Are We Being Sprayed? NASA Got Called Out

a reply to: cooperton


You are seeing fleets of aircraft flying at "about 20 km"? That's about 65,000 feet. Are you sure?

Do you know what the stratosphere even is?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: mrthumpy

Methods of delivering the required mass to the stratosphere depend on the required delivery altitude, assuming that the highest required altitude would be that needed to access the lower tropical stratosphere, about 20 km, then the most cost-effective delivery method would probably be a custom built fleet of aircraft, although rockets, aircraft/rocket combinations, artillery and balloons have all been suggested.

Yeah the part in bold is exactly what we see in the skies. fleets of aircrafts with persisting chemtrails that eventually fog the entire sky. Not sure what your point is

20km is 65,000 feet. Not sure how you're missing the point

a reply to: mrthumpy


He seems to think that commercial aircraft routinely fly 20km up, whole fleets of them.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: mrthumpy


He seems to think that commercial aircraft routinely fly 20km up, whole fleets of them.

I think it's more the usual case of chemtrail believers not reading the evidence they think supports their case

originally posted by: mrthumpy

20km is 65,000 feet. Not sure how you're missing the point

The Concorde Jet is certified to reach 60,000 feet. It's not outlandish to think that they either compromised the suggested altitude for dumping, or just blew taxpayer money to buy top of the line jets to achieve that height.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: cooperton


You are seeing fleets of aircraft flying at "about 20 km"? That's about 65,000 feet. Are you sure?

Yes I am sure. These projects would definitely not be executed by commercial planes. 65,000 feet in the air is visible from earth. I know this because if commercial flights fly around 35,000 feet, and are clearly visible, then an object twice as far away (70,000 feet) would appear from earth to be half as big... which would still be clearly visible from the ground, especially when there is a trail of chemicals following the jet.

a reply to: cooperton


Where do all these "fleets" of "top of the line jets" take off and land? Who flies, operates, maintains and loads them with these "chemicals"?

a reply to: cooperton


Ah. I see from your previous posts that you also believe that there is a glass ceiling above us which space craft can only pass through if they heat their noses so that they can melt the glass.

That was in 20015, you don't still believe that, do you?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: mrthumpy

20km is 65,000 feet. Not sure how you're missing the point

The Concorde Jet is certified to reach 60,000 feet. It's not outlandish to think that they either compromised the suggested altitude for dumping, or just blew taxpayer money to buy top of the line jets to achieve that height.

Or maybe what you're seeing in the sky isn't stratospheric aerosol injection and you're just clutching at straws rather than face up to the fact that you might be wrong.

I'm sorry the papers YOU posted don't say what you want them to say but you should really do the research and read this stuff like the skeptics and debunkers do

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: cooperton


Ah. I see from your previous posts that you also believe that there is a glass ceiling above us which space craft can only pass through if they heat their noses so that they can melt the glass.

You seem to have taken a liking to me. I'm flattered.

That was in 2015, you don't still believe that, do you?

So now we aren't talking about chemtrails anymore, it has changed to personally attacking me? a very unpleasant tactic.

Care to show in that post where I claimed to believe it? Rather than giving a general hearing to determine the opinions of the ATS community? Do you pursue any new ideas? Or just cement a wall and grave around your current belief system?

i would think NASA, or any other government agency, would be smart enough to avoid a dangerous single-dose event. However, what are the cumulative effects if any? That would be my concern. I know that lithium is associated with cognitive sluggishness as well as memory and verbal interference.

a reply to: oldcarpy

That was in 20015, you don't still believe that, do you?

Still?

ask them in 18000 years.

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
i would think NASA, or any other government agency, would be smart enough to avoid a dangerous single-dose event. However, what are the cumulative effects if any? That would be my concern. I know that lithium is associated with cognitive sluggishness as well as memory and verbal interference.

Cumulative effects from a few pounds dumped in space? Zero I'd say

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
i would think NASA, or any other government agency, would be smart enough to avoid a dangerous single-dose event. However, what are the cumulative effects if any? That would be my concern. I know that lithium is associated with cognitive sluggishness as well as memory and verbal interference.

