I was in Palmdale and the Chem-trail pollution was off the charts

a reply to: fema1

I wonder if the Appleman chart can be used to prove chemtrails are NOT contrails.

a reply to: fema1

I too would like to see some sort of evidence of "them" poisoning us with what appear to be simple contrails. It should be a simple thing to do as far as taking air samples where you see what you term "chem-trails" and break it all down to what exactly is poisoning us. I believe I saw such a study being done but no results ever put forward just more blanket accusations and cries of wolf.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: fema1

What debate? I'm not trying to troll man, but if you're gonna debate then debate. I know what a contrail is. You haven't given any actual data about how you know the difference between a contrail and a chemtrail, other than an arbitrary time frame and anecdotal stories about something you claim to have seen.

Here is a military witness!

originally posted by: fema1

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: fema1

What debate? I'm not trying to troll man, but if you're gonna debate then debate. I know what a contrail is. You haven't given any actual data about how you know the difference between a contrail and a chemtrail, other than an arbitrary time frame and anecdotal stories about something you claim to have seen.

Here is a military witness!

Does she present scientific evidence, actual tested samples of air and particulates from within one of these trails, in situ? Can those samples be independently re-tested by any lab capable of running the same tests to corroborate any findings? That is how science works to get at the truth without being blinded by faith and baseless accusations for political (or other) gain.

They measured the amount of viruses and cancers???? How the effing eff can you say there were two cancers found in the analysis?
Heck, blood tests can't even detect cancers yet, let alone tell you which kind. Only the amount of white blood cells tells you that something is not right and then other tests have to be conducted.
Looking at that picture has just made me much stupider than I was before.
And the rest [if there has ever been an analysis], where and how did they take the sample?
What method of analysis was used? What instruments, by which credible laboratory?

I worked in a chem lab for many years, doing just that, analysing unknown samples. There are important guidelines that have to be followed not to contaminate a sample.
These morons probably just stood under the sky full of contrails and measured something [eff knows what] and they detected the exact number of viruses and cancers...yeah right.

You must be as naive as a newborn not to question this. It's either a pi55take or published by someone who'd believe anything at all. Including that rainbows are due to chemtrails [there was a clip once on YT where a woman said just that].

I am really worried about the dangerous assumptions people can make from one image on the internet.

I also wanted to check the amount of flights over the area where the image was taken but it's not given. Only Idaho. Even as a European I know that Idaho is probably quite a big place.

Wow. Gullible and uninformed pseudo'science'. I am facepalming so hard, I'm getting a headache.

originally posted by: fema1

so chemtrails are cloud seeding? Strange that seeding an existing cloud at low altitude would have an effect on clouds 6 miles up. Perhaps OP can explain the mechanics of that.

a reply to: network dude

Chemtrails are lower than cloud seeding ?

Why do they bother cloud seeding when they could just send a few jets with normal everyday engines to create a bunch of contrails....

6 miles up from what, clouds can be at any height, contrails AND CHEMTRAILS, I have parachuted through clouds and "contrails" from as low as 12,500 feet.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: network dude

Chemtrails are lower than cloud seeding ?

Why do they bother cloud seeding when they could just send a few jets with normal everyday engines to create a bunch of contrails....

6 miles up from what, clouds can be at any height, contrails AND CHEMTRAILS, I have parachuted through clouds and "contrails" from as low as 12,500 feet.

Well if that plane is cloud seeding what sort of chemicals are they using?

WOW SHOCKER THIS WOMAN SLAMS THE HAMMER ON THE SNIP

a reply to: fema1

The picture of the plane wing you posted is from a cloud seeding operation 2 years ago in India to make it rain. Cloud seeding for that purpose is not considered part of the "chemtrails" debate. Using unsubstantiated pictures out of context without doing due diligence to qualify the source is not helping. It is only spreading more lies and fears. I ask, for what reason? To sell books/videos/personal-appearances? That, IMO, is the conspiracy here.


Download youtube to mp3: On nine places in maharashtra State caused Artificial Rain

Attention Please:

The topic is NEVER EACH OTHER OR OPINIONS OF EACH OTHER.

Any more name calling may result in a posting ban. Discuss and debate the topic and only the topic without the insults.

This will be the only warning.

Do not reply to this message.

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: fema1

The picture of the plan wing you posted is from a cloud seeding operation 2 years ago in India to make it rain. Cloud seeding for that purpose is not considered part of the "chemtrails" debate. Using unsubstantiated pictures out of context without doing sue diligence to qualify the source is not helping. It is only spreading more lies and fears. I ask, for what reason? To sell books/videos/personal-appearances? That, IMO, is the conspiracy here.


Download youtube to mp3: On nine places in maharashtra State caused Artificial Rain

No one is perfect and if I made a mistake on this plane I apologize, however irrelevant chem-trails exist!

originally posted by: fema1

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: fema1

The picture of the plan wing you posted is from a cloud seeding operation 2 years ago in India to make it rain. Cloud seeding for that purpose is not considered part of the "chemtrails" debate. Using unsubstantiated pictures out of context without doing sue diligence to qualify the source is not helping. It is only spreading more lies and fears. I ask, for what reason? To sell books/videos/personal-appearances? That, IMO, is the conspiracy here.


Download youtube to mp3: On nine places in maharashtra State caused Artificial Rain

No one is perfect and if I made a mistake on this plane I apologize, however irrelevant chem-trails exist!

OK, apology accepted. However, you still have not provided any actual evidence (or results from repeatable tests) to backup your claim. The claimant is the one responsible for that, not the person to which the claim is being stated.

So, I await your posting of evidence, that can be independently verified by a scientific method.

Until that time, this is all hearsay and anecdotal, which is only spreading fear and ignorance.

I have to thank ATS for firmly putting me in the "chem"trail denial category.

10 years ago I was on the fence due to BS click bait like in the OP.

So until I see an ACTUAL sample taken from 30,000 feet of an ACTUAL "chem"trail I will dismiss all the clickbait BS.

JUST TAKE A VERIFIABLE SAMPLE FFS. It's not rocket science........

a reply to: fema1

So...an explanation of what a contrail is, is 'downplaying' the existence of made up chemtrails? Is that how this works?

a reply to: fema1

No, I have a hell of a lot more experience than you do getting my hands dirty actually working on real aircraft and learning how they work, instead of believing anything I read online.

a reply to: fema1

Contrails have been seen doing exactly that. The first persistent contrail was seen in 1915. It was reported to spread out and look exactly like a cloud.

a reply to: fema1

You realize that she said herself she knew nothing about chemtrails, right? Her whistleblowing was about how they stored chemicals used for other things on base.