Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #31

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Hey, I request you take the new topic you've created to another post. Let's keep this one about chemtrails.

    Thanks,
    Liz
    Last edited by ubaru; 10-04-2011 at 12:09 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. Gratitude expressed by:

  3. TopTop #32
    Barry's Avatar
    Barry
    Founder & Moderator

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    I also found Pterosapiens unnecessarily harsh. I note that he(?) has deleted it, but it remains quoted in some of the replies.

    Please be kind and tolerant folks.

    I must say that I have been a chemtrails skeptic until recently. This recent article in Scientific American seems to indicate that it is not beyond consideration.

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  5. TopTop #33
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
    Supporting Member

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote Barry wrote: View Post
    I must say that I have been a chemtrails skeptic until recently. This recent article in Scientific American seems to indicate that it is not beyond consideration.
    it's the grab-bag of phenomena lumped as 'chemtrails' that's the issue, along with the implication/outright claims of secretive and nefarious organizations being responsible.
    Sure, there may well be both experiments and active attempts at weather manipulation going on occasionally. I think it's most likely that those who are attempting to pollute our precious bodily fluids are doing it through fluoridated water, rather than wastefully spreading it from airplanes. That stuff's got to be too expensive for that. Notice that there's nothing secretive about the UK effort you mention. Why the overlords are bothering to be secretive about the aerial spraying effort, when they're quite overt about most of the poisons they put into our food and environment, has never been explained in a way that makes any sense to me.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  6. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  7. TopTop #34
    Claire's Avatar
    Claire
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Here are my two cents.
    This couldn't be real because the powers that be would not want to poison their families??
    That is absurd. If Corporations and governments cared about their "families" do you think the Planet would be in this horrendous mess of environmental crisis? That holds water like a sieve.
    Secondly, even those who think they are aware of their surroundings often have no idea what is natural and unnatural.
    In the last few months I've heard the same statement from 2 different individuals: "That's so weird, the moon was out in the middle of the day!" Excuse me?? What planet have you been living on? Or you read passages in books like, "As evening came, I watched the new moon rise" or that the moon rises as night falls for a week in a row.
    If you observe your sky and all that is happening up there every day, many times a day, you may develop an understanding, otherwise you really needn't try to be an authority in this conversation.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  8. TopTop #35
    Sebtown1968's Avatar
    Sebtown1968
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote claire ossenbeck wrote: View Post
    In the last few months I've heard the same statement from 2 different individuals: "That's so weird, the moon was out in the middle of the day!" Excuse me?? What planet have you been living on? Or you read passages in books like, "As evening came, I watched the new moon rise" or that the moon rises as night falls for a week in a row.
    If you observe your sky and all that is happening up there every day, many times a day, you may develop an understanding, otherwise you really needn't try to be an authority in this conversation.
    ...What are you talking about? What does your statement have to do with the topic?

    Real accredited climatologists and atmospheric sciencists have weighed in on this subject for years and have collectively written the subject off as the fodder of "conspiracy theorists." I would conisder them to be somewhat an authority on this subject, wouldnt you think? But, these scientists are quickly criticized for being connected to big corporations or bought off or some other excuse rather than accept their findings and understand that our government isnt always trying to kill us.

    Instead, most of the links from the "experts" on chemtrails posted on this thread lead you to nutty (and embarassingly poorly built) websites which ultimately do more harm for the posters arguement than help.

    There's my 2 centavos...
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  9. Gratitude expressed by:

  10. TopTop #36
    Claire's Avatar
    Claire
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote Sebtown1968 wrote: View Post
    (Claire said: )Secondly, even those who think they are aware of their surroundings often have no idea what is natural and unnatural.
    In the last few months I've heard the same statement from 2 different individuals: "That's so weird, the moon was out in the middle of the day!" Excuse me?? What planet have you been living on? Or you read passages in books like, "As evening came, I watched the new moon rise" or that the moon rises as night falls for a week in a row.
    If you observe your sky and all that is happening up there every day, many times a day, you may develop an understanding, otherwise you really needn't try to be an authority in this conversation.

    ...What are you talking about? What does your statement have to do with the topic?

    My point is that by and large, we aren't really tuned into our environment. The changes in the sky have become standard, if we even observe them at all. Or, perhaps we don't really pay attention to cloud formation or to the moon or planets. They are not within our sphere of interest. (And besides, how would this be going on? No way!!)
    My point was that many people have complete ignorance of what is normal, especially in the natural environment. They don't even know the moon's schedule. Our one and only moon. It's not tricky and it doesn't change much.
    I think, how could you not know that and I'm guessing that these are the same type of people that are oblivious or dismiss the premise of persistent contrails.
    So they don't have to hide a thing because the general population doesn't really look up and see.
    Actually as a sky watcher, every day, much of the day, I had wondered about this but found no answers and didn't really use the internet. Then it became the weird norm and.... And it would be pretty much beyond belief.
    In fact, when you do look at this online, you are very quickly distracted by the most ridiculous, outlandish conspiracies.

    So, believe or not believe, just become your own authority. Check out your own sky. It's free, it's available. It's interesting and I think it's now scary. Find out what to look for and look up, look up and see for your Self.
    (Now, however, they seem to be "geo-engineering" predawn around here. Those who are up then see them all the time.)

    Is it really so hard to believe that there could be chemicals or metals being dispersed in our Air - for whatever reason?

    Also, watch the whole video, What in the World Are They Spraying?
    They interview scientists with excellent credentials and others who admit that geo-engineering is happening. Oh yes, and pay special attention to the Monsanto patent on record.

    And back to the premise that "they" wouldn't hurt their own... Monsanto?? of course not.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  11. Gratitude expressed by:

  12. TopTop #37
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
    Supporting Member

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote claire ossenbeck wrote: View Post
    My point is that by and large, we aren't really tuned into our environment. The changes in the sky have become standard, if we even observe them at all. ....
    I think, how could you not know that and I'm guessing that these are the same type of people that are oblivious or dismiss the premise of persistent contrails. .
    You ended up in a totally different place than I thought you were going. I thought you were saying that people are so unaware of the sky they vastly underestimate the natural variety of atmospheric phenomena.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  13. TopTop #38
    Iolchan
    Guest

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails


    Hey, Sebtownman1968, Ahoy!


    With your leave, Claire, I will answer Mark Inman, aka, Sebtown1968, on your behalf.

