Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Chemtrails debunked.

Options
1679111216

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 571 ✭✭✭rosser44


    yes or no


  • Registered Users Posts: 687 ✭✭✭pfurey101


    We are all entitled to believe what we want, but I prefer the facts.

    1. There are bog standard pollutants emitted from aircraft engines, it is a by product of the fuel used. The world knows that.
    2. There are also bog standard pollutants emitted from any vehicular combustion engine. The world knows that.
    3. Contrails are made up of water vapour and will contain ONLY those pollutants as mentioned in #1
    4. Contrails depend on atmospheric conditions at all flight levels. Aer Arran turboprops can fly over Dublin somedays at 22,000 and leave a solid trail. B747's can fly over at 41,000 feet and leave no trail.
    5. Contrails can also be small, broken or very long and dissipate from a few miles to a few 100 metres behind the aircraft.
    6. Contrails can also last a few hours dependent on atmospheric conditions - at all flight levels.
    7. I have worked in aircraft maintenance for 31 years and NEVER once saw nor heard anything in any technical circles about the legitimacy on additives that make up the longer lasting trails.
    9. I handled fuel sample reports as the fuel has to have very specific requirements and it is essential there are NO contanimants.
    10. THERE ARE NO POISONIOUS CHEMICALS ADDED TO AVAIATION FUEL
    11. If "THEY" wanted to poison the 6.7 billion of us - perhaps they would be better off NOT leaving a big white mark saying "POISON BE HERE"


    Chemtrail advocates used to say it was all contrails, then they say it is only specific US military and now they say it is only those big white and very visible contrails - the ones that contain exhaust pollutants known to all.

    Believe what you want - it is very hard to convince conspiracy theorists of anything else.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    Conspiracy theorists are one thing but chemtrail believers are quite another, the latter are like a religious cult, they will listen to no-one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    If not, and I can't imagine you answering Yes to the previous question, even Nagasaki and Hiroshima were experiments, how would you best disguise aerial spraying of the skies?
    Your question is rather flawed on a few levels.

    First, believers in chemtrails like Ireland Spirit don't actually think the governments are disguising anything. The believe that they are blatantly conducting the spraying for all to see and it's the sheeple's stupidity that allows the government to do this.

    Second, if they were going to disguise it, then why not disguise it as what Ireland Spirit was accusing them of: that they are spraying stuff to fight global warming? They wouldn't particularly care about people complaining about the environmental impact and it would be a useful PR boost. And bonus if it's their actual goal.
    What they wouldn't do is spray in such an "obvious" way and offer no explanation.

    And third, they wouldn't spray in such an obvious way at all in the first place. If their goal is to poison or mind control everyone, it doesn't make sense that they would do so in such a way where the whole thing is blown open by anyone looking up. And this is ignoring the physical problems of spraying people from such a height.
    It would be far far easier for them to just add the chemicals to water or staple foods.
    If they are spraying to affect the environment, then refer to the second point.

    So unfortunately, the answer you want is not the right one.
    The conspiracy theory is not in any way reasonable or well thought out.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    rosser44 wrote: »
    yes or no



    Would it kill you to read the posts? This is on the last page from here, post 233.


    "NO!"


    Now...about those two simple questions you've ducked....


  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    Your question is rather flawed on a few levels.

    First, believers in chemtrails like Ireland Spirit don't actually think the governments are disguising anything. The believe that they are blatantly conducting the spraying for all to see and it's the sheeple's stupidity that allows the government to do this.

    Second, if they were going to disguise it, then why not disguise it as what Ireland Spirit was accusing them of: that they are spraying stuff to fight global warming? They wouldn't particularly care about people complaining about the environmental impact and it would be a useful PR boost. And bonus if it's their actual goal.
    What they wouldn't do is spray in such an "obvious" way and offer no explanation.

    And third, they wouldn't spray in such an obvious way at all in the first place. If their goal is to poison or mind control everyone, it doesn't make sense that they would do so in such a way where the whole thing is blown open by anyone looking up. And this is ignoring the physical problems of spraying people from such a height.
    It would be far far easier for them to just add the chemicals to water or staple foods.
    If they are spraying to affect the environment, then refer to the second point.

    So unfortunately, the answer you want is not the right one.
    The conspiracy theory is not in any way reasonable or well thought out.

    I'm not my brothers keeper nor have I mentioned any of that inane stuff you've just brought up for some reason.


    Would you like to be the fourth person to ignore a simple question?


    You have a limitless supply of resources at your disposal and want to experiment the effects of spraying something from aeroplanes on the population or environment. How would you best disguise this process?


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    I'm not my brothers keeper nor have I mentioned any of that inane stuff you've just brought up for some reason.
    I bring up the inane stuff because the conspiracy theory you are trying to defend as reasonable or rational has this inane stuff in it.
    The people proposing the theory are including the inane stuff in an attempt to try and explain away the very obvious flaws in the conspiracy.

