Chem trails

humanji

aurelius79 wrote: »

Interesting argument. So in your opinion, we should let the Nazi party reform with the hope that it won't try to kill millions of people again? I mean, just because they did in the past doesn't mean they'll do it again right?

Well, that happened in the 1950s, no way the U.S. government would try secretly testing on humans again. Oh wait, what about the testing of Agent Orange on soldiers in Viet Nam and on Adventists at Fort Detrick? Ok, so maybe they won't test on humans after that. So why is there a law passed in 1997 in the U.S. that actually permits the testing of potentially lethal biological and chemical agents on human subjects?

PUBLIC LAW 105–85—NOV. 18, 1997 section 1078

http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/olc/docs/1998NDAA.pdf

Edit: That law also allowed the creation of the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program. (section 1076)

http://www.ngycp.org/site/

Anyone remember the Nazi Youth program?

Have you ever lied? Does that mean you do nothing but lie? Have you ever jumped? Does that mean you are constantly jumping around?

Or is it possible that you can do something once, twice or maybe a good few times, but not be always doing it? You see assuming something must be happening simply because it happened before is not evidence that it is actually happening.

My name is URL wrote: »

and one that shows 2 jets following the path of the trails already there.. I don't think I've seen so many jets in such quick succession before..

I'd say you'll find a lot more flights grouped together when there's bad weather. There'd be lots of delayed and rerouted flights roaming all over the place.

Tetsudo

Wassup, just found this thread so ill rant a bit on the topic.

I found out about all this chemtrail stuff about 2 - 3 years ago. It has been going on in every country in the world for about 10 years or so, except china apparently. There is a massive mountain of undisputed evidence which clearly shows that somone, whether its the UN, Nato or US is spraying chemicals all over us every day. Barium (a compound) has been identified to be part of the mix of whatever is being sprayed.

The debate has been narrowed down to these possibilities-
1) They are spraying micro particles so advanced weather control, satalite imaging and other exotic technologies can be used in the atmospere.

2) They are secretly rebuilding the ozone layer with mass spraying of particles to prevent global warming. (i think this is a bollox reson as global warming itself is still possibly a scam itself).

3) They are forcefully vaccinating us against somthing that we have no idea is happening.

4) Unfortunately, the evidence suggests that this reason is the most likely. We are being sprayed to negatively affect our health, likely some sort of global population control.

At this point, i would ask any1 whos sceptical that this is happening to wake early on clear morning about 5 - 6 o clock and tell me why tens if not 100's of non comerical planes are flying in formation over Cork City (and the rest of the world) with chemtrails coming out of them that cloak the entire sky in massive long white lines that slowy expand to cover the sky. That is not contrails. Contrails disaspear after 20-30secs. Chemtrails stay and dont go away.

Denile is an understatement in the extreme. This is going on everyday, everywhere. One tell tale sign is when u see two of them cross paths to form a massive X in the sky. It is believed that the X marks are used to coordinate better the massive global spraying, marking when one area has been done so some command center can mark it on the computer or whatever and then move on to the next place.

The public have been oblivious to this for the last decade, in fact it has become so normal apart of the skies that people dont notice. There is a 100% media blackout on this issue. There are many, many people who are paid, agents or civilians, to go on the net everyday and say its not happening and its just contrails and thats its all a big load of crap. There are those of us that walk outside everyday and look up to see otherwise. No offence to the genuine sceptics, but take your head out of your ass cause you and your family are getting sprayed like the rest of us.

Subliminal adverts have been partly to blame for the publics unknowing. One chilling example is a specsavers ad which has a woman walking through a field and animated multicolour effects jump around the screen. Chemtrails can be clearly seen all over the sky, but the viewer is unaware. A pair of glasses flies around the screen and touches on the first, and then the last, of the following sentence -'Contact lense free trial'.

Contact lense free trial
Con(tact lense free)trial
Contrial?
Contrail.......................

'Chemtrials: Dont talk about the weather' is the best and most cohesive documentary about this issue, it is on youtube. The specsavers ad can be viewed in part 13 of 27 from the 2:00 to 4:00 min mark followed by a brief explaination of how the ad works. When i saw this first i got a chill in my spine. I challenge any hardened sceptic to watch it and not be extremely disturbed. I would also ask people to watch the full documentary as it has all the evidence, experts and material in one film.

On a final note, from an irish point of view, we are not in Nato. Nor do we have an airforce, nor have we given any rights of allied airforces to use our space, not publically anyway. This is possibly the biggest international scandal ever, including all governments at defence level. Please dont tell me that the irish government dont know that their airspace is being used on a daily basis to spray **** on the population, thats a load of nonsense of the highest order. Ofcourse they know it and they sanction it aswell. A mother of one of my buddies is a health freak. She dont smoke, or drive, or drink. She dont eat meat only eats healthy stuff, She lives in the country because the air is better out there. When confronted about this issue, by me pointing clearly at it above our heads, she responded :"Ah, thats probably nothing to worry about, just a load of conspiracy stuff". I couldnt argue with that.

Maybe the fact that we are all being sprayed like insects is too much for some people to comprehend.

Zulu

Wouldn't that kind of subliminal advertising raise awareness?

I think you need to re-examine your understanding of subliminal advertising.

studiorat

They planes aren't strictly flying in "formation" that would suggest that they are flying together.

However, planes use "corridors" to fly into and out of airspace, otherwise they might crash into each other! Thus to the average joe soap it looks like they are in formation, and they are. However the CT'er uses the term formation to infer a military activity.

Ducks fly in formation too, this though, does not have a military connitation.

The real problem is though, that the persistance of con-trails is actually a result of the composition of the atmosphere rather than the composition of the trail itself. But that of course would indicate a change in climate, obviously a big no-no!

Thus the CT'er will blame the "Man" for this occurance, saying they con-trails have magical chemicals in them. Because to suggest the con-trail is the same and the atmosphere is different would concurr with the idea of climate change.

squod

studiorat wrote: »

However, planes use "corridors" to fly into and out of airspace, otherwise they might crash into each other! Thus to the average joe soap it looks like they are in formation, and they are. However the CT'er uses the term formation to infer a military activity.

Ducks fly in formation too, this though, does not have a military connitation.

The real problem is though, that the persistance of con-trails is actually a result of the composition of the atmosphere rather than the composition of the trail itself. But that of course would indicate a change in climate, obviously a big no-no!

Thus the CT'er will blame the "Man" for this occurance, saying they con-trails have magical chemicals in them. Because to suggest the con-trail is the same and the atmosphere is different would concurr with the idea of climate change.

We are discussing chem-trails here not con-trails.

studiorat wrote: »

They planes aren't strictly flying in "formation" that would suggest that they are flying together.

Do you have evidence that all weather modification companies will not/have not flown in formation? If you do then please post.

bonkey

squod wrote: »

Do you have evidence that all weather modification companies will not/have not flown in formation? If you do then please post.

Aren't you putting the cart before the horse there?

Shouldn't the question be whether or not there is evidence that they are flying in formation.

squod

bonkey wrote: »

Aren't you putting the cart before the horse there?

Shouldn't the question be whether or not there is evidence that they are flying in formation.

No.

bonkey

Why not?

squod

bonkey wrote: »

Why not?

Does it not make sense to you to use the resources at hand efficiently? Most of these companies have many aircraft. Previous posters have said that more than one aircraft can be seen spreading chemtrails.

Zulu

squod wrote: »

resources at hand efficiently

Eh, you think the Irish government has the resourses to carry out a campaign of spraying us with chemicals?

Are you aware of our "aerial" might?

squod

Zulu wrote: »

Eh, you think the Irish government has the resourses to carry out a campaign of spraying us with chemicals?

Are you aware of our "aerial" might?

Are you aware of how many weather modification companies there are in the world? Are you aware of how many contractors, commercial organisations there are involved in weather modification.

And why would the Irish government need to purchase said 'resourses to carry out a campaign of spraying us with chemicals'? I do not know of any other Government agency that owns a weather modification company. Governments don't generally run commercial companies.

http://www.weathermodification.org/archives.htm

mysterious

I remember seeing weird non commerical planes flying over my house down the country at 4am. It was so weird because of the noise, they are very noiesy type planes and fly a little lower than commericial jets and there were at least 100 of them flying over from a Northwest direction to Southeast which is never a commerical traffic direcdtion either.


The air to did feel toixious and dirrty about 5am. Either way the air didn't feel good to me. I'm not someone who looks out of chemtrails, but down the country they are more easier to spot than in the cities, because cities are and traffic makes them more easier to be dimissed as commerical planes.

squod

mysterious wrote: »

I remember seeing weird non commerical planes flying over my house down the country at 4am. It was so weird because of the noise, they are very noiesy type planes and fly a little lower than commericial jets and there were at least 100 of them flying over from a Northwest direction to Southeast which is never a commerical traffic direcdtion either.