    Mark, I understand perfectly what Claire is saying; and it is all very clear in her statement :



    claire ossenbeckwrote:
    If you observe your sky and all that is happening up there every day, many times a day, you may develop an understanding, otherwise you really needn't try to be an authority in this conversation.

    What Claire is saying, is that some people are not in their bodies; they do not really see (or notice) some very basic natural phenomena that has been happening right in front of them all their lives - like the phases of the Moon... As it is written, "Having eyes, they see not; having ears, they hear not; neither do their hearts understand."

    This means that some people, although gifted with outward sight, and seemingly "in" their bodies; and who have lived for years upon Mother Terra, are still unable to observe the sky that is spread out before them all day and all night. Likewise, some people, it seems, are unable to remember the high altitude contrails we all saw as children and to realize that "contrails" { which are ice crystals at a high altitude} are very different - and behave differently - from from the Chemtrail = Clouds that are so common today {since 1989}.

    We must distinguish between the Phenomena of the Chemtrail=Clouds themselves, which are a recent phenomena - that have only been happening since 1989 - and the enormous flurry about them, on the Internet... Plenty of conspiracy-mongering there, I'll grant you.

    But, I re-iterate,

    Iolchan wrote:

    Chemtrails are real. Whatever they may be, they are not ice crystals, the frozen vapor trails we all used to see as children. ...

    Now, to address this:


    Sebtown1968 wrote:
    Real accredited climatologists and atmospheric sciencists have weighed in on this subject for years and have collectively written the subject off as the fodder of "conspiracy theorists." I would conisder them to be somewhat an authority on this subject, wouldnt you think? But, these scientists are quickly criticized for being connected to big corporations or bought off or some other excuse rather than accept their findings and understand that our government isnt always trying to kill us.

    Instead, most of the links from the "experts" on chemtrails posted on this thread lead you to nutty (and embarassingly poorly built) websites which ultimately do more harm for the posters arguement than help.

    Show us some links, please. Name some names of some of these "Real accredited climatologists and atmospheric sciencists" [sic] wouldya? Be specific. We need facts. I agree wholeheartedly that the Subject of Chemtrails is the fodder of plenty of conspiracy theories. In the run of the seven million two hundred and ninety thousand {7,290,000} hits that come up with when one does a Google Search of the word Chemtrails, there is a lot of wacky materiel.

    But, as I said above, "Where there is smoke, there is fire." One of the more clever ways that the Company {C.I.A.} "covers up" phenomena that they want to contain, is by generating a whole lot of disinformation and black propaganda to muddy up the waters.
    They always use the word "conspiracy" very liberally, too, when they want to contain a Subject, and dissuade strata like the Chompskyites, and Leftist systems analysis ideologues from accepting the reality of some weird thing like Chemtrails. That's because no self-respecting Chompskyite wants to be caught dead holding any opinion associated in any way, with any sort of "Conspiracy thinking."

    How did the C.I.A. deal with containing public awareness about the Kennedy assassination after the cat was out of the bag, and a significant number of Citizens began to realize that the Warren Commission Report was a cover-up?

    After the first serious critiques of the Warren Commission Report were were published, the C.I.A. began a little cottage industry of their own, churning out one conspiracy pot-boiler after another; paperback after paperback. All of the Company-generated disinformation about who killed J.F.K. had some validity, but, in the aggregate, it was all wrong, and off the mark. The purpose was to generate confusion. Then the C.I.A. coined a handy little phrase. It caught on. They said: "Oh, that's just another conspiracy theory."

    That, to my knowledge, is the authentic, historical etiology of the phrase "Conspiracy Theory."
    If it is not the precise origin of the term, it most certainly is the point at which the phrase entered History with a vengeance.


    Mark Walter Evans

    Last edited by Iolchan; 10-06-2011 at 11:55 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  14. Gratitude expressed by 4 members:

  15. TopTop #39
    Sebtown1968's Avatar
    Sebtown1968
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    So, in essence, you are presenting the arguement that geoengineering is going on out in the open because "people" are no longer paying attention to the sky? And based on 2 people talking about the moon - that passes as an adequate scientific sampling to arrive at nobody's paying attention.

    There are thousands of people who's job is centered around the sky in some form or another. Wouldn't a reasonable person have found hard evidence of this by now? Geoengineering pre-dawn? Huh?

    I did watch the entire video "What in the World Are They Spraying" and found it full of the same overly-edited shock journalism that one can see on Fox each night. Cascading newspaper clips and half spoken points from news casts is hardly hard journalism. This video seems nothing short of fearmongering to me as, in the end their findings are loose, unverified and unproven.

    Here is a review of the film that adds some yin to your yang:

    http://contrailscience.com/what-in-t...they-spraying/
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  16. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  17. TopTop #40
    Claire's Avatar
    Claire
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote Sebtown1968 wrote: View Post
    So, in essence, you are presenting the arguement (sic) that geoengineering is going on out in the open because "people" are no longer paying attention to the sky? And based on 2 people talking about the moon - that passes as an adequate scientific sampling to arrive at nobody's paying attention.
    Oh come on. Did I say I was stipulating that for 'adequate scientific sampling'? I was using it as an example (within my own small sphere of people) of those who don't even know what's up in their own sky. I believe they are ubiquitous. That is why something like this could be happening without an uproar. I'll bet there are quite a few of those types adamantly denying the possibility of chemtrails right here on this forum.
    I am saying Observe for yourself.
    And Podfish, I would say that " people are so unaware of the sky they vastly underestimate the natural variety of atmospheric phenomena" not to mention unnatural.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  18. TopTop #41
    "Mad" Miles
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtra...spiracy_theory

    http://www.debunker.com/conspiracy.html

    http://conspiracies.skepticproject.c...es/chemtrails/

    http://www.nmsr.org/chemtrls.htm

    This took five minutes of googling. (Barry, for some reason the site is not automatically hyperlinking wikipedia URL's.)

    Claire, I'm fully aware of what phase the moon is in. I can read it everyday on the weather page of the newspaper, if I have lost track. And I have never been surprised at seeing it during daylight hours. I'm lucky to live up on a hill in Forestville so when the sky is clear, I can see the stars pretty well. There is still ambient urban light. So it's not as clear as memorable times I've been out in the boonies, or driving cross country, and have observed a clear night sky from lookouts in New Mexico or Utah and many other places.