    What point are you trying to make with your question if not that the conspiracy theory is somehow plausible or reasonable?
    Would you like to be the fourth person to ignore a simple question?


    You have a limitless supply of resources at your disposal and want to experiment the effects of spraying something from aeroplanes on the population or environment. How would you best disguise this process?
    I did answer it.
    Second, if they were going to disguise it, then why not disguise it as what Ireland Spirit was accusing them of: that they are spraying stuff to fight global warming?

    And I further clarified that the way the theory is purposing they do it is in fact the stupidest way and the exact thing I would not do were I in charge of the plot.

    So why do you not believe in this conspiracy theory? What about it makes the plot implausible if it's not the points that pfurey101 and Terry Gilliam Beard have outlined?


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    I bring up the inane stuff because the conspiracy theory you are trying to defend as reasonable or rational has this inane stuff in it.
    The people proposing the theory are including the inane stuff in an attempt to try and explain away the very obvious flaws in the conspiracy.

    What point are you trying to make with your question if not that the conspiracy theory is somehow plausible or reasonable?

    I did answer it.


    And I further clarified that the way the theory is purposing they do it is in fact the stupidest way and the exact thing I would not do were I in charge of the plot.

    So why do you not believe in this conspiracy theory? What about it makes the plot implausible if it's not the points that pfurey101 and Terry Gilliam Beard have outlined?

    This is like pulling teeth. To reiterate again - I cannot speak for anyone else, I have my own opinions, which I have freely expressed.


    While you may be fooling yourself that you have answered the question, you very clearly haven't.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    This is like pulling teeth. To reiterate again - I cannot speak for anyone else, I have my own opinions, which I have freely expressed.
    What point are you trying to make with your question?
    How would you answer it?
    While you may be fooling yourself that you have answered the question, you very clearly haven't.
    I have.
    Second, if they were going to disguise it, then why not disguise it as what Ireland Spirit was accusing them of: that they are spraying stuff to fight global warming?

    If I were in charge of such a conspiracy and I had to spray things from a certain height to experiment on people (ignoring that this would be a very ineffective way to do so.) I would disguise the operation as a an effort to combat global warming. I would claim that the chemicals and chemtrails released by the planes were to reflect more sunlight to stave off the greenhouse effect.

    What I would not do is what the actual conspiracy theory claims and just keep everyone quiet and leave the evidence to blow the whole thing wide open because this would be a. ineffectual and b. impossible.


  • Registered Users Posts: 687 ✭✭✭pfurey101


    Jaysus - I've forgotten the question!


  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    What point are you trying to make with your question?
    How would you answer it?


    I have.

    If I were in charge of such a conspiracy and I had to spray things from a certain height to experiment on people (ignoring that this would be a very ineffective way to do so.) I would disguise the operation as a an effort to combat global warming. I would claim that the chemicals and chemtrails released by the planes were to reflect more sunlight to stave off the greenhouse effect.

    What I would not do is what the actual conspiracy theory claims and just keep everyone quiet and leave the evidence to blow the whole thing wide open because this would be a. ineffectual and b. impossible.
    OK, now we are actually getting somewhere, let's unpack your method.

    So to be clear, you would carry out your highly secretive and treasonous operation by going public with a front project? Correct? Would it be a private or publically funded front?

    Your front project now becomes subject to oversight. Can you explain the rationale behind exposing yourself to needless oversight, industry codes and regulations and so on?

    Also, you haven't actually answered the most important part of the question. How you disguise the chemical spraying itself.

    Can you think of more effective way of disguising this hypothethical spraying than making it look and act as much as possible as actual contrails? If you can, can you share it because I would love to hear it.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    pfurey101 wrote: »
    Jaysus - I've forgotten the question!

    Let me refresh your memory, for what good it will do.


    I would be interested in your answer to the following questions:

    Do you believe government(s) (that is western, democratic) etc would be too moral to test weapons in secret on their population?

    If not, and I can't imagine you answering Yes to the previous question, even Nagasaki and Hiroshima were experiments, how would you best disguise aerial spraying of the skies?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,652 ✭✭✭I am pie


    Why bother getting involved in strawmen? The way that question is asked is railroading you into an answer. Let's play the game though, suspending all rational and entering into the childlike woo world of gassing people from the skies.

    Do you believe government(s) (that is western, democratic) etc would be too moral to test weapons in secret on their population?

    On their own population? Without a control group? Without a means to manage dispersal? Leaving myself at the whim of weather and a network of private companies with completely contrasting motivations? (profit).

    On a purely rational scientific basis they would not take the gassin' em from the skies approach.

