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

Chem trails

«134567…22

Comments

  • #2
    Mahatma coat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,869 ✭✭✭Mahatma coat


    Hmm, who'd a thunk the exhausts of airplanes give off toxic chemicals :rolleyes:

    until someone can provide me with something reasonably plausible as to WHY,

    I'm gonna list this one with the Lizzardmen,

    whoa, thats who's flyin the planes.


    BUT SERIOUSLY FLOKS if there is even a hint of truth to this I weep for humanity


  • #3
    zarathustra
    Closed Accounts Posts: 42 ✭zarathustra


    Mahatma coat wrote: »
    Hmm, who'd a thunk the exhausts of airplanes give off toxic chemicals :rolleyes:

    until someone can provide me with something reasonably plausible as to WHY,

    I'm gonna list this one with the Lizzardmen,

    whoa, thats who's flyin the planes.


    BUT SERIOUSLY FLOKS if there is even a hint of truth to this I weep for humanity

    if you read up on it you will learn that it is very real, there is lots of evidence of it, it is well documented.....as for the why, you should read up on the David Rockefellar controlled medical mafia cartel, and the elite goal of global depopulation, and its got f*** all to do with lizards, just the maniacs who run the world. Do some research on it.

    The normal exhaust from planes is refered to as Con-trails. When chemicals have been deliberately sprayed from a plane they are Chem-trails


  • #4
    zarathustra
    Closed Accounts Posts: 42 ✭zarathustra


    US military secretly bio-testing chemicals on the US public on Manhattan and San Francisco among other locations

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


  • #5
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/Military-Germs-US-Cities.htm
    Another bacterium, Bacillus globigii, never shown to be harmful to people, was released in San Francisco, while still others were tested on unwitting residents in New York, Washington, D.C., and along the Pennsylvania Turnpike, among other places, according to Army reports released during the 1977 hearings.

    In New York, military researchers in 1966 spread Bacillus subtilis variant Niger, also believed to be harmless, in the subway system by dropping lightbulbs filled with the bacteria onto tracks in stations in midtown Manhattan. The bacteria were carried for miles throughout the subway system, leading Army officials to conclude in a January 1968 report: "Similar covert attacks with a pathogenic [disease-causing] agent during peak traffic periods could be expected to expose large numbers of people to infection and subsequent illness or death."


  • #6
    zarathustra
    Closed Accounts Posts: 42 ✭zarathustra


    Scientist and researcher, Rosie Bertell continues to provide damning evidence concerning the military, goverment, scientists, giant corporations, the Illuminati involvement in the world-wide sinister "Black Project" known as Chemtrails. International collusion, aerial pharmacopoeia are explored and all point to the New World Order

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8NmzfjIkI0&eurl


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    zarathustra
    Closed Accounts Posts: 42 ✭zarathustra


    the ultimate war weapon HAARP, which can control weather, and even create earthquakes. A graphic display of the power of frequencies

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7504090818467251686&q=haarp&total=648&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

    HAARP-Chemtrails

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6563630790789702173&q=haarp&total=648&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1


  • #8
    cooperguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,650 ✭✭✭cooperguy


    I hate to break it to you OP but that first video had no evidence in it what so ever it just had pictures of the sky


  • #9
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Seriously I should be in bed and I'm reading this ****e. This is not the place for talking sense. I give up.


  • #10
    Kernel
    Registered Users Posts: 4,388 ✭✭✭Kernel


    meglome wrote: »
    Seriously I should be in bed and I'm reading this ****e. This is not the place for talking sense. I give up.

    If you made a point perhaps someone could respond to it?


  • #11
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    Kernel wrote: »
    If you made a point perhaps someone could respond to it?

    Very true...

    So we're saying the governments of the world are wrecking our immune systems and are then content to pay for the resulting large rise in the hospital admissions... :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    the american government wants to privatise the health industry even more.... it all ties together people


  • #13
    Owen
    Registered Users Posts: 12,683 ✭✭✭✭Owen


    Got a warning for posting in this thread, so ... I'm sorry. I'm not really though, as some of the stuff in here would make baby Jebus cry, but I will promise to follow the charter from now on.


  • #14
    rc28
    Registered Users Posts: 2,246 ✭✭✭rc28


    Sorry but this is a really pathetic conspiracy theory.
    http://amos.indiana.edu/library/scripts/contrails.html


  • #15
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    rc28 wrote: »
    Sorry but this is a really pathetic conspiracy theory.
    http://amos.indiana.edu/library/scripts/contrails.html

    "What we do with our hands, we deny with our mouths"

    If people cannot use their own six senses to independently consider the situation, then what can I say, you are among the living dead.


  • #16
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,381 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    This "rescue" effort of neutralizing and transmuting the toxic elements in chemtrails was initiated in early 2002 with the introduction of a device called the "chembuster" which will transmute the atmospheric orgone energy envelope from one polarity ('DOR') which allow chemtrails to persist, to another orgone polarity ('OR') which will cause chemtrails to disperse. The proliferation of chembusters around the country led to another dramatic development in early 2004: legions of huge air elemental beings called "Sylphs" by ancient Greeks made their presence known by assuming cloud shapes that often look like wispy winged angels or animal forms (there are dozens of photos of Sylphs posted on the Sylph /Chemtrail page) who set about "cleaning up" the skies of chemtrail toxins by engulfing and transmuting chemtrail toxins into non-toxic substances.

    Chemtrails eh?
    This has to be one of the more "Out there" conspiracy theories I've seen.
    I know this is the conspiracys forum but seriously, dont we have a "Fantasys" forum as well?
    Kippy


  • #17
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    What if we use our six senses and realize that it's still a load of rubbish?

    "The camel will fly south for Winter, but the emu took a boat"


  • #18
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    humanji wrote: »
    What if we use our six senses and realize that it's still a load of rubbish?

    "The camel will fly south for Winter, but the emu took a boat"

    O.k.

    Ring the department of defence, ask them what is being sprayed in the sky. They will not deny anything, merely refuse to answer. The reason for this is legalistic.


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


    If nothing is being sprayed in the sky, they won't know what the hell you're talking about and just dismiss you. But you would take such a response as an admission of guilt.

    The way you seem to take this is like if I asked were you a lizardman (sorry to keep bringing them up, but they've won a special place in my heart now :) ). You'd answer one of 3 main ways:

    1) You'd admit it (whether you're joking or really are one), in which case I'd be happy that I'm right.

    2) You'd deny it, in which case I'd say "Of course you'd deny it, that means you must be a lizardman"

    3) You'd dismiss me as an idiot, to which I'd take it as a victory for me since you must be avoiding the question because you are a lizardman.


  • #20
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    humanji wrote: »
    If nothing is being sprayed in the sky, they won't know what the hell you're talking about and just dismiss you. But you would take such a response as an admission of guilt.

    The way you seem to take this is like if I asked were you a lizardman (sorry to keep bringing them up, but they've won a special place in my heart now :) ). You'd answer one of 3 main ways:

    1) You'd admit it (whether you're joking or really are one), in which case I'd be happy that I'm right.

    2) You'd deny it, in which case I'd say "Of course you'd deny it, that means you must be a lizardman"

    3) You'd dismiss me as an idiot, to which I'd take it as a victory for me since you must be avoiding the question because you are a lizardman.

    You clearly have no understanding of admiralty law.


  • #21
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    What? Do you honestly belive that dismissing something is proof of guilt? And what the hell has Admiralty law have to do with the sky? Are you just trolling now?


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    casey212 wrote: »
    If people cannot use their own six senses to independently consider the situation, then what can I say, you are among the living dead.

    OK...I'll bite.

    What's your sixth sense?

    I would also point out that one cannot prove a negative. Its an argument you used on a Green Issues thread, so there's no question but that you understand its usage.

    Thus, no-one can prove that chemtrails aren't real....just like they can't prove the invisible pink unicorn at the bottom of my garden isn't real. The correct behaviour is to treat chemtrails like the invisible pink unicorn and ask for evidence if its existence which can be meaningfully scrutinised.

    Keeping an open mind on the subject means allowing that evidence may indicate its existence. It does not mean believing in it until evidence says otherwise. If you disagree, I've a lovely pet invisible pink unicorn to sell you.

    Would you care to summarise what this evidence is?


  • #23
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    How much do you want for this unicorn?


  • #24
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    humanji wrote: »
    What? Do you honestly belive that dismissing something is proof of guilt? And what the hell has Admiralty law have to do with the sky? Are you just trolling now?


    Admiralty law is the law of commerce.

    As fo trolling, leave that to the idiots talking about their favourite football team/celebrity.


  • #25
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    casey212 wrote: »
    Ring the department of defence, ask them what is being sprayed in the sky. They will not deny anything, merely refuse to answer. The reason for this is legalistic.

    Consider the following analagy...

    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on your husband last January
    Mrs. SmithNo
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last February
    Mrs. SmithNo
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last March
    Mrs. SmithNo
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last April
    Mrs. SmithNo
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last May
    Mrs. SmithNo comment. I refuse to answer the question

    If a department makes the simple distinction between denying and refusing to comment that you are suggesting, then its simple to figure out what the truth is. It requires a secondary-school level of logic to beat such a system.

    Consider, however, either of the two alternatives:

    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last January
    Mrs. SmithNo comment. I refuse to answer the question
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last February
    Mrs. SmithNo comment. I refuse to answer the question
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last March
    Mrs. SmithNo comment. I refuse to answer the question
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last April
    Mrs. SmithNo comment. I refuse to answer the question
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last May
    Mrs. SmithNo comment. I refuse to answer the question



    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last January
    Mrs. SmithNo
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last February
    Mrs. SmithNo
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last March
    Mrs. SmithNo
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last April
    Mrs. SmithNo
    Mr. Smith:Mrs. Smith, did you cheat on me last May
    Mrs. SmithNo

    Now...in each of those situations, can you tell in which months (if any) Mrs. Smith cheated?

    You'll see the same in any legalistic situation. Smart people know that if its not something you are authorised to say, then the correct answer is "no comment", regardless of whether the allegation is true, false, or downright crazy.

    So, that the DoD (in whatever country you've asked them) refused to deny your allegation, its because they're not entirely stupid....which doesn't really come as much of a surprise.


  • #26
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    casey212 wrote: »
    Admiralty law is the law of commerce.

    No, thats commercial law.

    Admiralty law is effectively the same as maritime law, which is somewhat different to the Law of teh Sea.


  • #27
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    bonkey wrote: »
    OK...I'll bite.

    What's your sixth sense?

    I would also point out that one cannot prove a negative. Its an argument you used on a Green Issues thread, so there's no question but that you understand its usage.

    Thus, no-one can prove that chemtrails aren't real....just like they can't prove the invisible pink unicorn at the bottom of my garden isn't real. The correct behaviour is to treat chemtrails like the invisible pink unicorn and ask for evidence if its existence which can be meaningfully scrutinised.

    Keeping an open mind on the subject means allowing that evidence may indicate its existence. It does not mean believing in it until evidence says otherwise. If you disagree, I've a lovely pet invisible pink unicorn to sell you.

    Would you care to summarise what this evidence is?

    The sixth sense is intuition. You want evidence, use you own eyes and your own memory of the past. As I have stated, my preference is for people to decide for themselves. I don't reference a lot because it is very easy to be labeled a radical.


  • #28
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    bonkey wrote: »
    No, thats commercial law.

    Admiralty law is effectively the same as maritime law, which is somewhat different to the Law of teh Sea.

    Incorrect, commercial law is a derivative of admiralty law. Admiralty law is the only law available nowadays. If you know of a common law court, inform me.


  • #29
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    No, commercial law and admiralty law are two very different things.


  • #30
    bonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 15,443 ✭✭✭✭bonkey


    casey212 wrote: »
    Admiralty law is the only law available nowadays.

    Given that admiralty law is a set of agreements between private companies, I think I begin to see where you're coming from with this.

    You are obliquely suggesting that criminal law is actually a convenient smokescreen, and that in reality everything is run by Big Business, right?


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    casey212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 481 ✭✭casey212


    humanji wrote: »
    No, commercial law and admiralty law are two very different things.

    As you wish, however this lets get back to the main concern. The spraying of chemicals in the skies.

    Look into the Enmod Treaty signed by ireland in 1978. And then refer to the open skies treay (both parts, commercial and military.)


Advertisement