    Lately I've been noticing how, due to the season, Ursa Major is so low on the horizon that I cannot see it due to the ambient urban light north of me. Windsor and Healdsburg specifically.

    Before you make sweeping assumptions about what others are, or are not aware of, I would check with some reputable sources. Anecdotal evidence is just that. And intuition only carries you so far.

    Everybody, just as with all other True Belief phenomenon, Vaccines, Ron Paul, Alex Jones, Obama, The Tea Party, Allopathic vs. Alternative Medicine/TCM/Homeopathy/Naturopathy, The Secret / Law of Attraction, The Inevitable Triumph of the Proletariat over the Bourgeoisie, Christ's Return, and on and on and on, there is no resolution to this debate.

    The believers will believe, no matter what they're presented with. The skeptics will choose not to believe (or I prefer, be convinced, belief itself is a dangerous and problematic issue) unless and until clear and irrefutable evidence from multiple and competing sources is provided, if then. And a whole range of opinion will exist in between and outside of such polar opposite positions.

    Ultimately we're all entitled to think whatever we choose. What we're not entitled to do, is enforce our beliefs by forcing them on others. Even if it's for their own good.

    But what constitutes "forcing ones beliefs (or lack thereof) on others" is also highly debatable. When beliefs lead to actions which are harmful to others, then it gets even more complicated. I'm thinking of the "anti-vacc" movement as an example.

    The new Ken Burns documentary, "Prohibition", on PBS is an able representation of just such a social quandary. It ably demonstrates the unintended consequences of using government, law and democracy to try and force people to do things they don't want to do, "for their own good".

    Claire, it's one thing to engage in profit making activity that is environmentally destructive and harms the public health, but can be avoided if one has the wealth and power to do so, protecting ones family in isolated enclaves in pristine areas, (an activity that we see plenty of throughout history and is still going on in massive ways today. And which looks like will be continued for quite some time into the future. More's the pity.) and another to engage in an activity which is purportedly harmful on a global/planetary scale in which there is no escape.

    Surely my question, and the very nature of this controversy made that clear. If it didn't, I hope it does now.

    So my question stands, what's in it for the perps? Where's the profit? What is the advantage? How are they able to keep them and theirs safe from the terrible damage that they're supposed to wreaking on the rest of us?

    I don't see any forthcoming answers to those questions, and without such answers, the whole story makes no sense.

    In the various theories of why conspiracy theories arise and flourish, I find the idea that they appeal to those with a need to ascribe some conscious agent to everything that happens, especially threatening / dangerous events and phenomenon, as the basis for why some people, quite a few of them, need to believe that dark, terrible forces are behind major events in the world.

    And since I ascribe to a social theory that ascribes a great deal of social causality to non-rational, unconscious and irreducible to the intentional actions of individuals or small subgroups, basically giving authorship to systemic forces beyond human cognition and control. Including the responsibility for much that happens in the world that is destructive and dangerous, to those impersonal forces, so I'm less inclined to look for "The Perps", all the time.

    This doesn't mean I don't also hold individuals responsible for actions for which we are truly responsible, within our own ranges and spheres of influence. But given a social epistemology that privileges systemic forces beyond volition, I'm less likely to attribute everything to some secret cabal of dark actors.

    Of course, it's a matter of emphasis. I'm always open to proofs which are convincing and seem reliable. I never, say never.

    In the case of Chemtrails, I see little to no basis for changing my mind, so far. And many, many reasons to dismiss the claims of the believers, or adherents, as unfounded and stemming from a need to blame somebody, for everything that happens. Whether it's happening, or not...

    I am loosely acquainted with someone who is a firm adherent to the chemtrail threat. This person also claims to be sensitive to EMF radiation. They are anti-vacc and have young children. They live somewhere, where they refused WiFi as their access to the internet, and required ground wiring.

    Yet they live next to a conventional vineyard, within a few feet. Where pesticides, fungicides and herbicides are used regularly. And they live up a hill from a PG&E transformer complex.

    I don't get it. That seems fundamentally irrational. And I completely understand the concept of harm reduction and the cautionary principle. I'm sensitive to petrochemical fumes and used to suffer from "exquisite" allergic rhinitus (massive hay fever, and yes that was literally my diagnosis, exquisite allergic rhinitus). Maybe it's the only place they could find and they're making the best of it. But it still seems contradictory.

    I don't discount claims by those who are chemically sensitive, or claim to be sensitive to various invisible energy rays. I myself cannot get a tan, due to my genetic inheritance. And I'm deeply concerned by the massive amounts and combinations of industrial chemicals that industrial civilization has invented and injected into the environment. And "we" continue to do so.

    But that's just it. Those things were done to accomplish certain goals, medical, industrial and all commercial. By a system which primarily encourages short sighted goal seeking and has no mechanism, social, political, let alone juridical, to enforce a perspective that takes into account the long term. Let's call it what it is, Capitalism.

    What are the goals of Chemtrails? (Yes, I've read the literature.) If it's an "us against them" situation, what are they accomplishing that is so dangerous to the rest of us?

    Oh wait, it's secret. And they're EVIL. Never mind!

    Just cause our systems are irrational, doesn't mean we have to be. Does it?


    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  19. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  20. TopTop #42
    Iolchan
    Guest

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    "Mad" Miles wrote:
    Here's the question I've never seen Chemtrail claimants answer. If there is a vast global conspiracy to spread chemicals in the upper atmosphere for nefarious purposes (Weather Control? Terraforming for the Saurians? Genetic Engineering / Stupefaction of the Masses? Take your pick, there are several other intersecting versions.) why would the elites responsible for them expose themselves and their families to the same chemicals?
    "Mad" Miles wrote:
    So my question stands, what's in it for the perps? Where's the profit? What is the advantage? How are they able to keep them and theirs safe from the terrible damage that they're supposed to wreaking on the rest of us?

    I don't see any forthcoming answers to those questions, and without such answers, the whole story makes no sense.

    Miles, In an attempt to answer your very valid questions :

    In the first place, how do we know that the families of the power elite even breathe the same air that the rest of us breathe, every day? Perhaps the children of privilege stay indoors on the days that the chemtrail spraying is going on; having been forewarned of the days when the aerial spraying will take place?

    And, if the brew that is being sprayed is occasionally viral or bacteriological junk, the families of the power elite may, for all we know, already be inoculated with antibodies to protect them from the pathogens that are being let loose in the clouds.
    There's one possibility for you.