    The first strawman is "moral"

    Morality needn't come into it, that's a cheap emotional trick. Once you blow away the fluff around it your question is "Are governments moral" Automatically introduced doubt and allows you to sneak waffle & woo in behind it. We can discard it totally by accepting that they are immoral enough to do it, because that allows us to get to the nonsense which flows after in your whacky theory.

    No government has ever tested weapons on their own population (more importantly on their constituent population) in peacetime in such an indescriminate way that potentially the entire population (including stupidly themselves) would be affected. What wiould the desired outcome there be? On a scientific basis you would be lacking a control environment, you would be selecting the most inefficient method for dispersal.

    Even more idiotic to ignore would be the glaring lack of evidence, civilian planes are boarded by passengers, have bags loaded by unskilled workers, have petrol filled by average airport workers, have caterers on board, have relatively low wage cabin crew (not to denigrate, but each and every one of these workers would have a financial incentive to sell a big story to the news). It's laughable to suggest that the entire civilian aviation industry (happy enough to thieve a few hundred fags and the odd bottle of vodka, don't ask me how I know) but to coalescent to sell the bigger news story of their lives? Please.

    Second. See some "chemtrailing" in action? Great, save us all. Get yourself up there in a plane / helicopter or send a device up and take samples? It's widespread remember? Show us some evidence beyond misunderstood cloud formations?

    You can't though. Of course. The reason being?

    I marvel at the naivety of adults who are not willing to examine their wild theories, unwilling to produce the slightest shread of evidence depsite it being comically easy to compile said evidence. I honestly think there are some other motivations, be they related to radical politics or pyschological conditions.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    I am pie wrote: »
    childlike woo world of gassing people from the skies.

    Evidently you don't know your history. And in future if you are going to declare to be answering a question and then not actually answer the question but just rant and dish out personal abuse I'd prefer it if you didn't bother.


    Quick history lesson: http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/03/germ-war-the-us-record-2/


    The US experimentation with bio-weapons goes back to the distribution of cholera-infect blankets to American Indian tribes in the 1860s. In 1900, US Army doctors in the Philippines infected five prisoners with a variety of plague and 29 prisoners with Beriberi. At least four of the subjects died. In 1915, a doctor working with government grants exposed 12 prisoners in Mississippi to pellagra, an incapacitating disease that attacks the central nervous system.

    After World War I, the United States went on a chemical weapons binge, producing millions of barrels of mustard gas and Lewisite. Thousands of US troops were exposed to these chemical agents in order to “test the efficacy of gas masks and protective clothing”. The Veterans Administration refused to honor disability claims from victims of such experiments. The Army also deployed mustard gas against anti-US protesters in Puerto Rico and the Philippines in the 1920s and 1930s.
    In 1931, Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, then under contract with the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations, initiated his horrific Puerto Rico Cancer Experiments, infecting dozens of unwitting subjects with cancer cells.At least thirteen of his victims died as a result. Rhoads went on to headof the US Army Biological Weapons division and to serve on the Atomic Energy Commission, where he oversaw radiation experiments on thousands of US citizens. In memos to the Department of Defense, Rhoads expressed his opinion that Puerto Rican dissidents could be “eradicated” with the judicious use of germ bombs.

    In 1942, US Army and Navy doctors infected 400 prisoners in Chicago withmalaria in experiments designed to get “a profile of the disease and develop a treatment for it.” Most of the inmates were black and none was informed of the risks of the experiment. Nazi doctors on trial at Nuremberg cited the Chicago malaria experiments as part of their defense.

    At the close of World War II, the US Army put on its payroll, Dr. Shiro Ishii, the head of the Imperial Army of Japan’s bio-warfare unit. Dr. Ishii had deployed a wide range of biological and chemical agents against Chinese and Allied troops. He also operated a large research center in Manchuria,where he conducted bio-weapons experiments on Chinese, Russian and American prisoners of war. Ishii infected prisoners with tetanus; gave them typhoid-laced tomatoes; developed plague-infected fleas; infected women with syphilis; performed dissections on live prisoners; and exploded germ bombs over dozens of men tied to stakes. In a deal hatched by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Ishii turned over more than 10,000 pages of his “research findings”to the US Army, avoided prosecution for war crimes and was invited to lecture at Ft. Detrick, the US Army bio-weapons center in Frederick, Maryland.
    In 1950 the US Navy sprayed large quantities of serratia marcescens, a bacteriological agent, over San Francisco, promoting an outbreak of pneumonia-like illnesses and causing the death of at least one man, Ed Nevins.

    A year later, Chinese Premier Chou En-lai charged that the US military and the CIA had used bio-agents against North Korea and China. Chou produced statements from 25 US prisoners of war backing him his claims that the US had dropped anthrax contaminated feathers, mosquitoes and fleas carrying Yellow Fever and propaganda leaflets spiked with cholera over Manchuria and North Korea.

