Operation Indigo Skyfold

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: mrthumpy

Oh please.

Do you expect a peer-reviewed scientific paper?

Let me ask you this.

Have you listened to the whole video?

And have you read the entire text?

Let me ask you this.

What evidence is presented?

originally posted by: mrthumpy
My brother's friend's dad is Air Chief Marshall in the RAF and he says that chemtrails are a hoax.

It could be that he doesn't know, and if he does, he's afraid to talk about it.

Military people have to think about the safety not only of themselves, but of their loved ones, because the price for divulging secrets affects families, too.

No, I can't back that up with a link; I'm speaking from years of past research and I haven't kept a file of links.

I would suggest you start doing some research of your own.

You won't find this on Metabunk, by the way.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
The caption reads, "Please do not post this photo apparently showing the inside of an aircraft used to create chemtrails on Facebook. Your account may be frozen or even removed."

It doesn't say copyright violation. It seems that if copyright violation were the reason, it would say so.

The message sounds as if Facebook is telling the user that the photo is a breach of national security. Perhaps chemtrails are considered a necessary evil?

Can you say why you accept the caption as true?

It may not be true.

It could be part of a psychological operation to keep the public busy throwing mud at each other, like on this thread.

The incredible leap of logic to completely ignore the possibility that a perfectly normal reason (like the picture was taken without permission and misused) exists, yet you jump to thinking men in black are monitoring Facebook posts using this picture is the reason for all those comments you dislike. Step back down here, in reality, where we can have a rational discussion about things. So far, you have run away from every inconvenient question asked of you.

What do you hope to gain my continuing to post this way?

a reply to: DenyObfuscation
Do you say that in relation to the Facebook caption, or what?

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: DenyObfuscation
Do you say that in relation to the Facebook caption, or what?

This pic
Looks to me like it was from inside this plane www.wired.com...

ETA: If the pic is of ballast testing tanks, whether the 747-8 or not, why would it be posted as a ''chemtrail'' thing? Why would anyone defend this deceitful practice?

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: mrthumpy
My brother's friend's dad is Air Chief Marshall in the RAF and he says that chemtrails are a hoax.

It could be that he doesn't know, and if he does, he's afraid to talk about it.

Military people have to think about the safety not only of themselves, but of their loved ones, because the price for divulging secrets affects families, too.

No, I can't back that up with a link; I'm speaking from years of past research and I haven't kept a file of links.

I would suggest you start doing some research of your own.

You won't find this on Metabunk, by the way.

No he is definitely in the know and is never afraid to say anything.

And I've done the research thanks, I even managed to find out that aluminium oxide is a solid!. Chemtrails are a ridiculous hoax kept alive by ignorance, lies and censorship.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: admirethedistance

Well, for copyright to be the true issue, but not stated as such, perhaps you could suggest the reason for that, since you're bringing it up?

Or, if there is some other explanation, what do you say it is? Since you brought it up.

What do I say it is? I say there is no explanation, because, like most things that come from chemtrail believers, there's no truth to it.

It took me all of about 15 seconds to search the image, and find that the original source for it is this Facebook page pushing chemtrails nonsense....

So again, it would seem that some lunatic pushing their chemtrails nonsense is flat-out lying. Imagine that.

originally posted by: network dude
The incredible leap of logic to completely ignore the possibility that a perfectly normal reason (like the picture was taken without permission and misused) exists . . .

You mean "apparently showing the inside of an aircraft used to create chemtrails" is referring to proprietary information for an airline, or classified information?

Either way, it's an aircraft used for chemtrails, according to your reasoning.

. . . yet you jump to thinking men in black are monitoring Facebook posts using this picture is the reason for all those comments you dislike.

What?

Men in black are monitoring Facebook posts. So far, so good.

The rest of your sentence makes no sense.

Step back down here, in reality, where we can have a rational discussion about things. So far, you have run away from every inconvenient question asked of you.

Like where are the peer-reviewed papers?

What do you hope to gain my continuing to post this way?

Wake people up.

a reply to: ConnectDots

You won't find this on Metabunk, by the way.

I'd bet you could find interesting info about the ice budget argument there. Check it out, it's good stuff.

a reply to: ConnectDots

You mean "apparently showing the inside of an aircraft used to create chemtrails" is referring to proprietary information for an airline, or classified information?

TPTB might be getting sloppy. See the article and pics in the link to Wired in my post above.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
You mean "apparently showing the inside of an aircraft used to create chemtrails" is referring to proprietary information for an airline, or classified information?

Either way, it's an aircraft used for chemtrails, according to your reasoning.

www.wired.com...

That link is from DenyObfuscation's post a few above this.

I realize you won't discuss this anymore since you will have been proven wrong again, So I will give you something to run off on a tangent about.

Do you think it's morally OK to lie, if you really believe your cause is just?

Here's the original picture of the inside of the 787:

www.airliners.net...

It's a copyrighted picture, as is stated on the top of the page. When you click on the more info tab, it will tell you the airliners.net policy regarding copyright:

You may not use these photos on any web page, commercial or non-commercial, for profit or non-profit, without written permission from the photographer. You may however link to the photos in the manner described below.

I guess airliners.net and/or the guy who made the picture weren't too happy to see his picture being used for the chemtrail sillyness, and stopped it from being used to further the agenda of the chemtrails idiocy.

a reply to: mrthumpy

I'll take that as a "no."

originally posted by: payt69
Here's the original picture of the inside of the 787:

www.airliners.net...

It's a copyrighted picture, as is stated on the top of the page. When you click on the more info tab, it will tell you the airliners.net policy regarding copyright:

You may not use these photos on any web page, commercial or non-commercial, for profit or non-profit, without written permission from the photographer. You may however link to the photos in the manner described below.

I guess airliners.net and/or the guy who made the picture weren't too happy to see his picture being used for the chemtrail sillyness, and stopped it from being used to further the agenda of the chemtrails idiocy.

OR.....


Reptilian overlords from the Planet Zog came here to spread chemtrails to block the view of their planet sized spacecraft, and they frequent chemtrail sites to supply photos of the inside of their ship, but the Men in Black attempt to thwart their actions by using their space modulator acquired by the defeat of Marvin the Martian.

I am just trying to 'connect the dots'

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: payt69
Here's the original picture of the inside of the 787:

www.airliners.net...

It's a copyrighted picture, as is stated on the top of the page. When you click on the more info tab, it will tell you the airliners.net policy regarding copyright:

You may not use these photos on any web page, commercial or non-commercial, for profit or non-profit, without written permission from the photographer. You may however link to the photos in the manner described below.

I guess airliners.net and/or the guy who made the picture weren't too happy to see his picture being used for the chemtrail sillyness, and stopped it from being used to further the agenda of the chemtrails idiocy.

OR.....


Reptilian overlords from the Planet Zog came here to spread chemtrails to block the view of their planet sized spacecraft, and they frequent chemtrail sites to supply photos of the inside of their ship, but the Men in Black attempt to thwart their actions by using their space modulator acquired by the defeat of Marvin the Martian.

I am just trying to 'connect the dots'

You sound very 'awake' today

But actually your interpretation isn't too far off from some of the claims. Some chemtrail believers actually believed that chemtrails were meant to block the view from Planet X.

www.thetruthdenied.com... thing/

www.youtube.com...

and of course certified UFO nut Alfred Webre (of bill HR 2977 fame):

exopolitics.blogs.com...

originally posted by: network dude
I realize you won't discuss this anymore since you will have been proven wrong again, So I will give you something to run off on a tangent about.

You are incorrigible, aren't you?

I know you're not in violation of the terms and conditions.

However, you are in violation of my concept of common courtesy.

So keep that in mind, in case you need an explanation later if I stop responding to you, altogether.

Do you think it's morally OK to lie, if you really believe your cause is just?

That is a loaded question, isn't it?

That's like have you stopped beating your wife?

Listen to yourself.

originally posted by: Phage
And Griffith was a fraud.

The subject of geoengineering is important for all living things on the planet.

Just on the chance that Griffith was not a fraud at all, but a genuine whistleblower, people should listen.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
Wake people up.

Re. the need to wake up, start at 4:06:

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: Phage
And Griffith was a fraud.

The subject of geoengineering is important for all living things on the planet.

Just on the chance that Griffith was not a fraud at all, but a genuine whistleblower, people should listen.

originally posted by: ConnectDots
Wake people up.

Re. the need to wake up, start at 4:06:

originally posted by: ConnectDots

Ummm...no. Just no. So we should listen to every person who lies, just in case they are not lying ? As long as the subject matter is important enough?

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

More important is:

1. What Facebook thought it was.
   
2. If it's part of a shadow government psychological operation, what their task or particular goal was in this case.

originally posted by: ConnectDots

The caption reads, "Please do not post this photo apparently showing the inside of an aircraft used to create chemtrails on Facebook. Your account may be frozen or even removed."

It doesn't say copyright violation. It seems that if copyright violation were the reason, it would say so.

Not necessarily, if the caption was added because somebody did have their account frozen or removed for previously posting the photo, that could have been the result of copyright infringement but they CLAIM it was for more sensationalist reasons. We KNOW what the photo shows, so the caption is nonsense.

The message sounds as if Facebook is telling the user that the photo is a breach of national security. Perhaps chemtrails are considered a necessary evil?

No, it sounds like whoever wrote it wants you to think it's something scary. Why is your skepticism all one sided?

It may not be true.

It could be part of a psychological operation to keep the public busy throwing mud at each other, like on this thread.

You're almost right. It's part of a psychological operation to bamboozle the less well informed/more susceptible internet readers.

Why have you decided it's not a ballast test set up then?