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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Chem trails

145791013

Comments

  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,822 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 279 ✭✭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


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,822 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    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.
    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.
    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?
    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.
    .....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?
    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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    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.
    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?

    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 111 ✭✭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?


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭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


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭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? :D
    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 111 ✭✭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! :D


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    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...


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    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.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭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.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    In that case you need to get in more :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭MooseJam


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


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭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.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 279 ✭✭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!!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭ShakeyBlakey


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


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    A drunk post, at this hour?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 279 ✭✭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


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    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?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 279 ✭✭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


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭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


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 279 ✭✭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


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭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


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,966 ✭✭✭✭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.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 279 ✭✭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


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    the Thai's and the Chinese claim to have perfected Cloud Seeding, the Aussies have tried with varying results, this is the art of actively putting chemicals in the sky, to make rain or prevent hail or generally manipulate the climate. you is tryin to prove something else from this.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    OK....even without the video to hand, I can tell you that they say the following:

    1) The content put into the sky was chaff, not chemicals. It was small fibres of metal-coated plastic.

    2) The "clouds" they reported were visible only on meteoroligical radar. If you looked up into the sky (or down on it with satellites) where there was the meteoroligical radar was reporting heavy cloud and heavy rain....you saw nothing but blue sky because there was no cloud.

    3) The claim made by the meteorologist (Karsten Brandt) was that the military were attempting to modify meteoroligcal weather charts, not that they were trying to manipulate the weather/climate, as the translation claims.

    4) Jockseire has claimed, and still claims that the translation is accurate, despite not even acknowledging or explaining how this gels with the content that I've already shown to be not compeltely incorrect. Nowhere in the German content - either the voice-over, or the text from the official report cited, is it claimed that chemtrails were sprayed at low altitude. Nowhere is anything even close to that claimed. What is claimed, as I've noted, is that the offical records show that only small quantities of chaff were deployed.
    Jockseire wrote:
    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

    One of the details I've picked out is that they did not spray chemicals. They deployed chaff. I'm not trying to derail any message, other than a misleading one. Chaff is "chemicals" only in the loosest interpretation of the term...that all matter is comprised of chemicals - an interpretation which would also include qualifying perfectly regular engine exhausts.
    and not the message presented in the report.
    The core of the message - which you still maintain is correclty interpreted - is exactly what I've already shown to be false. The report stated small quantities of chaff wer deployed. The "perfectly correct" translation said chemtrails were sprayed at low altitude.
    so lets see what bonkey understood from what the report
    I've pointed out more than enough thats wrong with the report. You've yet to address any of those points, resorting instead to bluster that I'm trying to somehow divert from the message.Of course, givben that you seem to understand "perfect" as "something containing errors that we can overlook", perhaps by "diverting from the message" you mean "showing where its completely wrong".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Right, listened to it again 'Metaldumpin' that'd be what they call chemtrails,

    You presumably are hearing them say 'Metaldppern', which would be the German for metallic chaff.

    As I've already pointed out...look at the opening credits, and you'll see 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.
    There was no cloud. There was a radar signature which said "there's a cloud there, and heavy rain", but no actual cloud and no rain. The meteorological radar was being confused by chaff.

    Thats why they keep using the term Dppern, and why they point out that the cloud was only seen on meteorological radar.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    For anyone who prefers the written word, here's a Spiegel article on the same subject....again, in German.

    http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/0,1518,445727,00.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    the Thai's and the Chinese claim to have perfected Cloud Seeding, the Aussies have tried with varying results, this is the art of actively putting chemicals in the sky, to make rain or prevent hail or generally manipulate the climate. you is tryin to prove something else from this.

    Just a small point, which I mention only because its one I've seen gotten wrong in many of the articles I've read while looking up on this, as well as in the above.

    Cloud-seeding and similar techniques are attempts to manipulate the weather, not the climate.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,851 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    1. I dont think theres anyone her who will say that chemicals arent being sprayed into the air. (Every single airplane that takes off emits exhaust gases which are of course chemicals) If these are now what are being called chemtrails because they are chemical trails then fair enough.