    From 1950 through 1953, the US Army released chemical
    clouds over six US and Canadian cities. The tests were designed to test dispersal patterns of chemical weapons. Army records noted that the compounds used over Winnipeg, Canada, where there were numerous reports of respiratory illnesses, involved cadmium, a highly toxic chemical.

    In 1951 the US Army secretly contaminated the Norfolk Naval Supply Centerin Virginia with infectious bacteria. One type was chosen because blackswere believed to be more susceptible than whites. A similar experiment was undertaken later that year at Washington, DC’s National Airport. The bacteria was later linked to food and blood poisoning and respiratory problems.

    Savannah, Georgia and Avon Park, Florida were the targets of repeatedArmy bio-weapons experiments in 1956 and 1957. Army CBW researchers released millions of mosquitoes on the two towns in order to test the ability of insects to carry and deliver yellow fever and dengue fever. Hundreds of residents fell ill, suffering from fevers, respiratory distress, stillbirths, encephalitis and typhoid. Army researchers disguised themselves as public health workers in order photograph and test the victims. Several deaths were reported.

    In 1965 the US Army and the Dow Chemical Company injected dioxin into 70 prisoners (most of them black) at the Holmesburg State Prison in Pennsylvania. The prisoners developed severe lesions which went untreated for seven months. A year later, the US Army set about the most ambitious chemical warfare operation in history.

    From 1966 to 1972, the United States dumped more than 12 million gallonsof Agent Orange (a dioxin-powered herbicide) over about 4.5 million acresof South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. The government of Vietnam estimate the civilian casualties from Agent Orange at more than 500,000. The legacy continues with high levels of birth defects in areas that were saturated with the chemical. Tens of thousands of US soldiers were also the victims of Agent Orange.

    In a still classified experiment, the US Army sprayed an unknown bacterial agent in the New York Subway system in 1966. It is not known if the test caused any illnesses.

    A year later, the CIA placed a chemical substance in the drinking water supply of the Food and Drug Administration headquarters in Washington, DC. The test was designed to see if it was possible to poison drinking water with LSD or other incapacitating agents.

    In 1969, Dr. D.M. McArtor, the deputy director for Research and Technologyfor the Department of Defense, asked Congress to appropriate $10 millionfor the development of a synthetic biological agent that would be resistant” to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease”.
    In 1971 the first documented cases of swine fever in the western hemisphere showed up in Cuba. A CIA agent later admitted that he had been instructed to deliver the virus to Cuban exiles in Panama, who carried the virus into Cuba in March of 1991. This astounding admission received scant attention in the US press.

    In 1980, hundreds of Haitian men, who had been locked up in detention camps in Miami and Puerto Rico, developed gynecomasia after receiving “hormone” shots from US doctors. Gynecomasia is a condition causing males to developfull-sized female breasts.

    In 1981, Fidel Castro blamed an outbreak of dengue fever in Cuba on the CIA. The fever killed 188 people, including 88 children. In 1988, a Cuban exile leader named Eduardo Arocena admitted “bringing some germs” into Cuba in 1980.

    Four years later an epidemic of dengue fever struck Managua, Nicaragua.Nearly 50,000 people came down with the fever and dozens died. This was the first outbreak of the disease in Nicaragua. It occurred at the height of the CIA’s war against the Sandinista government and followed a series of low-level “reconnaissance” flights over the capital city.
    In 1996, the Cuba government again accused the US of engaging in “biological aggression”. This time it involved an outbreak of thrips palmi, an insect that kills potato crops, palm trees and other vegetation. Thrips first showed up in Cuba on December 12, 1996, following low-level flights over the island by US government spray planes. The US was able to quash a United Nations investigation of the incident.

    At the close of the Gulf War, the US Army exploded an Iraqi chemical weapons depot at Kamashiya. In 1996, the Department of Defense finally admitted that more than 20,000 US troops were exposed to VX and sarin nerve agentsas a result of the US operation at Kamashiya. This may be one cause of Gulf War Illness, another cause is certainly the experimental vaccines unwittingly given to more than 100,000 US troops.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    OK, now we are actually getting somewhere, let's unpack your method.

    So to be clear, you would carry out your highly secretive and treasonous operation by going public with a front project? Correct? Would it be a private or publically funded front?

    Your front project now becomes subject to oversight. Can you explain the rationale behind exposing yourself to needless oversight, industry codes and regulations and so on?
    If the people behind the chemtrail conspiracy can keep hundreds and thousands of people, every single government, dozens of international bodies relating to aviation, engineer, climate and weather studies and medicine all absolutely and totally quiet, then the "oversight" is not an issue.
    Also, you haven't actually answered the most important part of the question. How you disguise the chemical spraying itself.
    Well evidently you can't, as the difference between real contrails and chemtrails or the unnatural increase in contrails are so obvious anyone who looks up can see it and blow open the whole conspiracy.
    Can you think of more effective way of disguising this hypothethical spraying than making it look and act as much as possible as actual contrails? If you can, can you share it because I would love to hear it.
    As stated, it's not effective as conspiracy theorists are apparently able to tell easily.
    It also has the very large problem of it being a very very stupid and ineffective way of spraying people.

    In fact of all the real examples of such experiments you obviously have been waiting to post, how come not a single one used chemtrails?
    They all detail much better ways of doing it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 687 ✭✭✭pfurey101


    Let me refresh your memory, for what good it will do.

    Calm down will you!


  • Registered Users Posts: 687 ✭✭✭pfurey101


    I am pie wrote: »
    Why bother getting involved in strawmen? The way that question is asked is railroading you into an answer.

    This!

    And a great post also I am Pie.


  • Registered Users Posts: 687 ✭✭✭pfurey101


    Have a look at the various Facebook "Chemtrail" pages, they seem to attract extremist (or misguided) pseudo enviromentalist type people. Some even want to blow these chemtrail producing machines out of the sky!

    It takes all sorts I suppose.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    pfurey101 wrote: »
    This!

    And a great post also I am Pie.

    I'm perfectly calm, thanks. You're assuming a tone that it isn't there. A combination of the problems of the medium and leaping to assumptions.

    So you are now going to congratulate and comfort each other for not answering simple questions that you won't like the answers to? And who was it that brought up religious cults?

    If you feel "railroaded" I'll try to rephrase the questions to be as neutral as possible. I'll set the hypothethical scenario.

    Always looking to create the most effective killing machines The Pentagon has hired you to head up a Top Secret , off the shelf, black operation where various toxins will be sprayed aerially from planes onto the unwitting public to test the health effects on them.

    You will given the use of a R&D department, the required diplomatic cover and all the money you need. How would you best go about this by giving the project the best chance of being kept secret?

    If this scenario is completely unrealistic because the Pentagon would never do such an awful thing, say so.


    What I would do, is acquire old civilian planes or respray and remodel military aircraft that they so they appear like civilians planes, and fit them up with the means of spraying the skies. The toxic trail would have been engineered to act and behave as a regular contrail as much as reasonably possible

    So how about you?


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    If.

    How about you answer those questions again without beginning "If....I believed the complete opposite of what my actual beliefs are this would be what I think I would say..."


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    How about you answer those questions again without beginning "If....I believed the complete opposite of what my actual beliefs are this would be what I think I would say..."
    This is not what I did.
    I detailed exactly what I would do in that hypothetical situation and kept that answer in that context.
    If you are proposing it's reasonable to think that the chemtrail conspirators are able to silence hundred of thousands of people, every government and every single organisations who would be able to identify the plot (as the chemtrail conspiracy theory requires) then you cannot object to the idea that they could also control the regulators in my proposed plan.

    In addition I pointed out the various problems of why I would not do the answer you wanted me to give.
    What I would do, is acquire old civilian planes or respray and remodel military aircraft that they so they appear like civilians planes, and fit them up with the means of spraying the skies. The toxic trail would have been engineered to act and behave as a regular contrail as much as reasonably possible
    This apparently is not possible as the difference between contrails an chemtrails or the increase of contrails are plainly visible to conspiracy theorists.

    If you suggesting that the plot is not a global spraying effort that occurs every single day in every country and that chemtrails are not distinguishable from contrails, then that is not the conspiracy theory being proposed either here or elsewhere.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    This is not what I did.
    It's precisely what you did.
    King Mob wrote: »
    I detailed exactly what I would do in that hypothetical situation and kept that answer in that context.
    No. It's all there in the text. You said what you would do assuming the most far out theories on "chemtrailing" are true. Now, we both know that you flatly reject these chemtrail theories so again it is precisely as I've said. You saying what would do if you held polar opposite opinions. Why pretend otherwise? Who are you trying to fool?
    King Mob wrote: »
    If you are proposing it's reasonable to think that the chemtrail conspirators are able to silence hundred of thousands of people, every government and every single organisations who would be able to identify the plot (as the chemtrail conspiracy theory requires) then you cannot object to the idea that they could also control the regulators in my proposed plan.
    I'm not.

    King Mob wrote: »
    In addition I pointed out the various problems of why I would not do the answer you wanted me to give.

    This apparently is not possible as the difference between contrails an chemtrails or the increase of contrails are plainly visible to conspiracy theorists.
    An honest answer is required here. Is the difference between supposed "chemtrails" and contrails "plainly visible" to you? If not, what is the relevance to our discussion?


    You are basing your response on something you know to be false. How is that in any way productive or honest?
    King Mob wrote: »
    If you suggesting that the plot is not a global spraying effort that occurs every single day in every country and that chemtrails are not distinguishable from contrails, then that is not the conspiracy theory being proposed either here or elsewhere.
    I am suggesting that given a) The vast and documented history of government experiments using unwitting human guinea pigs b) The ability of same governments to keep a secret c) The continous drive for militaries to obtain the upper hand in technologies and science to more effectively kill and dehabilitate an enemy d) The billions of dollars pumped in annually into R&D of military technology


    It is impossible to rule out military/intelligence experiments which could be harmful, even intentionally harmful to us. What people see as "chemtrails" could be (on occassion) the smoke to the fire, in the same way that military testing of advanced aircraft has lead people to believe in aliens and UFO's.


    The notion that if it looks like a contrail then it can only be a contrail is piss-poor IMO, and this is from people who claim the high ground by wearing the badges of "science" and "common sense".


    If I take one photograph of a jungle scene and then taken another photograph of the exact same scene but this time cover a bloke in plants and leaves and so on and camoflauge him in the shot the photo captures two distinct things even though it is impossible to tell them apart with the naked eye. The man doesn't become a plant because he looks like one or gain the ability to photosynthesise.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    I should add that I would speculate that wherever possible any human testing would be most likely be carried out in Africa or somewhere else where human life is less valued, somewhere they can give some Central African General a backhander to keep his mouth shut.


    To paraphrase Llyod George, "I reserve the right to kill..." (N-word, plural, especially offensive to black people.)


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    It's precisely what you did.


    No. It's all there in the text. You said what you would do assuming the most far out theories on "chemtrailing" are true. Now, we both know that you flatly reject these chemtrail theories so again it is precisely as I've said. You saying what would do if you held polar opposite opinions. Why pretend otherwise? Who are you trying to fool?
    This doesn't make any sense at all. You're asking me to answer a hypothetical question then giving out to me because I don't believe in the hypothetical?

    And yes, I am assuming the far out theories because they are the ones being proposed, those are the ones people are objecting to.
    I don't believe that any chemtrailing is happening on any level so I don't think I can possibly answer your question without running into this same problem.
    An honest answer is required here. Is the difference between supposed "chemtrails" and contrails "plainly visible" to you? If not, what is the relevance to our discussion?
    No it's not. But chemtrail conspiracy theorists believe they are.

    It's relevant to the discussion because it's the entire basis of the conspiracy theory.
    If they are indistinguishable from normal contrails, then what reason would anyone have for believing or positing such a conspiracy?
    If this is the case, then the conspiracy theory is no different from total and complete fiction.
    You are basing your response on something you know to be false. How is that in any way productive or honest?
    I don't know. You are the one who is asking people for this response. the point of which I'm still fuzzy on.
    It is impossible to rule out military/intelligence experiments which could be harmful, even intentionally harmful to us. What people see as "chemtrails" could be (on occasion) the smoke to the fire, in the same way that military testing of advanced aircraft has lead people to believe in aliens and UFO's.
    How could this be possible if chemtrails are impossible to distinguish? how would we be able to tell the difference between these genuine cases and the thousands of false ones?
    The notion that if it looks like a contrail then it can only be a contrail is piss-poor IMO, and this is from people who claim the high ground by wearing the badges of "science" and "common sense".
    That's a strawman. No one is proposing that.
    Everyone is making the point that the most likely explanation is that they are contrails and there is nothing to indicate that they are anything else.

    Of course using your same logic, we can't rule out that some of these contrails are being made by aliens for some nefarious purpose, right?


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    Of course using your same logic, we can't rule out that some of these contrails are being made by aliens for some nefarious purpose, right?

    This would be using the same logic if we ignore (as you did in your post) my reasons.


    "I am suggesting that given a) The vast and documented history of government experiments using unwitting human guinea pigs b) The ability of same governments to keep a secret c) The continous drive for militaries to obtain the upper hand in technologies and science to more effectively kill and dehabilitate an enemy d) The billions of dollars pumped in annually into R&D of military technology

    It is impossible to rule out military/intelligence experiments which could be harmful, even intentionally harmful to us. What people see as "chemtrails" could be (on occassion) the smoke to the fire, in the same way that military testing of advanced aircraft has lead people to believe in aliens and UFO's."


    Can you provide evidence of aliens having being involved in A, B, C and D above?


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    This would be using the same logic if we ignore (as you did in your post) my reasons.


    "I am suggesting that given a) The vast and documented history of government experiments using unwitting human guinea pigs b) The ability of same governments to keep a secret c) The continous drive for militaries to obtain the upper hand in technologies and science to more effectively kill and dehabilitate an enemy d) The billions of dollars pumped in annually into R&D of military technology

    It is impossible to rule out military/intelligence experiments which could be harmful, even intentionally harmful to us. What people see as "chemtrails" could be (on occassion) the smoke to the fire, in the same way that military testing of advanced aircraft has lead people to believe in aliens and UFO's."