    I am not fully persuaded that the contents of the Chemtrails is viral or biological junk. Again, that is only one theory; one explanation of what the Chemtrails are. For the sake of this discussion, it would be good if we could get on the same page and at least acknowledge that Chemtrails Are; that they are a recent phenomena - no older than 1984, at the most; and that they are not "contrails," which are ice crystals.

    I opened up the website, contrailscience.com
    that Mark Inman, Sebtown1968 offered. Here is what the webmaster of that site says about himself:

    ContrailScience.com is just a place where I write about both contrails and science – which also includes some looking at the “chemtrails” theory, and the pseudoscience associated with it.

    My name is Mick West, I’m a private pilot (in training, I have a solo certification, and have flown a 150 mile solo flight). I’ve been training out of Santa Monica airport, so I know the airspace round here. I like writing, and figuring things out. See something odd in the sky? Let me know.

    I’m not a scientist, or a meteorologist, but I like to think that what I post is comprised of independently verifiable facts. You can check the facts yourself. If you find ANY error on this site, then let me know and I will issue a correction immediately.

    I’m not paid for this. I do not work for anyone in conjunction with this site. I’m just some guy.

    So much for the scientific credentials of your link,
    Sebtown1968. This guy, Mick West, maintains that there are no chemtrails at all - & that the word itself is a fallacy - it's all contrails. Such errant non-Science, masquerading as "Science;" such disinformation.

    How can you explain 7,290,00 hits on a subject that does not exist - or where the name, the word itself, should not, properly, even exist? This is only one more example of a "contra" in this field, Chemtrails, where there is a vast psy-op [psychological operation] and a minefield of disinformation on all sides, pro and con... Where there is Smoke, there is also Fire.

    Sebtown1968 wrote:
    Real accredited climatologists and atmospheric sciencists have weighed in on this subject for years and have collectively written the subject off as the fodder of "conspiracy theorists." I would conisder them to be somewhat an authority on this subject, wouldnt you think? But, these scientists are quickly criticized for being connected to big corporations or bought off or some other excuse rather than accept their findings and understand that our government isnt always trying to kill us.

    Here are some credible links on the Subject:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udEtOc2IFO8


    http://videos.howstuffworks.com/disc...vers-video.htm


    http://www.wat.tv/video/chemtrails-a...7z_31wod_.html


    http://www.squidoo.com/chemtrailillness


    http://www.willthomas.net/Chemtrails...Chemtrails.htm


    http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/chemtrails.htm


    http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/


    http://www.californiaskywatch.com/


    Mark Walter Evans

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  21. Gratitude expressed by:

  22. TopTop #43
    danejasper's Avatar
    danejasper
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote Allorrah Be wrote: View Post
    And today, out of a clear blue sky this afternoon, it's FOGGY at "sunset" in Sebastopol?!!
    I admit I'm new in this area, but it came on so suddenly today, I can't believe it's natural.
    Is it?

    Rev. Allorrah Be
    No, no, of course not! We pay the spacing guild to create these conditions using their weather control satellites.



    -DJ
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  23. Gratitude expressed by:

  24. TopTop #44
    danejasper's Avatar
    danejasper
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    I think we should talk about this topic:

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  25. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  26. TopTop #45
    BobHeisler's Avatar
    BobHeisler
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote daynurse wrote: View Post
    Hi,
    I'm forwarding this request because I know there are a few people on WACCO with an interest in this subject and possibly some interesting facts for this reporter.
    Best,
    Peggy
    ps I'm not sure from the context what the 'other side' is.

    Subject: I wish to conduct a non bias investigation documentary on chem trails.

    Just to let you all know I plan to start an investigation non bias investigation on chem trails. Condensation or chemical trails, which one are they? that is the question I will be asking. Any information from other side would be great!

    Thanks

    Carl Carl Fiske [mailto:[email protected]]

    MendoPower Employment Services
    Fort Bragg, CA 95437
    707-962-9279

    I've been taking an interest in this subject for several months. Here is a website with a lot of information about this: californiaskywatch.com You're going to find it very disturbing. As a "do-it-yourselfer", look up in the sky and on some days you'll find what look like cloud patterns that take up only a portion of the sky. Normal weather patterns that produce high clouds usually cover hundreds or thousands of square miles in the atmosphere, covering a large portion of the sky. When I see strange patterns in only a portion of the sky, I assume they're chem trails. Normal jet contrails, which are made of water vapor, will dissipate within an hour or so. These chemtrails can last about 20 hours!

    Bob Heisler
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  27. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  28. TopTop #46

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote Iolchan wrote: View Post

    Miles, In an attempt to answer your very valid questions :

    In the first place, how do we know that the families of the power elite even breathe the same air that the rest of us breathe, every day? Perhaps the children of privilege stay indoors on the days that the chemtrail spraying is going on; having been forewarned of the days when the aerial spraying will take place?

    And, if the brew that is being sprayed is occasionally viral or bacteriological junk, the families of the power elite may, for all we know, already be inoculated with antibodies to protect them from the pathogens that are being let loose in the clouds.
    There's one possibility for you.

    I am not fully persuaded that the contents of the Chemtrails is viral or biological junk. Again, that is only one theory; one explanation of what the Chemtrails are. For the sake of this discussion, it would be good if we could get on the same page and at least acknowledge that Chemtrails Are; that they are a recent phenomena - no older than 1984, at the most; and that they are not "contrails," which are ice crystals.

    I opened up the website, contrailscience.com
    that Mark Inman, Sebtown1968 offered. Here is what the webmaster of that site says about himself:


    So much for the scientific credentials of your link,
    Sebtown1968. This guy, Mick West, maintains that there are no chemtrails at all - & that the word itself is a fallacy - it's all contrails. Such errant non-Science, masquerading as "Science;" such disinformation.

    How can you explain 7,290,00 hits on a subject that does not exist - or where the name, the word itself, should not, properly, even exist? This is only one more example of a "contra" in this field, Chemtrails, where there is a vast psy-op [psychological operation] and a minefield of disinformation on all sides, pro and con... Where there is Smoke, there is also Fire.