    2. The conspiracy at the center of this topic is that governments are intentionally "spraying" chemicals in the air over us to poison us. (Barium was one chemical mentioned earlier on and a number of reports were cited about differing levels of chemicals in groundwater etc.

    3. What has been reported in Germany doesnt really deal with point 2 at all in my opinion.

    4. No one has answered any of my questions which were asked a few pages ago.

    Kippy


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    kippy wrote: »
    1. I dont think theres anyone her who will say that chemicals arent being sprayed into the air. (Every single airplane that takes off emits exhaust gases which are of course chemicals) If these are now what are being called chemtrails because they are chemical trails then fair enough.

    Well at that rate car exhausts are spraying chemicals into the air. And every power station, every cigarette and too many other places/things to mention. The term chemtrails is being used to signify something else, the intentional poisoning of the population by planes.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    I'll have a shot at your questions, Kippy....
    1 Who is spraying?(actually flying the planes, refueling the plans and responsible for their safe trip through the sky)?
    I don't know, but I'm willing to bet that there's a 1-1 correlation between registered flight-paths of commercial aircraft, and the trails that have been photographed.
    2 Who finances this, who orders the spraying and who do they answer to?
    Presumably the same shadowy, ill-defined cabal that's allegedly behind everything other conspiracy. Y'know...the ones who control everything, but are trying to gain control of everything.
    3 Why do this? As mentioned earlier (which I have to say, was completely overlooked) spraying from the sky is neither targeted, stealthy or inexpensive) Why they hell dont "they" poison the water reservoirs directly? Dublin only has one or two sources of water and this appears to be the way to go for any such poisoning of the population of the city.
    The only logical conclusion is that its a long-term plan to achieve some sort of critical levels of something in the entire atmosphere. Given the wind-speeds at the altitudes that 'trails (con- or chem-) occur, the occurrence of such 'trails over ocean as well as land, and various other factors, it simply cannot be actually targetted at anything. I'd refer back to the Spiegel article I linked to above, concerning chaff, where it is mentioned that chaff falls at 20-30 cm/sec. If dropped from a few thousand metres, its going to take hours to fall to earth. Now...if instead of chaff, we have fine particulate matter (e.g. something like smoke particules) or a gas, then it could easily stay in the atmosphere indefinitely (witness how far dust from teh sahara can be blown, and it starts at ground-level, or indeed where the radioactive fallout from Chernobyl was traced to, again, starting at ground-level).
    4 Why spend so much time and effort doing this when there are easier and more effective ways of doing it?
    If the aim is to reach critical levels of something in the entire atmosphere, there may not be easier and more effective ways of doing it.

    The problem (for me) with this scenario is that you'll find it hard to find someone who agrees with the theory of chemtrails who also believes that man's entire impact on the earth can have any signficant impact on the atmosphere (e.g. the whole Global Warming thing). So if our entire impact - industrual, agricultural, and all the rest is insignificant...how can a handful of planes who's output makes up a tiny, tiny proportion of that do anything at all to the global atmospheric makeup.
    5 What do you personally do to protect yourself from the effects of this spraying? Wear a mask?
    I do nothing, because I don't believe I'm being sprayed.
    6 Have you brought up your issues with your local politician? If so what has the response been? Similiarily have you written a letter to the department of the environment or the green party or the EU asking for clarification of what is going on in the skies above our heads? If so I would be interested in seeing any replies.
    I have no issues, so this doesn't apply to me.
    7 You mentioned before that there were a few countries that didnt actually get sprayed. To be honest I found that amazing.
    Yeah...someone mentioned Switzerland, which is amusing because I've seen these 'trails in the morning sky over Bern more than once. Also, as I've already mentioned above, the windspeeds at altitude, coupled with the slow descent rate of anything that would/could be being used would mean that it wouldn't matter. Switzerland - if it were not involved in this alleged conspiracy - could do nothing against the 'fallout' from neighbouring countries.