    Can you provide evidence of aliens having being involved in A, B, C and D above?
    No. But you are arguing it based on motivation. You can posit that aliens have similar or comparable motivations to the points you listed. It's as valid as an explanation as the government doing it is.
    The government being responsible for some chemtrails is more likely as an explanation than aliens, but it's not the most likely explanation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 687 ✭✭✭pfurey101


    That wasn't Sahara Dust on your cars the last couple of mornings.................just saying :rolleyes:


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    pfurey101 wrote: »
    That wasn't Sahara Dust on your cars the last couple of mornings.................just saying :rolleyes:
    Why?


    Are we back into Dan Brown and the Loch Ness Monster again?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,652 ✭✭✭I am pie


    Evidently you don't know your history. And in future if you are going to declare to be answering a question and then not actually answer the question but just rant and dish out personal abuse I'd prefer it if you didn't bother.


    Quick history lesson: http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/03/germ-war-the-us-record-2/


    The US experimentation with bio-weapons goes back to the distribution of cholera-infect blankets to American Indian tribes in the 1860s. In 1900, US Army doctors in the Philippines infected five prisoners with a variety of plague and 29 prisoners with Beriberi. At least four of the subjects died. In 1915, a doctor working with government grants exposed 12 prisoners in Mississippi to pellagra, an incapacitating disease that attacks the central nervous system.

    After World War I, the United States went on a chemical weapons binge, producing millions of barrels of mustard gas and Lewisite. Thousands of US troops were exposed to these chemical agents in order to “test the efficacy of gas masks and protective clothing”. The Veterans Administration refused to honor disability claims from victims of such experiments. The Army also deployed mustard gas against anti-US protesters in Puerto Rico and the Philippines in the 1920s and 1930s.
    In 1931, Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, then under contract with the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations, initiated his horrific Puerto Rico Cancer Experiments, infecting dozens of unwitting subjects with cancer cells.At least thirteen of his victims died as a result. Rhoads went on to headof the US Army Biological Weapons division and to serve on the Atomic Energy Commission, where he oversaw radiation experiments on thousands of US citizens. In memos to the Department of Defense, Rhoads expressed his opinion that Puerto Rican dissidents could be “eradicated” with the judicious use of germ bombs.

    In 1942, US Army and Navy doctors infected 400 prisoners in Chicago withmalaria in experiments designed to get “a profile of the disease and develop a treatment for it.” Most of the inmates were black and none was informed of the risks of the experiment. Nazi doctors on trial at Nuremberg cited the Chicago malaria experiments as part of their defense.

    At the close of World War II, the US Army put on its payroll, Dr. Shiro Ishii, the head of the Imperial Army of Japan’s bio-warfare unit. Dr. Ishii had deployed a wide range of biological and chemical agents against Chinese and Allied troops. He also operated a large research center in Manchuria,where he conducted bio-weapons experiments on Chinese, Russian and American prisoners of war. Ishii infected prisoners with tetanus; gave them typhoid-laced tomatoes; developed plague-infected fleas; infected women with syphilis; performed dissections on live prisoners; and exploded germ bombs over dozens of men tied to stakes. In a deal hatched by Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Ishii turned over more than 10,000 pages of his “research findings”to the US Army, avoided prosecution for war crimes and was invited to lecture at Ft. Detrick, the US Army bio-weapons center in Frederick, Maryland.
    In 1950 the US Navy sprayed large quantities of serratia marcescens, a bacteriological agent, over San Francisco, promoting an outbreak of pneumonia-like illnesses and causing the death of at least one man, Ed Nevins.

    A year later, Chinese Premier Chou En-lai charged that the US military and the CIA had used bio-agents against North Korea and China. Chou produced statements from 25 US prisoners of war backing him his claims that the US had dropped anthrax contaminated feathers, mosquitoes and fleas carrying Yellow Fever and propaganda leaflets spiked with cholera over Manchuria and North Korea.

    From 1950 through 1953, the US Army released chemical
    clouds over six US and Canadian cities. The tests were designed to test dispersal patterns of chemical weapons. Army records noted that the compounds used over Winnipeg, Canada, where there were numerous reports of respiratory illnesses, involved cadmium, a highly toxic chemical.

    In 1951 the US Army secretly contaminated the Norfolk Naval Supply Centerin Virginia with infectious bacteria. One type was chosen because blackswere believed to be more susceptible than whites. A similar experiment was undertaken later that year at Washington, DC’s National Airport. The bacteria was later linked to food and blood poisoning and respiratory problems.

    Savannah, Georgia and Avon Park, Florida were the targets of repeatedArmy bio-weapons experiments in 1956 and 1957. Army CBW researchers released millions of mosquitoes on the two towns in order to test the ability of insects to carry and deliver yellow fever and dengue fever. Hundreds of residents fell ill, suffering from fevers, respiratory distress, stillbirths, encephalitis and typhoid. Army researchers disguised themselves as public health workers in order photograph and test the victims. Several deaths were reported.