Cumulative effects from a few pounds dumped in space? Zero I'd say

I think you are missing the cumulative part...

originally posted by: mrthumpy

Cumulative effects from a few pounds dumped in space? Zero I'd say

Yeah just like a little fluoride in the water, what's the worst that could happen?

Why are you ok with the possibility that taxpayer money is being spent to dump toxic garbage in the sky?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: mrthumpy

Cumulative effects from a few pounds dumped in space? Zero I'd say

Yeah just like a little fluoride in the water, what's the worst that could happen?

Why are you ok with the possibility that taxpayer money is being spent to dump toxic garbage in the sky?

No not like a little fluoride in the water at all. What a ridiculous comparison to try and make

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
i would think NASA, or any other government agency, would be smart enough to avoid a dangerous single-dose event. However, what are the cumulative effects if any? That would be my concern. I know that lithium is associated with cognitive sluggishness as well as memory and verbal interference.

Cumulative effects from a few pounds dumped in space? Zero I'd say

I think you are missing the cumulative part...

Not at all. I think you're missing the few pounds in space part

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: cooperton


Ah. I see from your previous posts that you also believe that there is a glass ceiling above us which space craft can only pass through if they heat their noses so that they can melt the glass.

You seem to have taken a liking to me. I'm flattered.

That was in 2015, you don't still believe that, do you?

So now we aren't talking about chemtrails anymore, it has changed to personally attacking me? a very unpleasant tactic.

Care to show in that post where I claimed to believe it? Rather than giving a general hearing to determine the opinions of the ATS community? Do you pursue any new ideas? Or just cement a wall and grave around your current belief system?

That was hardly a personal attack, was it?

True, you never came out and said that you straight up believed it but you did say quite a bit that you found the evidence for said glass ceiling "compelling".

Yes, I am open to new ideas but I do have a filter that tends to filter out stuff that is plainly bonkers. Don't you?

originally posted by: oldcarpy

Yes, I am open to new ideas but I do have a filter that tends to filter out stuff that is plainly bonkers. Don't you?

If most of the stuff we were led to believe growing up is a misconception, then anything remains possible. all the great changes in global consciousness occurred from people pushing the limits of what was thought to be possible.

But look, they even have a cost-analysis of stratospheric albedo modification (Link), which is a fancy phrase meaning the same thing as chemtrails. I could find no senate-approved enactment of these measures, but the fact there is so much literature on albedo modification indicates they are seriously considering it, or there is covert execution of these ideas. from what I have observed, this would make the most sense for the long chemtrails we see in the sky

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: oldcarpy

Yes, I am open to new ideas but I do have a filter that tends to filter out stuff that is plainly bonkers. Don't you?

If most of the stuff we were led to believe growing up is a misconception, then anything remains possible. all the great changes in global consciousness occurred from people pushing the limits of what was thought to be possible.

But look, they even have a cost-analysis of stratospheric albedo modification (Link), which is a fancy phrase meaning the same thing as chemtrails. I could find no senate-approved enactment of these measures, but the fact there is so much literature on albedo modification indicates they are seriously considering it, or there is covert execution of these ideas. from what I have observed, this would make the most sense for the long chemtrails we see in the sky

We consider existing aircraft, a new design airplane optimized for the geoengineering task at altitudes up to 30 km, a new design hybrid airship for the same purpose, rockets, guns, and suspended pipes carrying gas or slurry.

One of these days you might actually read the material you post.

Every single article on STRATOPHERIC aerosol injection states that spraying would occur high up in the STRATOSPHERE yet these documents are constantly used by chemtrail believers to prove that these trails in the upper TROPOSPHERE are geoengineering.

a reply to: cooperton


Some things do remain fairly impossible, though. Like Flat Earth, for instance. One does have to employ a certain amount of critical thinking or you end up believing every crank and nutjob on the internet or Youtube.

I'm all for having an open mind but if you take that it extremes their is a point where a person just becomes a credulous fool.

Who might "they" be that might be "seriously considering it"?