nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Chem trails

zarathustra

If you don't believe the governments of the western world are involved in secretly spraying chemicals through the skies with the aim of affecting the populations immune systems then you should read this story

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=16038262

If you don't know what Chemtrails are then here are a few links you defo should read/watch, but you won't like what you find. If you don't believe them, then return to the first paragraph of this thread

http://educate-yourself.org/ct/

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/sylphandchemtrailindex.shtml

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Xcf84CFEKQ

http://www.mercola.com/2005/may/7/barium_water.htm

http://educate-yourself.org/ct/ctpeanutbutterbariumsandwiches17apr02.shtml

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVc9GX5K_As&eurl=http://z13.invisionfree.com/THE_UNHIVED_MIND/index.php?showtopic=35575

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/06/290343.shtml

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVZAChMUa0Y

Chemtrails are an Aerosol program run by the Office of Naval Intelligence controlled by British Intelligence (and those who control British SIS) and gets conducted in all countries within 'The Open Skies Treaty.' Notice the immune dysfunction, Respitory problems, Cancer, Thyroid problems going through the roof in those countries.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

oscarBravo

Jocksereire wrote: »

chemicals (plastic substances with metals)...

Sounds like a description of chaff to me. In fact, it's a description that my ballpoint pen would match.

Are you seriously suggesting that all the photographs of contrails we've seen on this thread so far are actually trails of radar-jamming chaff?

Jocksereire wrote: »

...were sprayed to interfere with radars. They were picked up on weather radars they did not interfere with them.

Make up your mind.

Jocksereire wrote: »

to MY satisfaction yes, its does end the debate as to whether to military were spraying chemtrails.

As always, I'm astonished at how low the burden of proof is when it comes to things you (meaning "truthers" in general) want to believe in.

Jocksereire wrote: »

explain why it doesnt satify you that these planes did not spray chemicals in the sky?

Because I don't equate the dropping of radar-jamming chaff with the spraying of chemicals. Because I haven't seen anyone so much as attempt to draw a connection between this alleged military exercise and the photographs of contrails that have been touted as evidence of "chemtrails".

Why are you so satisfied with a single news report in a language you don't understand, translated by an unknown (but evidently biased) source with an unknown degree of accuracy?

What is the German for chemtrail?

Jocksereire

oscarBravo wrote: »

Sounds like a description of chaff to me. In fact, it's a description that my ballpoint pen would match.

Are you seriously suggesting that all the photographs of contrails we've seen on this thread so far are actually trails of radar-jamming chaff?

are you seriously suggesting that i am suggesting that?

Make up your mind.

lol penny not dropping here?? never mind

As always, I'm astonished at how low the burden of proof is when it comes to things you (meaning "truthers" in general) want to believe in. Because I don't equate the dropping of radar-jamming chaff with the spraying of chemicals. Because I haven't seen anyone so much as attempt to draw a connection between this alleged military exercise and the photographs of contrails that have been touted as evidence of "chemtrails".

totally avoiding the issue going of on another silly and deliberate tangent. the title of this thread is chemtrails not compare links to some pictures:rolleyes:
care to comment on the other report i posted where it states and i quote

"One chapter of the report, 'The Fluorescent Particle Trials', reveals how between 1955 and 1963 planes flew from north-east England to the tip of Cornwall along the south and west coasts, dropping huge amounts of zinc cadmium sulphide on the population".....hey look they used the word "dropping" in their too, just like you!! ok ill conceed that the governments are not "spraying" chemicals in the air

I don't equate the dropping of radar-jamming chaff with the spraying of chemicals.

dropping? tell me how do they "drop" the chaff (chemicals.....but lets call it chaff to please you)? playing with words now? is that the best you can do??