    What is perhaps a more pertinent question is why these allegedly-non-involved nations are keeping silent when they are unquestionably going to be as effected as anyone else.
    How many undocumented flights, gallons of fuel/chemical and man hours would be needed for an operation of this size and who is logisticily and financially responsible for running it?
    You're mostly repeating questions from above here, but here's my take on it...

    If there were such a conspiracy, I believe it would be far better achieved by ensuring that there were additives in all aviation fuel. To achieve this would require a far smaller degree of coverup, and could leverage so many of the logistics already in place. Unfortunately, it would negate all these "on again, off again", "only some of the time", "suspicious patterns" arguments that are key to the whole argument.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,851 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Thanks Bonkey,
    Your logicilly thought out and well formed answers are well appreciated.
    Meglome,
    What appears in the youtube video/article being argued about in the more recent threads doesnt really purport to be about chemtrails then,
    Kippy


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 216 ✭✭rigormortis


    Heres my video. Going to make plenty more when the cloud cover permits.

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


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Heres my video. Going to make plenty more when the cloud cover permits.

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

    Not to yet again point out that these are exactly what you see from every jet plane depending on the conditions. I'm still failing to see what showing us exactly what we expect to see is proving.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    yeah, but the one thingthatgives this theory any form of credence (nice tune BTW) is tha I remember as akid when you could look up in the sky and the contrailswould be 2 straight lines trailin off the wings for about 15 miles behind the plane, theydidnt become as diffuse as quickly as they do nowadays. what has changed? is it something they have added to the fuel?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    yeah, but the one thingthatgives this theory any form of credence (nice tune BTW) is tha I remember as akid when you could look up in the sky and the contrailswould be 2 straight lines trailin off the wings for about 15 miles behind the plane, theydidnt become as diffuse as quickly as they do nowadays. what has changed?
    A number of things have changed.

    CO2 concentrations, weather conditions, the altitude that planes fly at, the number of planes in the air...all changed.
    is it something they have added to the fuel?
    As far as I'm aware, if aviation fuel has changed much over the years, its because they've removed stuff from it....a bit like car fuel has changed.

    I would, in return, ask whether you noticed these persistent contrails after you heard someone talking about them / read about them / were otherwise informed about them, or if you saw them and then asked yourself "what has changed" and went and checked it up?

    I know that as a kid, the only time I noticed plane contrails at all were on clear, cloudless days. I remember noticing that some planes left no contrails. Some left the "straight as an arrow" type, and some left contrails that "puffed out" into something fluffier. I definitely didn't stay looking at the same patch of sky over half an hour to see what happened in each and every case....no more than I do today.

    Today, I see the same...and occasionally (but only now that I've been reading this type of stuff) I've noticed occasions where there's a load of persistent 'trails in the sky. I still don't watch the sky for hours on end to see what happens to each and every 'trail that I see.

    I would additionally say that when I do notice the type of effect that is being termed as chemtrails, I generally find that the weather conditions are quite similar, and the clouds that I see (that definitely aren't from planes) are generally of the same type....which would be consistent with the notion that its specific conditions that give rise to this situation.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    Well, case closed, chemtrails are real. The next endeavour is to determine what purpose they are intended for and whether they are harmful to us.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    Kernel wrote: »
    Well, case closed, chemtrails are real.
    Indeed.
    The next endeavour is to determine what purpose they are intended for and whether they are harmful to us.
    Why? You've abandoned any respectable standard of proof to declare case-closed, so why not jsut decide whats in them and make up what you think its doing to you, and declare case closed there as well?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46 STEVO B




  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,822 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    STEVO B wrote: »
    This has what, exactly, do do with chemtrails?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,966 ✭✭✭✭Zulu




  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    ah yeah I think you've confused the name of a pop band featuring that bird Fergie and the name given to CIA covert operations there lad.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,701 ✭✭✭Diogenes


    STEVO B wrote: »

    Jesus wept how many accounts can one man have.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement