is nothing wrong with the result.

It's the interpreatation of the result that's the problem.

Who interpretted the result?

Point taken.

The lab I assume.

Or maybe not...

Someone fucked up....

And the rest is history...

Or it was...

Until Fuzzy unfuzzled it... :)

Wish you were on our side Fuzzy! :(

[fuzzylogic]

I'm not on anyone's side, Anthony. I'm definitely not on "their" side.

I just believe that contrails can persist.

[anthony65]

I'm not on anyone's side, Anthony. I'm definitely not on "their" side.

I just believe that contrails can persist.

:D

I was being provocative Fuzzy!

I don't think you're a bad 'un! ;)

As I wrote earlier, I'm going to prepare a list of points / links which I believe to be relevant.

One set of points / links I'll post for Marpat (including a couple of Marpat special items), but one set I'll post in a new thread that is to be a point of reference to all skeptics. Your feedback will be welcome!

[truthseeker1980]

I ask you to provide evidence because regardless of your opinion of the question being answered, this thread proves that there's a strong chance that the question has not been answered. In fact a search of threads by title for barium only finds 3 threads, each with this video in them and people happily accepting the evidence provided. More fool them!

If you want to say that trails have been tested for aluminium and barium then it's up to you to show where you obtained that information from. The fact that you won't supply the information speaks volumes.

Please point out where in this thread I have taken quite feasable evidence apart without actually looking for myself?

That post is so hypocritical it's not even funny.

No more fool you, if you cant get your head around or even cast your memory back to the 80's when there were not the CHEMTRAILS in the sky.

What speaks volumes is the fact both of you are on a site where you disagree with everything, not sure about yourself so much but military marine pattern camoflage person (MARPAT) doesn't agree with anything in any of the topics on the whole forum.

Why if you have no interest in anything on a forum would you join and become a posting member? Again that defies logic, much like your fuzzy logic.

I dont have time to supply you with the information, if you were a bonefide truthseeker you would look for it yourself, there are countless sites on airborn sample tests, rain tests and alike. That again speaks volumes, if you were genuine, you would have a hunger to find this info out, rather than asking questions which have been previously answered and not even just sifting through all posts titled Chemtrails on this forum. I work so dont have time to supply you with info, again it SPEAKS VOLUMES you expect me to provide you with it, if you were genuine you would find it yourself.

Marine pattern camoflage person/s (MARPAT) has been on here quite some time, but asks the same questions, which they know, have already been answered. But when we do provide evidence for them, they either chose to ignore it or say that's not proof, that sample could have been contaminated or you cant prove anything with that.

So why come on a site you have no interest in? THAT SPEAKS VOLUMES.

The only legitimate reasons i can think of why someone would join a forum of which they disagree with everything are listed below.

1. You are both so sad, that the way you get your kicks is to ridicule and ask questions on topics you either dont understand or find funny, coz you cant think outside the box and think anyone who does is mad.

2. Or you are both on here only to disrupt posts with any slight info on, so new members wont be able to find it after me or someone similar has argued with you.

Now this is also something which SPEAK VOLUMES. Marine pattern camoflage person (MARPAT) supposidly works for the MoD, operating or working closely with a doppler radar. I dont have a very pressured job, i'd say about just over average, but i have posted half the amount compared to someone who is working for the Ministry of Defence. That speaks volumes and is also quite worrying.

Is this the state the MoD is in?

They employ slackers who shy from work, who must be so bored that they join and post on a forum which they have no interest in.

I thought the Ministry of Defence were supposed to be protecting the nation, but someone who works on a doppler radar finds the time to post more than i do and i have an interest in the topics. THAT SPEAK VOLUMES!!!

I know why they are here, perhaps marine pattern camoflage (MARPAT) is telling the truth, he does work for the MoD and does work on a doppler radar, but let too much slip for the inquisitive ones on here like myself, who can work out why they are here.

Perhaps this person/s role with the doppler radar is weather modification under the guise of defence, which is involved with cloud seeding and chemtrails and they are paid by the government to come on here and disrupt posts asking questions about the work they are carrying out.

I cant think of any other reason of why marine pattern camoflage person/s would want to jon a forum they disagree with every topic on.

Fuzzy that weren't really aimed at you, so i apologise.

[fuzzylogic]

My friend showed me a chemtrails video.

I believed it.

I looked into it further and realised that some of the stuff that I believed in was actually easily explained (such as grid patterns).

The more I looked into it the less I believed it.

I then became interested in why people believe in chemtrails.

And I find myself here to try and understand why people believe in chemtrails. And while I'm here I'll correct any bad science I find.

[truthseeker1980]

My friend showed me a chemtrails video.

I believed it.

I looked into it further and realised that some of the stuff that I believed in was actually easily explained (such as grid patterns).

The more I looked into it the less I believed it.

I then became interested in why people believe in chemtrails.

And I find myself here to try and understand why people believe in chemtrails. And while I'm here I'll correct any bad science I find.

To be honest i have never thought you were like MARPAT, so I apologise.

Just used your post to quote the SPEAKS VOLUMES from as it fits very nicely in exposing the camoflage's agenda.

[fuzzylogic]

And regarding 1980, I don't even need to go that far back.

Before seeing the video I can't say I'd ever noticed one of these trails in the sky.

So, let's say it was about year ago. As far as my memory is concerned chemtrails did not exist before 2008.

But they did exist before 2008.

So there really is little point in trusting my memory as to the existence of chemtrails.

So I have to rely on accounts of others as to when these trails were first spotted. And I believe that there are accounts of people seeing them before 1980.

[anthony65]

And regarding 1980, I don't even need to go that far back.

Before seeing the video I can't say I'd ever noticed one of these trails in the sky.

So, let's say it was about year ago. As far as my memory is concerned chemtrails did not exist before 2008.

But they did exist before 2008.

So there really is little point in trusting my memory as to the existence of chemtrails.

So I have to rely on accounts of others as to when these trails were first spotted. And I believe that there are accounts of people seeing them before 1980.

Do you accept the proposal that contrails may have stuck occasionally in the past given particular atmospheric conditions, but that the chemtrail phenomenon as we know could be a development of this phenomenon, using say jet fuel additives and manipulation of the atmosphere to create conditions where trails are more likely to stick?

[fuzzylogic]

That leads to a "not all persistent contrails are persistent contrails" scenario which I doubt anyone wants to get in.

The "how to tell the difference between a persistent contrail and a chemtrail" thread would be amusing though.

[anthony65]

That leads to a "not all persistent contrails are persistent contrails" scenario which I doubt anyone wants to get in.

The "how to tell the difference between a persistent contrail and a chemtrail" thread would be amusing though.

That leads to a "not all persistent contrails are persistent contrails" scenario which I doubt anyone wants to get in.

Why not?

Different aircraft, different fuels, different additives....

What's in "regular jet fuel"?

I wouldn't drink it!

What can you add to it to make it stick and spread better so that for example it reflects the sunlight...?

The "how to tell the difference between a persistent contrail and a chemtrail" thread would be amusing though.

The question as to why some trails stick and some don't, despite planes flying close together, or say, loads of trails stick, then one fat fucker sticks for miles, is very relevant.

Why do some trails stick, stop, stick, stop etc.

Something to do with the atmosphere?

Something to do with the antennas on the ground fucking around with said atmosphere.

** Back in 1992 the Wall street journal reported on a Russian company that claimed to be a able to fix the weather for a 200km radius using antennas. I read about this a few weeks ago in "Angels Don't Play this HAARP" by Jim Begich. There are references in the Internet but I couldn't find the orginal article.

Try searching for the following...

wall street journal Elate Intelligent Technologies

Listed here...

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/scalar_tech/esp_scalartech03.htm

Mentioned here...

http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/?id=1108

and here...

http://www.rense.com/general18/mn.htm

The breakup of the Soviet Union in the 1990s ushered in brave new opportunities in weather modification. The New York Times reported on September 24, 1992, that a Russian company was openly selling electronic equipment to manipulate the weather in a specific area. The Times noted that certain Russian farmers used the weather-control technology to alter the climate for better crop yields.

A little over a month later, the Wall Street Journal reported that Russian company Elate Intelligence Technologies Inc. was selling weather-control equipment using the slogan "Weather made to order." The Journal quoted Igor Pirogoff as saying that Hurricane Andrew, which did an estimated $17 billion in damage, could have been turned "into a wimpy little squall" by his company.

[fuzzylogic]

That leads to a "not all persistent contrails are persistent contrails" scenario which I doubt anyone wants to get in.

Why not?
Cos, as far as the chemtrail conspiracy is concerned, persistent contrails do not exist.

The air force say they only last 30 seconds, remember?

Who's gonna want to admit they were wrong?

Not the air force :D :D :D :D

But seriously, there's too much invested in persistent contrails not existing for anyone involved to turn around and say "errrrrr actually we were wrong, persistent contrails do exist but you must realise that not all persistent contrails are persistent contrails, some are chemtrails". Would anyone have any credibility left if they did that?

[anthony65]

Cos, as far as the chemtrail conspiracy is concerned, persistent contrails do not exist.

The air force say they only last 30 seconds, remember?

Who's gonna want to admit they were wrong?

Not the air force :D :D :D :D

But seriously, there's too much invested in persistent chemtrails not existing for anyone involved to turn around and say "errrrrr actually we were wrong, persistent contrails do exist but you must realise that not all persistent contrails are persistent contrails, some are chemtrails". Would anyone have any credibility left if they did that?

You like to generalize about the "chemtrail conspiracy" as if you were debating with a monolithic cyclopic beast...

Do you think the argument for chemtrails rests on statements like "contrails last 30 seconds"?

This may or may not have been genuinely taken from an official source. I don't know.

But I do know that after studying the sky for 2 and a half years that there are trails that behave very differently and I believe that there are planes with different fuels, different agendas.

Isn't it feasible that there are different aircraft up there with different jet fuel mixes?

Isn't it also feasible that the actions in the air are being supported by antennas on the ground?

[fuzzylogic]

Do you think the argument for chemtrails rests on statements like "contrails last 30 seconds"?

This may or may not have been genuinely taken from an official source. I don't know.
The statement "contrails last 30 seconds" is basically there to say that persistent contrails do not exist. The existence (or more to the point the non-existence) of persistent contrails is definitely fundamental to the chemtrail conspiracy.

But it's gone much further now so I don't think it rests solely on that anymore.

I have been unable to find a us air force source of a contrail definition that states 30 seconds.

I can't help thinking that if it was an official source then they would've provided a link to the source of that information, like they have provided links to the sources of the rest of the information they use.

[banjoreality]

The statement "contrails last 30 seconds" is basically there to say that persistent contrails do not exist. The existence (or more to the point the non-existence) of persistent contrails is definitely fundamental to the chemtrail conspiracy.

But it's gone much further now so I don't think it rests solely on that anymore.

I have been unable to find a us air force source of a contrail definition that states 30 seconds.

I can't help thinking that if it was an official source then they would've provided a link to the source of that information, like they have provided links to the sources of the rest of the information they use.

here.... take this in your hands, have a feel at it, it's soft isn't it, now look at

it... it's kinda greyish isn't it, phew! doesn't smell too good either does it?

ohhhhhh and did you see how long it is?

It's bbbbbiiiiiiggggg!!! it goes aaall the way across the sky...... there, now

you've touched it and had a gooood look, you even sniffed it do you still

believe it ain't real? then what is?

The army pays you but god's given me a BIG loan.