Why are you so satisfied with a single news report in a language you don't understand,

wrong again here. fist there are many reports linked on this thread, never mind the TWO i just posted so its not just a single report is it?. as for me not understanding german? I speak german, studied it, lived in heilbronn and heidelberg, worked for the largest german software company there for 4 years so dont make statements you know little or nothing about although reading your posts over the years i doubt that is ever going to stop any time soon

What is the German for chemtrail?[/QUOTE] as i have never had to use this word in german before i do not know. Do tell us. i doubt there is a word for it. What has that go to do with the military spraying chemicals in the air?im not going to play a petty word game if thats what your after

oscarBravo

Jocksereire wrote: »

are you seriously suggesting that i am suggesting that?

OK, straight question: when you cite the German report as conclusive proof of the "chemtrail" activity that is the topic of this thread, are you equating the phenomenon being reported on with the alleged chemtrails that people have been photographing? Or are you waving off all the laughable claims of contrails being chemtrails and saying "OK, so those aren't chemtrails, but these are?

If you're not saying any of those things, I'd appreciate a clear statement of what it is you are saying.

Jocksereire wrote: »

lol penny not dropping here?? never mind

I caught you out in a direct contradiction of yourself within two sentences. Your condescending smart-assed reply doesn't change that.

Jocksereire wrote: »

totally avoiding the issue going of on another silly and deliberate tangent. the title of this thread is chemtrails not compare links to some pictures:rolleyes:

See the top of this post. Are you stating here that you don't believe the photographs of contrails posted to date in this thread are chemtrails?

Jocksereire wrote: »

care to comment on the other report i posted where it states and i quote

"One chapter of the report, 'The Fluorescent Particle Trials', reveals how between 1955 and 1963 planes flew from north-east England to the tip of Cornwall along the south and west coasts, dropping huge amounts of zinc cadmium sulphide on the population"

I accept that it happened, but it doesn't mean it's happening now. If you believe it is happening now, produce some evidence.

Jocksereire wrote: »

.....hey look they used the word "dropping" in their too, just like you!! ok ill conceed that the governments are not "spraying" chemicals in the air

dropping? tell me how do they "drop" the chaff (chemicals.....but lets call it chaff to please you)? playing with words now? is that the best you can do??

Do you actually know what chaff is?

Jocksereire wrote: »

I speak german, studied it, lived in heilbronn and heidelberg, worked for the largest german software company there for 4 years so dont make statements you know little or nothing about although reading your posts over the years i doubt that is ever going to stop any time soon

oscarBravo wrote:

What is the German for chemtrail?

as i have never had to use this word in german before i do not know.

You're fluent in German, and you've watched the video where the reporter is talking in German and the English subtitles use the word "chemtrails". So I'll ask again: what's the German word for "chemtrail"?

It's not a word game. I'm trying to establish the accuracy of the translation of the report.

humanji

Jocksereire wrote: »

You said it could be talking about downloading porn for all you know, you replied with a lazy answer and embarrased yourself. Thats ok we will forget about it soon. have you had an "independent" source translate it for you yet??? :rolleyes: if it gets translated the same as above is it then considered evidence?

How is it lazy to have not learned a language? Do you know Aramaic? Are you lazy for not knowing it? How have I embarrassed myself by admitting to not knowing German? You have truly bizarre standards.

If the translation is correct then the video is worth considering. Whether it is relevant is another matter.

Jocksereire wrote: »

I didnt take anything personally i just pointed out your laziness

Again, this "laziness" you have a problem with. How can it not be personal when you feel you have to slander someone who doesn't agree with you?

Jocksereire wrote: »

dont forget to email RTL to to get a transcript of their report too. can you post the email you sent?

I can't, I used the RFI page on the MOD site.

Dirty Dave

How come mainstream news is only acceptable as a source by CT'ers when its used to back up their claims but when its used against their claims its corporate cover ups?

Ah well - interesting video.

Here's a question though - who is responsible for the supposed chemical spraying over Ireland? The Irish Government?