    In 1965 the US Army and the Dow Chemical Company injected dioxin into 70 prisoners (most of them black) at the Holmesburg State Prison in Pennsylvania. The prisoners developed severe lesions which went untreated for seven months. A year later, the US Army set about the most ambitious chemical warfare operation in history.

    From 1966 to 1972, the United States dumped more than 12 million gallonsof Agent Orange (a dioxin-powered herbicide) over about 4.5 million acresof South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. The government of Vietnam estimate the civilian casualties from Agent Orange at more than 500,000. The legacy continues with high levels of birth defects in areas that were saturated with the chemical. Tens of thousands of US soldiers were also the victims of Agent Orange.

    I have no interest in what you prefer.



    In a still classified experiment, the US Army sprayed an unknown bacterial agent in the New York Subway system in 1966. It is not known if the test caused any illnesses.

    A year later, the CIA placed a chemical substance in the drinking water supply of the Food and Drug Administration headquarters in Washington, DC. The test was designed to see if it was possible to poison drinking water with LSD or other incapacitating agents.

    In 1969, Dr. D.M. McArtor, the deputy director for Research and Technologyfor the Department of Defense, asked Congress to appropriate $10 millionfor the development of a synthetic biological agent that would be resistant” to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease”.
    In 1971 the first documented cases of swine fever in the western hemisphere showed up in Cuba. A CIA agent later admitted that he had been instructed to deliver the virus to Cuban exiles in Panama, who carried the virus into Cuba in March of 1991. This astounding admission received scant attention in the US press.

    In 1980, hundreds of Haitian men, who had been locked up in detention camps in Miami and Puerto Rico, developed gynecomasia after receiving “hormone” shots from US doctors. Gynecomasia is a condition causing males to developfull-sized female breasts.

    In 1981, Fidel Castro blamed an outbreak of dengue fever in Cuba on the CIA. The fever killed 188 people, including 88 children. In 1988, a Cuban exile leader named Eduardo Arocena admitted “bringing some germs” into Cuba in 1980.

    Four years later an epidemic of dengue fever struck Managua, Nicaragua.Nearly 50,000 people came down with the fever and dozens died. This was the first outbreak of the disease in Nicaragua. It occurred at the height of the CIA’s war against the Sandinista government and followed a series of low-level “reconnaissance” flights over the capital city.
    In 1996, the Cuba government again accused the US of engaging in “biological aggression”. This time it involved an outbreak of thrips palmi, an insect that kills potato crops, palm trees and other vegetation. Thrips first showed up in Cuba on December 12, 1996, following low-level flights over the island by US government spray planes. The US was able to quash a United Nations investigation of the incident.

    At the close of the Gulf War, the US Army exploded an Iraqi chemical weapons depot at Kamashiya. In 1996, the Department of Defense finally admitted that more than 20,000 US troops were exposed to VX and sarin nerve agentsas a result of the US operation at Kamashiya. This may be one cause of Gulf War Illness, another cause is certainly the experimental vaccines unwittingly given to more than 100,000 US troops.

    I have no interest in what you prefer I do to be blunt. I see you have singularly failed to answer but one of my questions which renders this "debate" worthless. Quite what the above isolated incidents have to do with the global air travel industry I don't know. I imagine you'll baffle us with some more copy and paste-ology.

    Some evidence would raise the debate above and beyond confirmation bias I suppose. Any chance?

    1. Physical evidence? Either photos of the nefarious deployment systems necessary or biological smaples of this global woo phenomena?

    2. Human evidence in the form of testimony - as you tellingly chose to ignore the many human touchpoints of this silly charade have been made clear to you. Can we find one engineer, air crew, steward, fuel company rep etc with a grudge to bear who might come out and blow the lid on this.

    No & No. Of course. That would lead me to believe there are other drivers for belief in this theory were evidence doesn't suffice.


  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    I am pie wrote: »
    I have no interest in what you prefer I do to be blunt. I see you have singularly failed to answer but one of my questions which renders this "debate" worthless. Quite what the above isolated incidents have to do with the global air travel industry I don't know. I imagine you'll baffle us with some more copy and paste-ology.

    Some evidence would raise the debate above and beyond confirmation bias I suppose. Any chance?

    1. Physical evidence? Either photos of the nefarious deployment systems necessary or biological smaples of this global woo phenomena?

    2. Human evidence in the form of testimony - as you tellingly chose to ignore the many human touchpoints of this silly charade have been made clear to you. Can we find one engineer, air crew, steward, fuel company rep etc with a grudge to bear who might come out and blow the lid on this.

    No & No. Of course. That would lead me to believe there are other drivers for belief in this theory were evidence doesn't suffice.
    I tried to appeal to your better nature. I really don't appreciate your tone and can't see anything positive to be had in continuing any discussion with you.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement