CHeMtRails In Kentucky

a reply to: brykc14

A blast from the past. Nice to see you back after such a long time away.

I don't believe any studies were done by anyone in a scientific manor to prove chemtrails are anything other than a conspiracy theory. Can you link us to one of these studies please?

originally posted by: brykc14
I live close to an airport I see many planes everyday and I know what contrails look like and these are not contrails.

Are you suggesting that you are seeing contrails from planes coming and going from your nearby airport?

Because if you are, you are a liar.
Straight to the point and rude maybe, but I'm fed up of chemtrail believers pushing the same lies they always do, like that contrails don't spread and dissipate quickly.

There are HUNDREDS of posts and images in this sub forum showing that "fact" to be hogwash. If you are not going to bother reading up on what you are posting about, then i have little time for you.

yeah, I'm having a and day.

I love when this topic comes up... Lol. The backlash from even bringing it up on here is priceless! Hahahahha.. Especially from new members who don't know better. It never ends well, but what a ride!!

(chewing popcorn...)

BTW: I'm not saying you're a newbie brykc14... Just to clarify.

originally posted by: EternalShadow
I love when this topic comes up... Lol. The backlash from even bringing it up on here is priceless! Hahahahha.. Especially from new members who don't know better. It never ends well, but what a ride!!

(chewing popcorn...)

BTW: I'm not saying you're a newbie brykc14... Just to clarify.

So, what do you suggest?

That we say nothing when posters lie and repost the same baseless claims that have been debunked ad nauseous?

Instead of making a clever comment about the people debunking, why don't you address what i mentioned above and ask the Op why he believes the oft spewed rubbish he's posting?

When introduced as "CHeMtRails", what is to be expected.

So there is one of those "orbs" right on the ground or very near ground between the camera and the pallets. Should have walked over with a can or box and captured it.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

I'm not choosing sides, I'm merely observing. This topic is always a heated one and since I don't have a TV, this will do. Lol. Are you going to get upset at me for not engaging directly?? I've already learned my lesson in this arena. Debunk away my friend. 👍

originally posted by: EternalShadow
a reply to: 3danimator2014

I'm not choosing sides, I'm merely observing. This topic is always a heated one and since I don't have a TV, this will do. Lol. Are you going to get upset at me for not engaging directly?? I've already learned my lesson in this arena. Debunk away my friend. 👍

Im not getting upset with anyone. But i have noticed that debunkers get all the flack, just for pointing out facts, whereas chammies are given carte blanche to lie, spread lies, false information etc..with no one questioning them.

You say you are not choosing sides, but you kind of did.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

The lessons I learned were logical views on the subject which still stand in my opinion. It made me consider some things and now I'm awaiting the "tests at altitude" fallback position. Is it OK to enjoy the "flack" in the meantime?

I think either I didn't clarify enough, my idea of humor differs from yours, or perhaps you took it the wrong way. Either or, I'm OK with both positions until solid and impericle data says otherwise.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Another fun learning experience:

Mention of chemtrails on ATS immediately draws organized coordinated attacks from the same handful of members time after time.

There IS something to it.

"Chemtrails do not exist"

Absolute nonsense.

a reply to: Urantia1111

Prove that chemtrails exist.

There are literally hundreds of studies of contrails that prove they're contrails. How many studies are there that prove they're chemtrails? None.

a reply to: brykc14

I've been wondering about the Jet Stream, and how it has become highly "erratic" compared to what it was in the past. I live in the Chicago area, and it seems contrails used to dissipate/"blow away" quickly, but it seems more and more that they don't. I lean toward "chemtrails" just being contrails, but it seems as though something is different over the past 20 years. Could it be the jet stream no longer spending most of it's time moving more or less straight across W to E has changed up the way the atmosphere above us moves?

Just wondering - I feel as though there is a mundane explanation, I just haven't figured it out exactly yet.

originally posted by: brykc14
Actually there have been studies done just google it. They are spraying Aluminium Oxide. And for the record Contrails dissipate after a few of minutes, not spread and get larger and stay visible for hours. I live close to an airport I see many planes everyday and I know what contrails look like and these are not contrails.

Those 'studies' have one problem: they fail to link any findings to aircraft flying overhead at some 7 miles altitude. It's just kindof assumed that they are the ones 'spraying' whatever it is they find in the soil or the water.

In fact the way the 'evidence' was gathered was very amateurish and flawed in the first place. The aluminum oxide they found was from a sample of 'water' that contained soil. In fact on the lab result sheet it states it was 'sludge'. Soil contains abou t 8% aluminum on average.

I'm pretty sure that when you say 'study', you're referring to a film called 'what in the world are they spraying?', since you seem to be parrotting some of it's main talking points (contrails can't persist, aluminum is being sprayed).

These points have been thoroughly debunked long ago. In fact I'm surprised that anyone still brings it up occasionally.

Just for fun, try and ask some of your fellow believers WHY exactly a contrail can't persist. It's a surefire way to get yourself in trouble with believers, because you're not supposed to ask that question. The reason is: they don't know. They're being told that that's the way it is, they believe it, but they don't know WHY they believe it.

There's no science to back it up. It's actually the exact opposite: cirrus clouds can persist and expand given the right conditions. And a contrail is just a cirrus cloud (cloud consisting of ice particles), and it will persist if the air meets certain conditions (such as saturated for ice).

Your statement about living close to an airport is so typical for chemtrail believers too. It's such a display of the ignorance needed to be a chemtrail believer. What does living close to an airport mean? I live close to an airport too, but the thing about airports is that the planes landing and taking off there are LOW in altitude, and nowhere near the cruise altitude they're at when they produce contrails. So it's a meaningless statement. And somehow you connect that with knowing what a contrail looks like. Well apparently you don't, since you've got everything mixed up.

It's this kind of stupidity (sorry, but can't put it any other way) when it comes to aviation and meteorology that we see ocver and over again in believers. It really is a pattern.

I hope you will inoculate yourself to falling for this kind of nonsense again by actually familiarizing yourself with the pertinent subjects. You're not going to get any good info from conspiracy sites, which are just echo chambers meant to boost egos and propagate nonsense as fact. It'd really help if you looked into the actual science a bit more. Maybe start with the properties of contrails and the conditions in which they persist.

Anyway good luck with all that. You might feel a slight sting, but don't worry, that's just your ego.. it's pretty useless anyway, so you can just ignore it

a reply to: dogstar23

New engines. Higher bypass, more efficient, more contrails.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: dogstar23

New engines. Higher bypass, more efficient, more contrails.

Thank you Zaph - I meant to add some of that in as other possibilities. It's reasonable to think, "something has changed." What's not reasonable is to automatically ignore the list of possibilities, such as new engines, etc. At one point, I started believing in chemtrails because I knew what I was seeing was different than what I'd seen as a kid - I finally came around to realize there may well be a legitimate (or multiple legitimate) explanations I hadn't yet considered. I think the shock of realizing the change may be what leads many to see something nefarious in their skies changing.

More and better information = more and better understanding.

Thanks again

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Another fun learning experience:

Mention of chemtrails on ATS immediately draws organized coordinated attacks from the same handful of members time after time.

There IS something to it.

"Chemtrails do not exist"

Absolute nonsense.

Change the record mate. If THATS your proof, that we all speak out against stupid concepts and lies, then you are a fool.

Why don't you try telling us what we have said that wrong...i dare you. I dare you to show us how we are wrong. I know you won't, you come in, call us shills and now will run away, like all chammies. Boring

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Another fun learning experience:

Mention of chemtrails on ATS immediately draws organized coordinated attacks from the same handful of members time after time.

There IS something to it.

"Chemtrails do not exist"

Absolute nonsense.

I don't organize or coordinate (or even regularly speak with) any other members here. I have better things to do. I "attack" chemtrails, because the idea is idiotic, and anyone with so much as a 5th grade education knows this.

Deny ignorance. Don't embrace it.

originally posted by: dogstar23

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: dogstar23

New engines. Higher bypass, more efficient, more contrails.

Thank you Zaph - I meant to add some of that in as other possibilities. It's reasonable to think, "something has changed." What's not reasonable is to automatically ignore the list of possibilities, such as new engines, etc. At one point, I started believing in chemtrails because I knew what I was seeing was different than what I'd seen as a kid - I finally came around to realize there may well be a legitimate (or multiple legitimate) explanations I hadn't yet considered. I think the shock of realizing the change may be what leads many to see something nefarious in their skies changing.

More and better information = more and better understanding.

Thanks again

in the last 20 years something monumental has changed. The increase in air traffic. The numbers are staggering to comprehend. And you couple that with the new engines, which are more prone to make trails, and it would be a conspiracy in itself if nobody did notice.

I am of the theory that it's where you get your answer from first that determines weather you believe in science or fantasy though. If you see trails, and question them, but ask someone who actually understands contrails, clouds and weather, they will offer you an explanation that you requested, and will listen to, and it will make perfect sense and won't need any additional hyperbole to make it real.

However, if you ask a chemtrail believer, you will be trained in all the horrific things "they" (they being the government) have done in the past, shown patents for things, and trained how NOT to engage in conversations about this with "paid government agents" as they will lie and tell you things like "those are just contrails and I could explain it to you if you like" which is just what "they" would tell you.

But, to date, nothing has been brought into the discussion that proves anything other than the trails are likely contrails.

a reply to: Urantia1111

Another fun learning experience: Mention of chemtrails on ATS immediately draws organized coordinated attacks from the same handful of members time after time. There IS something to it. "Chemtrails do not exist" Absolute nonsense.

I will ask you this question as I do with most who believe they exist...

Where is the evidence from one sampled while it was in the air?

First thing to do is get an actual sample in the air that shows they exist then you can say there is something to it...until that happens there is nothing to it.

Chemtrails exist...absolute nonsense.

a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

I don't organize or coordinate (or even regularly speak with) any other members here. I have better things to do.

Some seem to think we meet in a war room and go over tactics on dealing with chemtrail believers...it really is amazing.