Mahatma coat

my german is not what it used to be, but from listening to that youtube rathere than readin the translation I got the impresion that this is what they were on about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding

especialy the bits about metals (possibly silver iodide) and manipulation of clouds/weather

humanji

Dirty Dave wrote: »

How come mainstream news is only acceptable as a source by CT'ers when its used to back up their claims but when its used against their claims its corporate cover ups?

concenient that, isn't it?

Dirty Dave wrote: »

Here's a question though - who is responsible for the supposed chemical spraying over Ireland? The Irish Government?

Considering the Irish government couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, and assuming that there really is chemical spraying happening, the two main suspects would be the US or the UK.

You'd also have to consider what is the purpose of the spraying. If, as was said earlier, that it's to make the population docile, then why would the US or UK do this to Ireland? Without knowing what is being sprayed and why, then it's difficult to think who would be behind it.

Dirty Dave

humanji wrote: »

Considering the Irish government couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, and assuming that there really is chemical spraying happening, the two main suspects would be the US or the UK.

You'd also have to consider what is the purpose of the spraying. If, as was said earlier, that it's to make the population docile, then why would the US or UK do this to Ireland? Without knowing what is being sprayed and why, then it's difficult to think who would be behind it.

I like your theory and would like to sign up for your newsletter!

Mahatma coat

ah but You've missed the bit about all world governments being puppets of the Lizzard Cabal.

If they were to be spraying something I'd be more inclined to assume that it was to sterilize the population rather than just make them docile, something that could sterilize vast tracts of the population but with a relativly simple antidote thats readily available to whoever they deem worthy of passin on their seed, something like that purple Powerade - no one drinks it there must be a reason the fridges are always so well stocked with it.

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ah but You've missed the bit about all world governments being puppets of the Lizzard Cabal.

If they were to be spraying something I'd be more inclined to assume that it was to sterilize the population rather than just make them docile, something that could sterilize vast tracts of the population but with a relativly simple antidote thats readily available to whoever they deem worthy of passin on their seed, something like that purple Powerade - no one drinks it there must be a reason the fridges are always so well stocked with it.

Are you taking the piss with this powerade nonsense?

Also has there a marked reduction in population growth since these "chemtrails" started appearing? Is children of men a documentary and not fiction?

These conspiracy theories get less lucid and rational the more you look at them...

Mahatma coat

the powerade thing is what I would call a hypothesis, just ramblings and idle speculation, tho have you ever sen anyone actualy buy the stuff?? sinister eh

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

the powerade thing is what I would call a hypothesis, just ramblings and idle speculation, tho have you ever sen anyone actualy buy the stuff?? sinister eh

You really, really, really need to get out more.

Mahatma coat

its 11pm and I'm sittin on the porch havin a beer and a smoke on a farm in the mountains of NSW, I am connected to you via the miracles of satelite Broadband and a Diesel generator runnin on Sunflower oil.

out is a bit of a stretch, the nearest village is about half an hours drive, and thats way too far to walk home pissed, so tonight its just me the dog andthe cattle.

humanji

In that case you need to get in more

Diogenes

Mahatma coat wrote: »

its 11pm and I'm sittin on the porch havin a beer and a smoke on a farm in the mountains of NSW, I am connected to you via the miracles of satelite Broadband and a Diesel generator runnin on Sunflower oil.

out is a bit of a stretch, the nearest village is about half an hours drive, and thats way too far to walk home pissed, so tonight its just me the dog andthe cattle.

Then please get some more human interaction than the internet.

Honestly governments are spraying sterility drugs that can only be cured by powerade.

MooseJam

got more laughs out of this thread than the Jesus Lol one

bonkey

Jocksereire wrote: »

The clip is translated perfectly, can a "critic" can confirm that to you(i can but i doubt youll believe me).

No, its not.

Try, for example, from 1:15 to 1:30. Here, *no* translation is provided for the voice-over. Instead, a sentence is provided in English below which is then blended out as a German sentence from the report is blended in.

But ok....its hard to translate two things at once, so lets assume that the reporter isn't saying anything interesting and just look at the translation being done.