    Here are some credible links on the Subject:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udEtOc2IFO8


    http://videos.howstuffworks.com/disc...vers-video.htm


    http://www.wat.tv/video/chemtrails-a...7z_31wod_.html


    http://www.squidoo.com/chemtrailillness


    http://www.willthomas.net/Chemtrails...Chemtrails.htm


    http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/chemtrails.htm


    http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/


    http://www.californiaskywatch.com/


    Mark Walter Evans

    Thanks for your post Mark.

    It must be that the people who do not notice the difference between the contrails we've seen throughout our lives, are very different than the GeoEngineered ones which have been increasing for the last several years; must be victims from some mass hypnosis, or are suffering from nature deficit syndrome. They just don't get out enough to notice what has changed through the Weather Modification program.

    Most of the elected officials, current and former water agency executives, and even the climate protection leaders such as Ann Hancock, tell me they know nothing about it, or if they do, (such as, folks like Mark Leno and Gavin Newsom) will not discuss it.

    When I started researching this, I found business that do this work in our state, advertising their clients over the past 10 years; this list included PG&E and municipalities. Now days, it's not just about increasing the snow pack for hydro power production; the methods and materials they are using are designed to reflect the sunlight away.

    What do the GeoEngineering deniers gain from keeping us in the dark? There are many perilous consequences from trying to outsmart nature.

    I noticed a sharp increase in the weather modification activities when Arnold Schwarzenegger was denied getting the water bond on the ballot to build a pipeline for his cronies in the Westlands Water District; the Resnicks. These same folks who are spoiling the native's water supply while profiting from the Fiji Water Co. Now the Resnicks have bought a winery in Sonoma County. Sorry I don't have the name right now; it's one which should be put on the boycott list.

    See their connection to Dianne Feinstein here:
    http://www.alternet.org/water/144427...wrecking_crew/

    Controlling the rain for the water supply of wine grapes is likely another reason it is being funded, now that the State is finally taking charge of the 800 illegal water diversion issues in the Russian River watershed, and many more along the Napa river. (The Bohemian has a recent story on that.)

    With all the manipulation of weather going on, it's hard to tell if the recent rain harming this year's grape crop is normal, a result of Geo Enineering gone awry, or a deliberate way to profit from hedging bets on crop failures, or eliminating the glut & competition.

    See http://weatherwars.info/ for details on that.

    In 2006, the first year I ran for US Senate, and had climate protection a core issue; Congress made climate change a national security issue. This is why the weather modification programs done by the Air Force and Navy can be done is secret, without any environmental impact review.

    Here are some more images from Chem Trail on Facebook:

    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002298761467

    This subject is one of the top 5 most important issues in my platform; how does it rank for you all?

    I invite you to see some of the poetry I posted on my 2006 campaign website. www.campaignforpeace.org/CFernald/Poetry.html

    In "Listen to the Trees", I wrote about the risks to us all, from dropping depleted uranium bombs in Iraq while the massive dust storms were going on:

    The wind blows
    The water flows
    You do not control the jet stream

    Perhaps "they" took that as a challenge.

    I took some inspiration for this from a brilliant play by Ben Elton, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Elton), which I saw in England about 20 years ago, called "Gasping". The premise was that air had become a commodity. I think it's time to turn that one into a feature film.

    (Any Investors, Writers, or Producers out there interested? My partners and I are working on real life screenplays to submit as, Chinatown III, Terminator 6, and Ms. Smith goes to Washington.)


    Another part of what fueled "Listen to the Trees" in 2006, was that Sudden Oak Death was high on the radar of the media. I had concern for all the possible threats to the health of our tress, which are of course essential for every human life.


    This year, I met Rosalind Peterson from California Sky Watch. Here's some of her credentials from their website:


    Rosalind Peterson is the California President and Co-Founder of the Agriculture Defense Coalition (ADC), formed in 2006 to protect agricultural crop production from uncontrolled experimental weather modification programs, atmospheric heating and testing programs, and ocean and atmospheric experimental geoengineering programs.


    In 1995, Rosalind became a certified U.S.D.A. Farm Service Agency Crop Loss Adjustor working in more than ten counties throughout California. Many crop losses throughout the State can be attributed to weather related causes.
    Rosalind earned a BA degree from Sonoma State University in Environmental Studies & Planning (ENSP), with emphasis on agriculture and crop production.


    Between 1989 and 1993 Rosalind worked as an Agricultural Technologist for the Mendocino County Department of Agriculture. After leaving Mendocino County she took a position with the USDA Farm Service Agency as a Program Assistant in Mendocino, Sonoma, and the Salinas County Offices.


    ***


    Everyone, please start sky watching and documenting the abnormal clouds which form from these aerial operations. I have some of my own, which I turned into art. Anyone wishing to support my causes is welcome to become a collector; who knows how much it might be worth down the road.


    Ignorance is not bliss; it may be fatal.


    Patriotically in peace,

    Colleen Fernald



    California's Constitutional Candidate for PEACE!
    United States Senate 2012
    campaignforpeace.org
    Last edited by Barry; 10-08-2011 at 07:37 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  29. Gratitude expressed by:

  30. TopTop #47

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    In the World Watch section of the Sunday, SF Chronicle a few months back, it mentioned that China had announced a successful weather modification program.

    Many people know "Cloud Seeding" has been going on for decades, this is no myth or theory. GeoEngineering is taking this to new, very dangerous levels of risk.

    It's curious, and disturbing that prominent local business owners, such as Dane Jasper of Sonic, and Mark Inman, formerly, of Taylor Made Coffee; are in the camp of weather modification deniers.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  31. TopTop #48
    Sebtown1968's Avatar
    Sebtown1968
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Rainbows...at ground level? This is far more terrifying than anything we've been talking about on this thread. As the person who submitted the video evidence clearly states "This did not exist 20 years ago." If you noticed, her video was filmed and uploaded July 6, 2007. "20 years ago" would put the original creation of this phenomenon to be July 6, 1987. In 1987, people stopped looking at their sprinklers- or the watering of their lawns in general as they were busy being "distracted" with the launch of PowerPoint, Microsoft's O/S2 and IBM's PS2 with the new 3.5 inch floppy diskette.... a convenient launch timing, don't you think? Getting the mainstream all into computers and away from nature when this "phenomenon" started to rear its nefarious head.

    What else was going on on July 6, 1987, you might ask?