The air to did feel toixious and dirrty about 5am. Either way the air didn't feel good to me. I'm not someone who looks out of chemtrails, but down the country they are more easier to spot than in the cities, because cities are and traffic makes them more easier to be dimissed as commerical planes.

I've been looking at flight maps, can't find them for this country. Many other countries do publish them online. Try email one of them near you for the next flight time and then avoid breathing for the following few hours!

Zulu

Of course "weather modification" companies.

Dublin customs: "So, what in the hold."
Company pilot: "Some chemicals and stuff."
Dublin customs: "Ok, where are you taking them?"
Company pilot: "No where, I'm just heading out for a little spin."
Dublin customs: "You're taking a plane full of chemicals out for a spin over dublin city?"
Company pilot: "Yup"
Dublin customs: "Right so ted, away with you."

Company pilot: "Request permission to take off"
Dublin air traffic control: "Rodger, whats your destination?"
Company pilot: "Eh, dublin"
Dublin air traffic control: "Whats your final destination?"
Company pilot: "Eh, dublin. Just gonna take her up & fly her about for a bit. Back in an hour."
Dublin air traffic control: "Cool no worries then."

<sprays dublin and lands>

Dublin customs: "Welcome back. Lets see the chemicals."
Company pilot: "What chemicals?"


Really folks.

mysterious

squod wrote: »

I've been looking at flight maps, can't find them for this country. Many other countries do publish them online. Try email one of them near you for the next flight time and then avoid breathing for the following few hours!

I think I know its not an air traffic route, because it was coming from the NW going to SE, the nearest airport to me is Shannon and Im NE of that, so that directions of the planes were coming from the Greenland direction. Also there were at least a hundred planes heading towards a SE and East direction. There were a hundred planes flying all within an hour. Shannon woldnt have this much plains in half the day never mind at 4am in the middle of winter....


Oh and if I did prove that this isn't a flight path, it wouldnt be a conspiracy would it. I know its not a conspiracy because its a fact and it happens. Some people want some leader to tell us in words what it is. But we tend not trust what we see ourselves. But all in all they werent commerical passnger jets!

squod

Zulu wrote: »

Of course "weather modification" companies.

Dublin customs: "So, what in the hold."
Company pilot: "Some chemicals and stuff."
Dublin customs: "Ok, where are you taking them?"
Company pilot: "No where, I'm just heading out for a little spin."
Dublin customs: "You're taking a plane full of chemicals out for a spin over dublin city?"
Company pilot: "Yup"
Dublin customs: "Right so ted, away with you."

Company pilot: "Request permission to take off"
Dublin air traffic control: "Rodger, whats your destination?"
Company pilot: "Eh, dublin"
Dublin air traffic control: "Whats your final destination?"
Company pilot: "Eh, dublin. Just gonna take her up & fly her about for a bit. Back in an hour."
Dublin air traffic control: "Cool no worries then."

<sprays dublin and lands>

Dublin customs: "Welcome back. Lets see the chemicals."
Company pilot: "What chemicals?"


Really folks.

What are you on about? Why would customs be talking to a weather mod company?

http://www.weathermod.com/index.php

squod

mysterious wrote: »

I think I know its not an air traffic route, because it was coming from the NW going to SE, the nearest airport to me is Shannon and Im NE of that, so that directions of the planes were coming from the Greenland direction. Also there were at least a hundred planes heading towards a SE and East direction. There were a hundred planes flying all within an hour. Shannon woldnt have this much plains in half the day never mind at 4am in the middle of winter....


Oh and if I did prove that this isn't a flight path, it wouldnt be a conspiracy would it. I know its not a conspiracy because its a fact and it happens. Some people want some leader to tell us in words what it is. But we tend not trust what we see ourselves. But all in all they werent commerical passnger jets!

I expect they would just need directions from satellites, following up on info from radar also.

Zulu

squod wrote: »

What are you on about? Why would customs be talking to a weather mod company?

Do you live in Ireland?
Why would customs be talking to cargo planes taking off & landing at Dublin airport?
Are you serious?

bonkey

squod wrote: »

Does it not make sense to you to use the resources at hand efficiently? Most of these companies have many aircraft. Previous posters have said that more than one aircraft can be seen spreading chemtrails.

I guess its a matter of how you approach the question...

If we assume that chemtrails are real, and that its happening over Cork city (or wherever), and that what people are claiming to have seen is the generation of chemtrails, then yes...it makes sense to also conclude that whoever is behind it will be doing whatever they are doing efficiently.

If we further make assumptions on what they are trying to achieve, and how that would be efficiently achieved, we can conclude that it makes sense to use formation flying.

This seems somewhat back-to-front, though. We've started by assuming all of our conclusions...and are concluding that formation flying would be consistent with them. The problem is that we've already assumed all of our conclusions.

You then seem to be taking this a step further, and suggesting that the onus is now to provide evidence to show that these conclusions are wrong....that there isn't formation flying, or (presumably) that there isn't something being added, or (presumably) that chemtrails don't exist. Of course, its impossible to prove non-existence....which is ultimately why this line of reasoning is flawed.

As an admittedly trivial parallel...

Dragons exist. They like flying behind planes, invisibly, and it is actually smoke from their nostrils that is being confused for chemtrails. For this to be considered a credible theory, is the onus on me to provide any sort of evidence and reasoning other than "I've seen stuff behind planes that doesn't look like contrails to me"? Alternately, is the onus on someone else to provide evidence that I'm wrong?

Note the bit I highlighted. Everyone is free to believe what they want. I'm not saying people can't or shouldn't believe in chemtrails (or dragons). I'm merely suggesting that if you're trying to build a credible argument for your position, starting by assuming the conclusions to be true, then challenging others to provide evidence that they're wrong would seem to be the wrong way to go about it.

squod

Zulu wrote: »

Do you live in Ireland?
Why would customs be talking to cargo planes taking off & landing at Dublin airport?
Are you serious?

Then put your case accross. What is the legal obligation for weather modification companies in this country and how do they relate to customs specifically?

squod

bonkey wrote: »

I guess its a matter of how you approach the question...

If we assume that chemtrails are real, and that its happening over Cork city (or wherever), and that what people are claiming to have seen is the generation of chemtrails, then yes...it makes sense to also conclude that whoever is behind it will be doing whatever they are doing efficiently.

If we further make assumptions on what they are trying to achieve, and how that would be efficiently achieved, we can conclude that it makes sense to use formation flying.

This seems somewhat back-to-front, though. We've started by assuming all of our conclusions...and are concluding that formation flying would be consistent with them. The problem is that we've already assumed all of our conclusions.

You then seem to be taking this a step further, and suggesting that the onus is now to provide evidence to show that these conclusions are wrong....that there isn't formation flying, or (presumably) that there isn't something being added, or (presumably) that chemtrails don't exist. Of course, its impossible to prove non-existence....which is ultimately why this line of reasoning is flawed.

As an admittedly trivial parallel...

Dragons exist. They like flying behind planes, invisibly, and it is actually smoke from their nostrils that is being confused for chemtrails. For this to be considered a credible theory, is the onus on me to provide any sort of evidence and reasoning other than "I've seen stuff behind planes that doesn't look like contrails to me"? Alternately, is the onus on someone else to provide evidence that I'm wrong?

Note the bit I highlighted. Everyone is free to believe what they want. I'm not saying people can't or shouldn't believe in chemtrails (or dragons). I'm merely suggesting that if you're trying to build a credible argument for your position, starting by assuming the conclusions to be true, then challenging others to provide evidence that they're wrong would seem to be the wrong way to go about it.

Could you please retype this piece, I don't mean to be rude but none of this makes a lick of sense.

mysterious

bonkey wrote: »

I guess its a matter of how you approach the question...

If we assume that chemtrails are real, and that its happening over Cork city (or wherever), and that what people are claiming to have seen is the generation of chemtrails, then yes...it makes sense to also conclude that whoever is behind it will be doing whatever they are doing efficiently.

If we further make assumptions on what they are trying to achieve, and how that would be efficiently achieved, we can conclude that it makes sense to use formation flying.

This seems somewhat back-to-front, though. We've started by assuming all of our conclusions...and are concluding that formation flying would be consistent with them. The problem is that we've already assumed all of our conclusions.

You then seem to be taking this a step further, and suggesting that the onus is now to provide evidence to show that these conclusions are wrong....that there isn't formation flying, or (presumably) that there isn't something being added, or (presumably) that chemtrails don't exist. Of course, its impossible to prove non-existence....which is ultimately why this line of reasoning is flawed.

As an admittedly trivial parallel...

Dragons exist. They like flying behind planes, invisibly, and it is actually smoke from their nostrils that is being confused for chemtrails. For this to be considered a credible theory, is the onus on me to provide any sort of evidence and reasoning other than "I've seen stuff behind planes that doesn't look like contrails to me"? Alternately, is the onus on someone else to provide evidence that I'm wrong?

Note the bit I highlighted. Everyone is free to believe what they want. I'm not saying people can't or shouldn't believe in chemtrails (or dragons). I'm merely suggesting that if you're trying to build a credible argument for your position, starting by assuming the conclusions to be true, then challenging others to provide evidence that they're wrong would seem to be the wrong way to go about it.

This is a real sign of where discussion becomes really confusing. Why would anyone make a really long post that does not make sense and it appears thats the only thing I can see in this post.

We are discussing chemtrails, we don't want to make it a complicated topic. Chemtrails exist and I don't think people are assuming it's "probable they exist" Most people know they exist.

I don't understand how you think bonkey's post doesn't make sense. He's pointing out the logical fallacies (i.e. assuming the conclusions, and arguing from there) in an argument. You can't argue with logic, folks.

mysterious

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

I don't understand how you think bonkey's post doesn't make sense. He's pointing out the logical fallacies (i.e. assuming the conclusions, and arguing from there) in an argument. You can't argue with logic, folks.

Logic is flawed. Like logic cant see deception;)

Needs physical proof someone hid something without you know eh. Logic wnats to know why people lie, but can't find out why.

This is why it's important to use discernment. We are not onesided beings or one sided left brained! we have both a right and left brain. We need less obsessive logic and more balanced use of intellegence. It's like schools that program us to use mostly are left brains. It's like Einstien said you only really learn things when you leave school.

My name is URL

Conspiracies etc aside for a minute.. does anyone know what causes the particular contrails to behave in the way they do? It's happening now while it's extremely cold and it happened last summer while it was very much warmer

I've seen normal trails around the same times as I've seen the trails that expand etc. How can such a fluctuation in behavior occur so rapidly and without any real change in weather?

IrelandSpirit

My name is URL wrote: »

I've seen normal trails around the same times as I've seen the trails that expand etc. How can such a fluctuation in behavior occur so rapidly and without any real change in weather?

Ha! Happened again, took the post right out of my type!

mysterious

mysterious wrote: »

Logic is flawed. Like logic cant see deception;)

Needs physical proof someone hid something without you know eh. Logic wnats to know why people lie, but can't find out why.

This is why it's important to use discernment. We are not onesided beings or one sided left brained! we have both a right and left brain. We need less obsessive logic and more balanced use of intellegence. It's like schools that program us to use mostly are left brains. It's like Einstien said you only really learn things when you leave school.

I honestly don't know what you're talking about mysterious. I'm not arguing about the validity of logic with you. I'm saying that an argument that assumes its conclusions and argues from there is illogical.

mysterious

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

I honestly don't know what you're talking about mysterious. I'm not arguing about the validity of logic with you. I'm saying that an argument that assumes its conclusions and argues from there is illogical.

I'm saying logic isn't all it's cracked up to be, if you don't use the other side of your brain also. Absaloute logic would mean we become robots. I'm sorry but logic can be very flawed. Its why we have this forum (thank god)

IrelandSpirit

I've watched normal trails forming at the same time as chemtrails, in stable weather conditions, (and have pointed this out to sceptics present too), and as yet I've not found an explanation...

Edit: a 'mainstream' explanation.

humanji

My name is URL wrote: »

Conspiracies etc aside for a minute.. does anyone know what causes the particular contrails to behave in the way they do? It's happening now while it's extremely cold and it happened last summer while it was very much warmer

I've seen normal trails around the same times as I've seen the trails that expand etc. How can such a fluctuation in behavior occur so rapidly and without any real change in weather?

Airspeed, altitude, geographic location, wind, air pressure, fuel mixes, plane engine type etc etc.

It's too hard to claim anything definitive since there's so many variables even when similar planes fly similar routes at similar times. I'd almost go as far as claiming that I doubt you'll ever see two contrails/chemtrails that are identical.