The German sentence which appears on screen is :

"Die Aufzeichnungen belegen, dass dabei sehr geringe Mengen von Düppeln ausgebracht werden"

The english sentence thats blended out at the same time reads :

"The registers report emissions of chemtrails at low altitudes"

(Note that you never see the full version of both sentences at the same time. One is wiped out as the other is filled in)

The actual translation should be more like :

"The reports show that very small quantities of chaff were used".

You can use a translation tool of your choice to verify this. If it has problems with the word Düppeln, its the plural form of Düppel, which is the german for chaff (dict.leo.org is one of the best tools for single-word translation, but feel free to find your own if you don't trust me)

You can also verify that the German word for Chemtrail is *nowhere* in the sentence being translated. (Read on to find out how.)

Oh...and no....what the reporter says during that entire 15-second period also doesn't match up to that nine-word translation....even if we ignore the whole blend-in-blend-out thing which suggests that its a translation of the excerpt from the document.

So a perfect translation it sure as **** ain't. Most of it is close...but there's just enough inaccuracy, omission of detail, and downright incorrectness to completely skew what is being said into something far more sinister.

What is the German for chemtrail? as i have never had to use this word in german before i do not know. Do tell us. i doubt there is a word for it.

Jeez guys...as I've already mentioned, its in the opening credits of the video you're arguing about. Its also in the name of the website that the opening credits lists.

Diogenes

bonkey wrote: »

So a perfect translation it sure as **** ain't. Most of it is close...but there's just enough inaccuracy, omission of detail, and downright incorrectness to completely skew what is being said into something far more sinister.

I'm shocked shocked I say, shocked that a conspiracy theorist is misrepresenting and lying, no, wait thats not the words I want....uh, um, on yes, I am unsurprised and non plussed to discover a conspiracy theorist is misrepresenting someone and lying.

Jocksereire

bonkey wrote: »

So a perfect translation it sure as **** ain't. Most of it is close...but there's just enough inaccuracy, omission of detail, and downright incorrectness to completely skew what is being said into something far more sinister.

oh most of it is "close" but still inaccurate incorrect and sinister. now is it? fair enough.
do a bullet point summary of what the report says in german and we will compare it to the message translated in english and lets see how inaccurate and incorrect and "more sinister" it is!!

ShakeyBlakey

dont know what yiz are all cacking on about , but chemtrails do exist, look at portondownthe basssstards, fukk them

humanji

A drunk post, at this hour?

Jocksereire

no the case of porton down according to them is "interesting"....it still doesnt exist (in their heads of course) though. Im pretty sure if the OP here said chemtrails did NOT exists they would argue it did.....doesnt really matter what the topic is

bonkey

Jocksereire wrote: »

oh most of it is "close" but still inaccurate incorrect and sinister. now is it?

Yes. Thats what I said. I also supplied an example of where its very inaccurate, turning the meaning of something completely on its head, from something which effectively said "there wasn't all that much chaff actually used" into "chemtrails were sprayed at low altitude"

fair enough.

do a bullet point summary of what the report says in german and we will compare it to the message translated in english and lets see how inaccurate and incorrect and "more sinister" it is!!

You maintained that the term Chemtrail may not exist in German (which I've shown to be incorrect), and that the translation is perfect (which I've shown to be incorrect).

So currently, we're at the point where we know the translation is not perfect. We know that your analysis of it is flawed. We know that you didn't even read the opening credits, because if you had, you'd have seen the term that you said you didn't know and doubted existed.

The onus is now on you to explain how you - as a self-professed German speaker - made these mistakes, and to explain why you still have credibility to be able to offer meaningful comment on the rest of the translation.

If you want to come back and say the rest is still perfect, I'll show you another mistake and put the ball back in your court again. I've no shortage of examples, but I'm not going to go through it sentence by sentence just because you asked me to. I'd suggest you take your own advice from earlier, and get a friend to translate it for you, or (re)learn German and do it yourself. I'm more than happy to critique your work, but I've absolutely no intention of doing it for you.