    Aside from weak attempts to distract us with the whole Klaus Barbie trial, where he was sentenced to life in prison for Crimes Against Humanity...There existed a man who was quietly filling the office of Vice President. This man was able to work unchecked, under the radar.... a man who would eventually be (according to one Mark Walter Evans aka "lolchan") behind the implementation of a mass poisoning of the citizens of earth through "chemtrails".

    And who was that man? He was none other than.......George H.W. Bush!!!

    Ever notice why George W Bush was always "indoors." or "testing his dive tanks" for hours on days when strange cloud patterns dotted the Texas sky? Ever wondered why the "illuminati" always held their "underground" meetings during cloudy days?? Why did the G8 have "inoculation day" when the weather looked just a little off?

    Coincidence? I think not!!!

    Forget the sky...we really need to be looking downward, answering the $10,000 question that the poster of the video asks: "What is oozing out of our ground??

    Sebtown1968
    AKA Mark Inman
    AKA former owner of Taylor Maid (Not Made) Farms.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  32. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  33. TopTop #49
    "Mad" Miles
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails


    Confirmation Bias is a Beeaaattttcccchhhhhh!


    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  34. TopTop #50
    podfish's Avatar
    podfish
    Supporting Member

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote Peace Voyager wrote: View Post
    In the World Watch section of the Sunday, SF Chronicle a few months back, it mentioned that China had announced a successful weather modification program.

    Many people know "Cloud Seeding" has been going on for decades, this is no myth or theory. GeoEngineering is taking this to new, very dangerous levels of risk.

    It's curious, and disturbing that prominent local business owners, such as Dane Jasper of Sonic, and Mark Inman, formerly, of Taylor Made Coffee; are in the camp of weather modification deniers.
    that's like saying that if you don't believe in chupacabra you're denying that wild animals kill sheep. Is it really true that Dane and Mark deny there's such a thing as weather modification?? I bet they just take issue with the interpretation of what you all seem to think you see in the sky.
    of course there's been interest in weather modification for a tremendously long time, and even attempts to implement it. That's only peripherally relevant to the "chemtrail conspiracy".
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  35. Gratitude expressed by 2 members:

  36. TopTop #51
    Sebtown1968's Avatar
    Sebtown1968
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    "Podfish" is very observant......
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  37. TopTop #52
    Iolchan
    Guest

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails



    Sebtown1968 wrote:

    What else was going on on July 6, 1987, you might ask?

    Aside from weak attempts to distract us with the whole Klaus Barbie trial, where he was sentenced to life in prison for Crimes Against Humanity...There existed a man who was quietly filling the office of Vice President. This man was able to work unchecked, under the radar.... a man who would eventually be (according to one Mark Walter Evans aka "lolchan") behind the implementation of a mass poisoning of the citizens of earth through "chemtrails".

    And who was that man? He was none other than.......George H.W. Bush!!!

    Ever notice why George W Bush was always "indoors." or "testing his dive tanks" for hours on days when strange cloud patterns dotted the Texas sky? Ever wondered why the "illuminati" always held their "underground" meetings during cloudy days?? Why did the G8 have "inoculation day" when the weather looked just a little off?

    Coincidence? I think not!!!

    Look, Mark Inman, I am only a man; but I have eyes in my head, & I am an observer of this phenomenon of Chemtrails - and I can testify that they are Real. I know the difference between Chemtrails and natural Clouds, and Contrails. To discern the difference between these three distinct phenomenal categories is not rocket science. One need not be a Scientist to Process this discernment. In fact, it is easy; and anyone can do it - even yourself, if you choose to
    let go of Denial, and embrace Reality.

    On the other hand, If you want to mock the whole phenomenon, and say that those people
    are deluded who think they are seeing non-existent "Chemtrails," when, in fact, only Clouds and Contrails are actually Real; then go ahead and mock. =OR= If you just want to bait me, and bring non-sequitors like the "illuminati" into the conversation, then go right ahead.

    I, myself, have no personal Knowledge of such things - nor have I ever written a single word, anywhere, ever, to the effect that the so-called "illuminati" are the sinister masterminds behind this technology. Frankly, I think that your mockery does not speak well for your position. For you still have not answered my original Challenge to you:

    Iolchan wrote:

    Show us some links, please. Name some names of some of these "Real accredited climatologists and atmospheric sciencists" [sic] wouldya? Be specific. We need facts. I agree wholeheartedly that the Subject of Chemtrails is the fodder of plenty of conspiracy theories. In the run of the seven million two hundred and ninety thousand {7,290,000} hits that come up with when one does a Google Search of the word Chemtrails, there is a lot of wacky materiel.
    I agree with Peace Voyager on this point:

    Peace Voyager wrote:

    It must be that the people who do not notice the difference between the contrails we've seen throughout our lives, are very different than the GeoEngineered ones which have been increasing for the last several years; must be victims from some mass hypnosis, or are suffering from nature deficit syndrome. They just don't get out enough to notice what has changed through the Weather Modification program.

    But I have never [yet] alleged in print that I "believe" {or "know"} that George H. W. Bush is the dark mastermind behind Chemtrails. Frankly, I do not know who is behind them, or what the purpose[s] of the damned things are. So far, in this thread, I have merely stated a few of the the various opinions that one may find in this field. That is what is known as Reporting. In dealing with the
    the Subject of the Phenomenology of Chemtrails, there are a lot of opinions... Here follows what I did write. You, the Public, may do the research - and draw your own conclusions - for yourselves.

    Iolchan wrote:

    ...Chemtrails are generally a low altitude phenomena. Where I live, at fifteen hundred feet altitude, facing the Ridge that is the Napa County line, the Chemtrails that are laid above the Ridge on most mornings appear to be at about five to six thousand feet in altitude - too low for Ice crystals to form from the vapor trail of a Jet engine.

    The shiny white lines that are emitted out of the belly of the C-100's that fly out of Edwards Air Force base, soon fan into clouds, as the wind blows them eastward across the Napa valley. By the time they are over the Central Valley, they actually look like clouds. From where I live, I have watched part of this Process unfold; many, many mornings.

    Google search of Chemtrails Edwards Air Force base


    Also – and this is very important - there were no Chemtrails before the Year 1989; the first year that the George H.W. Bush was in Office. You can confirm that here if you choose:
    http://www.google.com/search?q=Chemtrails%2C+1989&hl=en&num=100&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images


    Some websites maintain that the Bush Family have a financial interest in the production of this aerial phenomena: Google Search : “Bush Crime Family”, Chemtrails ,


    Some maintain that the purpose of the Chemtrails is for population reduction – the genocide of “useless eaters.”

    939,000


    That it is a form of biological warfare :

    240,000


    That it is a Project connected with HAARP :

    2,110,000



    And, some maintain, All the fuss is about nothing more than Weather Modification:

    543,000

    One thing for sure: There are now seven million two hundred ninety thousand (7,290,000) hits that come up when you Google the word Chemtrails at this time; October 2, 2011. That’s a lot of hits. I would suggest that there is something more happening here than just a simple “Popular Delusion” or that ol' “Madness of Crowds.” Where there is that much “smoke,”there is generally “fire” as well.

    http://www.google.com/search?q=Chemt...r=&safe=images
    7,290,000

    - Mark Walter Evans -
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  38. TopTop #53
    Sebtown1968's Avatar
    Sebtown1968
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Mr. Mark Walter Evans....

    What you are doing is far from "Reporting." It is fear mongering. You are merely linking sources from dubious websites that draw wild conclusions form anecodotal evidence. What I am simply doing is calling "Bulls%&t" and attempting to balance this discussion with a sprinkling of sanity. Others on this thread have made similar attempts. Not to change your mind- as it is already convinced, but to offer a balanced discussion for others who stumble on this thread and have not formed opinions on this matter.

    Look, Mark Inman, I am only a man; but I have eyes in my head, & I am an observer of this phenomenon of Chemtrails - and I can testify that they are Real. I know the difference between Chemtrails and natural Clouds, and Contrails. To discern the difference between these three distinct phenomenal categories is not rocket science. One need not be a Scientist to Process this discernment. In fact, it is easy; and anyone can do it - even yourself, if you choose to let go of Denial, and embrace Reality.

    Having eyes in your head and being an "observer" (whatever that means) is a straw dog arguement. You see it with your eyes-therefore it is real. Others that dont believe your words are in denial. Well I can counter that with:

    YOU have no direct proof of anything. YOU are not a scientist or a climatoligist- who have described the phenomenon of "Chemtrails" using their scientific training numerous times. You are a lay person on this subject, suffering from the trappings of any lay person. Everything you "Know" comes from sources that have yet to be verified or proven. For your theory to hold any tangeable weight, it is up to YOU to prove it. My "Denial" comes from the same place my "Denial" of Bigfoot comes from- the lack of any hard evidence.

    BTW- When you type in "Bigfoot" on Google you come up with 23,100,000 hits. When you type in "Chupacabra" you get 5,030,000 hits. "Boogeyman" 5,020,000 hits. Your constant reference of 8+ million hits = Truth is silly.

    And what version of "Chemtrails" are you arguing for today, as it seems the definition slips and slides on this thread:

    1. Weather Modification (increasing rainfall)
    2. Reflecting Sun's to mitigate global warming.
    3. Outright poisioning people for nefarious purposes

    Let's take a look at the results of your "Reporting," shall we?
    Some maintain that the purpose of the Chemtrails is for population reduction – the genocide of “useless eaters.”

    Aside from the utter foolishness of the above premise, when one clicks through, you read nothing but anecdotal evidence from a past, past director of the LA FBI office who is recounting a secondhand story from a "Drunk" pilot who was trying to pick up women at a bar. When he failed to convine these women he was Daniel Craig or Sean Connery, he finally "Ante's up" and spills the beans on his supposed "Chemtrail" missions.....and this is some sort of proof to you?

    This story is coming from a retiree who is convinced that the death of Sonny Bono, the Oklahoma City Bombing and Jeffery MacDonald case were caused by "High Level Government Officials" and "Satanic Cults."

    Really? This is your "Reporting."

    This is utter nonsence. It smells of the same insane ramblings as this:

    http://www.lennonmurdertruth.com/

    Which is a site full of "Evidence" and "Facts" as well. This does not make it credible.

    Again, the burden of proof of "Chemtrails" is on you. And- again- from ANY credible news source- which you have utterly failed to bring to the table.

    Mark Inman
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  39. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  40. TopTop #54
    Iolchan
    Guest

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    "Mad" Miles wrote:

    The believers will believe, no matter what they're presented with. The skeptics will choose not to believe (or I prefer, be convinced, belief itself is a dangerous and problematic issue) unless and until clear and irrefutable evidence from multiple and competing sources is provided, if then. And a whole range of opinion will exist in between and outside of such polar opposite positions.

    Ultimately we're all entitled to think whatever we choose. What we're not entitled to do, is enforce our beliefs by forcing them on others. Even if it's for their own good.
    Good point, Miles; we do agree about that; emphatically. Thank You...

    Sebtown1968 wrote:

    Let's take a look at the results of your "Reporting," shall we?
    Some maintain that the purpose of the Chemtrails is for population reduction – the genocide of “useless eaters.”

    Aside from the utter foolishness of the above premise, when one clicks through, you read nothing but anecdotal evidence from a past, past director of the LA FBI office who is recounting a secondhand story from a "Drunk" pilot who was trying to pick up women at a bar. When he failed to convine these women he was Daniel Craig or Sean Connery, he finally "Ante's up" and spills the beans on his supposed "Chemtrail" missions.....and this is some sort of proof to you?

    This story is coming from a retiree who is convinced that the death of Sonny Bono, the Oklahoma City Bombing and Jeffery MacDonald case were caused by "High Level Government Officials" and "Satanic Cults."

    "...When one clicks through,"
    there are over eight hundred thousand hits on the confluence of the words genocide and chemtrails. To suggest that "
    you read nothing but anecdotal evidence from a past, past director of the LA FBI office who is recounting a secondhand story from a "Drunk" pilot," just shows that you, Sebtown1968, have not done any serious homework on the link. In point of fact you only "clicked through" the first ten items. Google (which was subjected to a hostile takeover by the Central Intelligence Agency, no later than 2007) conveniently placed those crazy, and disinformation-laden links at the top of the pile, in order to show people who suffer from ADD, and do not have either the patience or the inclination to dig deeper, that the whole subject is just wacky.

    I like the way Paul Simon put it:

    "A man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest."

    And, to be frank, I do not wish to be categorized or stereo-cast as a "believer" in Chemtrails.
    I only claim to be an "observer" of them. I have seen them; many thousands of them; since I first started taking notice of this then-novel phenomena, in the 1990's.