I've already supplied one glaring inconsistency, which we can't even charitably classify as being only slightly incorrect. I've pointed out that there's an entire 15 seconds of commentary untranslated at the same time. I've pointed out that a translation is supplied in the video that you professed to now knowing.

What have you done? You've made several claims about the absolute quality which I've already shown to be false.

If you want to insist that by "perfect" you meant "not actually perfect, but not terrible" or something....then maybe you should clear up what your understanding of the word "perfect" is before we go any further.

Or hey...I know...why don't you point out the errors that you noticed but didn't think made it anything less than "perfect", and I'll see if you got them all from what I noticed.

But seriously...perfect means "without error". I've shown that to be false. Until you redefine your opinion of the quality of the translation, I don't need to do anything more.

I will give one more example, though. Around 1:12 (no access to video in work, so I'm going from memory here), the commentator says something that is translated as something like "(several? many?) tons of chaff". Thats not what the commentator says though, is it, Jockseire? Why don't you tell us what he actually says - both the exact German, and the correct translation, then explain why there's nothing unreasonable about the on-screen translation?

Jocksereire

bonkey wrote: »

So currently, we're at the point where we know the translation is not perfect. We know that your analysis of it is flawed. We know that you didn't even read the opening credits, because if you had, you'd have seen the term that you said you didn't know and doubted existed.

as i said i did not know the german for chemtrails as i have never used it. i noticed the link to the website but didnt read it literally or try translate it in my head as i didnt have the german for chemtrails so what is your point here?what has me not reading the opening credits got to do with the german military spraying chemicals to block radar?

The onus is now on you to explain how you - as a self-professed German speaker - made these mistakes, and to explain why you still have credibility to be able to offer meaningful comment on the rest of the translation.

no the onus is still on you. are you going to do it or not?? I am satisfied that the translation in english represents what is presented in the german report. so lets have your version. point out to everyone what the report says since its so inaccurate

Mahatma coat

Jockser you consistently play into the hands of the skeptics, STOP, LOOK, LISTEN.

if yer gonna claim to have a fluency in a language (I've previously stated that my German ssketchy at best) then you had better be able to back yer claims up with actions.

dont talk the talk ff ya cant wlk the walk, cos there are people here qued upto walk all over you

I'mnot one of em tho, I genuinely give all theories equal consideration before furthur scrutiny or outright dismissal

Mahatma coat

Jockser, Bonkey lives in Bern, a German speakin part of Switzerland, unles you can provide a literal translation of the video dont push this, you will be chewed up and spat out, which is not something I want to see as I consider youone of the beter CT'ers on this forum

Jocksereire

no youre missing the point. the point is they try to derail the message of german military spraying chenicals in the air by picking out other details from my posts and not the message presented in the report. so lets see what bonkey understood from what the report says and lets compare it to the message potrayed in english and lets see how different and inaccurate both are.

im am not here to argue with someone whos german is better, that is what they want to do, try get away from what the report is about. what i am argueing it the message of the report. im not asking for a full translation im asking for the top 5 or 6 points from the report

Mahatma coat

Right I'll watch it again and then edit this post

Right, listened to it again 'Metaldumpin' that'd be what they call chemtrails, I still maintain (as I've noticed the date is in December) that it would most likely be cloud seeding with silver iodide to prevent hail, based on the geographic locations given in the video.

why the German milatray didnt make a song and dace about thi process is a mystery to me, tho it probably has something to do wit the general inefectivenes of the process

Zulu

No it doesn't work that way.
Just to recap...
1) You provided "proof"
2) Bonkey dismissed the "proof" as the BS it was. He did this to great effect shattering any attempt at credibility.

So now you are back to square one - you have no proof. So the ball is in your court.

Jocksereire

and it doesnt work that way either. lets just see what he says the points of the report were. this IS proof that germans were putting chemicals in the sky. so i do have proof not to mention the blatent admission from porton down to chemtrails :rolleyes: .....you must have missed that