    'Tis true; I am not a scientist; but neither am I a fool, a simpleton, or your garden-variety "conspiracy theory" junky. I have eyes, and I see with them. I observe the heavens, and the changes that take place in the field of heaven, over Time.

    Unlike "Contrails," Chemtrails are not - generally - a high altitude phenomena. The Jets that lay these trails in the atmosphere are not cargo or
    passenger planes en route from cities like Chicago and Denver, flying to destinations like San Francisco and Portland, on routine, commercial business...

    Typically, these planes fly out of Air Force bases - and, it does appear { i.e. all of the evidence indicates} - that these planes are on one mission only: laying Chemtrails in the sky.

    And to Dane Jasper, Miles Mendenhall, and Mark Inman, I say:
    Open your eyes; you might be surprised at what you see - some of it is definitely Loopy; to say the least:


    Mark Walter Evans
    Attached Thumbnails (click thumbnail for larger view) Attached Thumbnails (click thumbnail for larger view) Expand   Expand  
    Last edited by Iolchan; 11-11-2011 at 02:26 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  41. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  42. TopTop #55
    Iolchan
    Guest

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails


    Words Have Definite Meaning


    “ Observer ”

    from the Oxford English Dictionary :

    observer, n.

    Pronunciation:

    Brit. /_b_z__v_/ , U.S. /_b_z_rv_r/
    Forms: 15 observar, 15–16 obseruer, 15– observer, 16 observor.
    Etymology: < observe v. + -er suffix1. Compare Middle French observeur ...

    1.
    a. An adherent or follower of a law, religion, custom, ritual, method, etc. Usu. with of.
    1550—1991


    †b. A person showing respect, deference, or dutiful attention; an obsequious follower. Obs.

    1601—a1640

    2.
    a. A person who watches or takes notice; a spectator.
    Freq. in titles of newspapers; cf. observator n. 3b.
    1555—1989


    b. A person who watches for and interprets omens. Cf. observe v. 6b. rare after 17th cent.

    1588—1971

    c. A person who observes in an official capacity without participating; spec. (a) one who attends a conference, inquiry, etc., to note the proceedings; (b) one posted to an area of conflict to monitor events, supervise a ceasefire, etc.; freq. attrib. in observer force, etc.

    1925—2001

    3.
    a. A person who observes objects or phenomena scientifically; a person who makes scientific observations; such a person (real or hypothetical) regarded as having a particular viewpoint or effect. Also: a person in charge of an observatory.
    a1631—1993


    b. Mil. A person responsible for observation; spec. (a) a person carried in an aeroplane, or (formerly) in a balloon, to observe enemy positions, direct ground forces, etc.; (b) a member of an artillery unit responsible for identifying targets and watching and directing fire; (c) a person trained to keep watch for and identify incoming aircraft, missiles, etc., as a safeguard against enemy air attack. Freq. attrib.

    1870—1990

    †4. A person who makes a verbal observation or remark. Obs.

    1724—1724

    Compounds

    Used attrib. with reference to the effect of subjective factors on the accuracy or veracity of scientific observations.

    1959—1991


    Last edited by Barry; 10-13-2011 at 06:05 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  43. TopTop #56
    Iolchan
    Guest

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails


    Scientists - And Others - Expose Chemtrail Agenda :

    Dr. Michael Castle :
    http://bariumblues.com/methodic_demi...ural_earth.htm

    Lauren Moret :
    See Search results here.



    Evergreen Aviation :
    http://coupmedia.org/arial-spraying/...with-usaf-1401

    Weather Modification Companies in operation today inside the USA:
    http://www.wtwma.com

    Weather Mitigation Research and Development Policy Authorization Act of 2009 :
    http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-60

    A.C. Griffith on Project Cloverleaf - (Series with Joyce Riley, Captain in the United States Air Force and flew on C-130 missions in support of Operation Desert Storm, a well known nurse, advocate for soldiers with Gulf War Syndrome and who had it herself) :
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4c0F...eature=related

    North American Weather Modification council :

    http://www.naiwmc.org/


    Owning the weather by 2025 (by US Airforce Col, Ltn, and Majors

    http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf
    Last edited by Barry; 10-13-2011 at 05:36 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  44. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  45. TopTop #57
    danejasper's Avatar
    danejasper
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    I'll just leave this here.

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  46. Gratitude expressed by 7 members:

  47. TopTop #58
    Iolchan
    Guest

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Ah so; One Picture says more than one thousand words:
    Attached Thumbnails (click thumbnail for larger view) Attached Thumbnails (click thumbnail for larger view) Expand   Expand   Expand   Expand  

    Expand   Expand   Expand   Expand  

    Expand  
    Last edited by Iolchan; 12-02-2011 at 06:40 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  48. Gratitude expressed by 3 members:

  49. TopTop #59
    Iolchan
    Guest

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails


    And if one picture is worth more
    that one thousand words;
    What is the worth of fourteen pictures ?
    Attached Thumbnails (click thumbnail for larger view) Attached Thumbnails (click thumbnail for larger view) Expand   Expand   Expand   Expand  

    Expand  
    Last edited by Iolchan; 12-02-2011 at 06:43 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  50. Gratitude expressed by:

  51. TopTop #60
    danejasper's Avatar
    danejasper
     

    Re: Reporter seeking "unbiased" information on Chemtrails

    Quote Iolchan wrote: View Post

    And if one picture is worth more
    that ten thousand words;
    What is the worth of fourteen pictures ?
    Zero.

    Posting random pictures of jet airliner condensation trails doesn't mean anything.

    A suggestion: If you see a jet leaving behind a contrail, and you think it might be a sinister "chemtrail", just use FlightAware and look it up. From the location overhead and the direction of travel, you can identify the flight on the map.

    Click one of the little airplanes to look up the call sign, source and destination, plane make and model and more. Heck, you can even see the range of prices that the passengers paid for their seats. If you see a sinister one, you can view it's past and scheduled future flights, and track it as it passes overhead again tomorrow.

    Perhaps this resource for factual input might help assuage your confusion.

    For our region, start here:
    http://flightaware.com/live/airport/KSTS

    -DJ
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  52. Gratitude expressed by 5 members:

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-20-2011, 01:46 PM
  2. "Voter Information Guide for Democrats"
    By Barry in forum General Community
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-30-2008, 05:12 PM

Tags (user supplied keywords) for this Thread

Bookmarks