Painting the sky..(pics)

Originally posted by Affirmative Reaction

Originally posted by Dramon
Well, I'd have to agree to disagree with you on this one. There have been many a well documented research topic that was shot down, only to find out that it was valid later - and no, I'm not talking about science in the 1500s.

How about an example of one such study????

Well, now let's see - what new idea hasn't initially been met with open criticism or ridicule when first introduced:

flight (powered or not)
spaceflight
black holes
planets around other stars
cloning
stopping/slowing photons

I could go on and on, but why bother. Scientists are not some special breed of human - just like anyone else they have egos, and all to often just because they couldn't see it, they ridicule it. It's been shown again and again throughout history, why would it be any different know, in fact, it isn't.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
.... who else have I left out?

I think you forgot the entire chemical industry, which must surely be running at full capacity to procude all those billions of gallons of "spray" every day, blus the entire aluminum industry, (ditto), plus all of the universities (they all have meteorology faculties, which are keeping mum), plus the trucking industry (gotta get the tankers of spray form the factories to the airports), and the manufactureres of aircraft (Boeing and Airbus must have their factories going full tilt, to turn out all those planes), plus the entire news media industry, all observatories and the entire astronomy and cosmology industries, the entire agricultural industry (don't want the farmers reporting all that aluminium and barium that ends up covering their fields!), plus....

Well, lets just summarize, and say that about half of the world's population must be involved...

(And I'm probably STILL forgetting somebody...)

Dramon,

so true that new ideas are rejected before being considered particularily by those that should embrace them first. The problem with theories is that they are constructed to fit into bigger puzzles and after awhile the puzzle is quite large indeed.

to replace a piece of the puzzle can jeapordize the entire puzzle itself that is why I think they resist change.

What If I won a nobel prize for a theory that at the time sounded good but ten years later was proven totally invalid or at best incomplete. Would not my ego resist this?

Originally posted by THENEO

to replace a piece of the puzzle can jeapordize the entire puzzle itself that is why I think they resist change.

that's right. this is the web. if "they" lose just one arguement out here in cyberspace, the whole house of cards is in jeopardy.

Originally posted by Dramon

Well, now let's see - what new idea hasn't initially been met with open criticism or ridicule when first introduced:

Oh boy. One more person who doesn't understand science. In fact, if you look around in the science journals, I would sincerely hope that you find EVERY SINGLE new idea has been meet with extreme skepticism! If you could show me one that was NOT met with skpeticsm, I'd be highly suspicious of it!

You see, contrary to popular belief, the job of a scientist is not to PROVE something to be true, but rather to do his best to DISPROVE it! This is called "Falsifying the hypothesis", and is the main activity that scientists are involved in, all the time. Only when numerous attempts have been made to falsify a hypothesis, and all of them have failed, then scientists start to think that maybe they are on to something.

You really should try learning about a subject before you try to debunk it.

[ I think you forgot the entire chemical industry, which must surely be running at full capacity to procude all those billions of gallons of "spray" every day, blus the entire aluminum industry, (ditto), plus all of the universities (they all have meteorology faculties, which are keeping mum), plus the trucking industry (gotta get the tankers of spray form the factories to the airports), and the manufactureres of aircraft (Boeing and Airbus must have their factories going full tilt, to turn out all those planes), plus the entire news media industry, all observatories and the entire astronomy and cosmology industries, the entire agricultural industry (don't want the farmers reporting all that aluminium and barium that ends up covering their fields!), plus....


Do not the Masons control most of these organizations now? They do not need to control everyone but only those in positions of societal power.

But I forgot you don't believe in ANY conspiracies anyways. I am still not sure why you come here?

Originally posted by THENEO
so true that new ideas are rejected before being considered particularily by those that should embrace them first.

No, they are rejected by those who should NOT embrace them. They are rejected by the peers of the scientist who propsed them. If they were embraced without argument, as you say they should be, then those scientists who did the embracing should all be fired on the spot, becuase they would no be doing their job.

The problem with theories is that they are constructed to fit into bigger puzzles and after awhile the puzzle is quite large indeed.

No, theoris are not "constructed". They are arrived at. Hypothesis are put forward, predictions are made based on the hypothesis, and then every scientist in the field tries to falsify the hypothesis by showing that the predictions do not pan out. If it turns out that the predictions DO stand the test of peer review, then the hypothesis stands some chance of being accepted.

to replace a piece of the puzzle can jeapordize the entire puzzle itself

No, pieces of the puzzle are regulary replaced, just as soon as they have been falsifed. It happens all the time. Every time that a scientist falsifies part of a theory, the theory either gets modifed so that it cannot be falisifed any more in that way, or if that isn't possible then it is abandoned, and a new theory will be propsed.

that is why I think they resist change.

No, they resist change because that is their job.

What If I won a nobel prize for a theory that at the time sounded good but ten years later was proven totally invalid or at best incomplete. Would not my ego resist this? No, why should it? Science does not work BECAUSE of a scientists beliefs, feelings, and emotions: It works DESPITE his beliefs, feelings, and emotions. That is what peer review is all about.

Your grasp of the scientific method seems to be somewhat tenuous...

Oh my grasp of the scientific method is good,

but you truly mean the masonic method don't you?

and why would Francis Bacon and others carve out a method but to inhibit true science and discovery so that the secrets could remain in the hands of the secret societies themselves.

they have conditioned you very well.

Originally posted by THENEO
Do not the Masons control most of these organizations now? They do not need to control everyone but only those in positions of societal power.

So you really think that all those millions of people who are not masons, and who work on the "program" or whatever you want to call it, would just carry on spraying themselves and their families, and not care at all? How do you explain that? Not one single disgruntled whistleblower? Not one accidentally leaked scrap of evidence? If the entire US government cannot keep secret the rising and falling of Bill Clintons zipper inside the Oval Office itself, and only a handful of people knoew about it, then how on earth could they keep secret such a massively huige conspiracy? I think you give them FAR too much credit!

But I forgot you don't believe in ANY conspiracies anyways. I am still not sure why you come here?

Who said that I don't believe in conspiracies? I never said that! Why do I come here? To debunk the impossible, way out, fringe conspiracies that are actually scams, cons and hoaxes. Why do I do that? Becuase I hate to see the con artists get away with scamming the gullible, who don't know any better and can't defend themseleves.

So why was it that you said you were here? Why is it that you are so determined to carry on promoting the chemtrail hoax, after it has been so thouroughly debunked?

Originally posted by THENEO
Oh my grasp of the scientific method is good,

Well then why are you so intent on pretending that you know absolutely nothing about it? Why do you make such a good show of ignorance?

and why would Francis Bacon and others carve out a method but to inhibit true science and discovery so that the secrets could remain in the hands of the secret societies themselves.

Sir Francis Bacon? And what exactly does he have to do with the scientific method? Please explain what you are getting at here, because you sure do seem to be ranting and raving at things you know nothing about....

they have conditioned you very well.

They have? Strange, but I was under the impression that I figured all this out by myself...

Why is it that trolls always resort to attacking the poster, instead of the issue, as soon as the run into real science? Why is it that trolls always refuse to even try to defend their own words, when they are exposed as being ignorant ramblings?

Strange, that...

If you do not understand the role of people like Francis Bacon in what is now the academic/scientific world today then you sir are the one that needs an education IMHO.

Originally posted by Dramon

Originally posted by Affirmative Reaction

Originally posted by Dramon
Well, I'd have to agree to disagree with you on this one. There have been many a well documented research topic that was shot down, only to find out that it was valid later - and no, I'm not talking about science in the 1500s.

How about an example of one such study????

Well, now let's see - what new idea hasn't initially been met with open criticism or ridicule when first introduced:

flight (powered or not)
spaceflight


I could go on and on, but why bother. Scientists are not some special breed of human - just like anyone else they have egos, and all to often just because they couldn't see it, they ridicule it. It's been shown again and again throughout history, why would it be any different know, in fact, it isn't.

Wait a minute...I thought I asked for an example of a study that was proven, yet not accepted by the scientific community, didn't I?


Lets see...Flight...after the wright brothers, it was pretty much a proven fact...where's the unacceptability?

Space flight? who, other than the conspiracy theorists who say it never happened, doens't accept that we don't regularly fly in space?

black holes
planets around other stars
cloning
stopping/slowing photons


I think these have all been proven, and readily accepted by the scientific community...so...I say again...


How about an example of one such study????

Originally posted by THENEO
Billybob,

I think Howard/Alternative/xxxx etc., they are all the same spook.

I nominate them for December's ATS SPOOK Of the Month Award!

Let's start a petition cause they have surely earned it!

I guess I must be "Alternative" here...HA! someone needs to read better....

Guess that the U2U's I have traded with Howard mean I'm a split personality talking to myself then, eh, Neo?

Whenever someone looses an argument or cannot come up with something constructive here, they start calling names and throwing around the "SPOOK" title...

Can't you stand on your merits? Your arguments can't, but as a person, can't you admit when you could be wrong instead of resorting to silly childish namecalling to try to draw the attenting away from your failure?


Come on...be a man...

Originally posted by StuartAllsop

Well, lets just summarize, and say that about half of the world's population must be involved...

(And I'm probably STILL forgetting somebody...)

one bully can control the will of a hundred people, if the people are divided(and their families are threatened and high tech is involved, mind control, etc.). so, once again, you show us your excellent reason and infallible logic. ever seen the untouchables? if of a sudden, the mafia is the legal system(duh, that IS what happened to america) it becomes easy to generate an atmosphere of fear and distrust which makes ALL more easily controlled. it worked for hitler.
even if half the world was in on it by willful volition, that would make sense if the world may be polarizing into a final battle of darkness and light, as many believe.

i don't believe anything, so you can stop calling me a chemmie any time now. if the job of a scientists is not to PROVE something to be true, but rather to do his best to DISPROVE it! then how come you're not calling me a scientist? i'm doing my best to disprove your contrail theory(and purely for the pursuit of truth, too!).

i'd really love to be wrong, but like i say, my memory keeps nagging me. things up there just look different now.
i'm going to help you. if you can convince me, you can probably convince anyone. the best argument i've heard so far, is a different kind of jet engine that is more common now. perhap's the fuel mixture has changed within the last five to ten years, as well?

i really just want to know what i'm seeing is normal, and not only have you guys not convinced me, you've made me more suspicious with your tactics, vehemence, vitriol and sheer persistance, AND the fact that you two(howard, stuart) just showed up to 'debunk' this particular thread. it seems VERY important that you make anyone who thinks jet exhaust my not be as healthy as wheat grass, is an unreasoning kook. if we are all just nuts, why do you care so much?

p.s. i don't think farmers test their food for barium and aluminum. i think they just pick it and sell it. mmmm, good. one of my theories is that 'they' want us to ingest it(barium) so that 3D imaging tech(via HAARP and satellite tech) can be used to locate everybody, anywhere, anytime. scary thought, that one! kooky, yeah?
the aluminum is reported by some to be a common non-toxic inert silicate(very fine sand, basically), which would only cause respiratory problems due to the small (seven to ten microns) size(culling the old and infirm?, while reducing global warming(reflection)? or ...blocking out consciousness raising higher vibrations from the alleged photon belt?(this is out there, i know, but i have no problem saying, 'i don't know' what the hell is going on. the cause and effect of the war on terror proves to me that something is going on, though).

Frankly your names don't matter because it appears to me that you are either:

1. the same person
2. part of the same operation
3. from the same organization

or add the truth where it is applicable.

I don't know what your problem is but YOU and a few other new people that inhabit this thread have a STRONG need to fight with people. But that is not the problem, you have been directed to dozens among hundreds of websites that exist on the web and if you wish you can fight with these people.

I frankly do not have time for this nor do I have to prove anything to you. With my own eyes and numerous hours of investigation in the past and also based on observations and affects on other people I soundly came to the conclusion that this is a real conspiracy.

That is it, accept it, deal with it, too bad for you.

I have worse news for you too my friend, once you become brave enough and enlightened enough to see this conspiracy for what it is then you are facing numerous others. I don't know if you can handle it really.

geo.arc.nasa.gov...

Cirrus Cloud and Climate Modifications due to Subsonic Aircraft Exhaust

Key Investigators: Eric J. Jensen, Owen B. Toon

NASA has recently initiated a program to evaluate the potential effects of current and future commercial aircraft fleets on atmospheric chemical processes and climate. As part of this program, we are modeling the effects of subsonic aircraft exhaust on upper tropospheric cirrus clouds. Using sophisticated computer programs, we have developed a detailed ice cloud microphysical model here at NASA Ames Research Center. The model simulates cloud processes such as ice crystal formation, growth, and transport. The formation and evolution of aircraft-generated contrails is simulated to determine what processes and environmental conditions control the growth, spreading, and dissipation of contrails. In addition, the formation of natural cirrus is simulated with and without aircraft exhaust soot particles to predict the impact of commercial air traffic on the frequency of cirrus occurrence and their impact on climate.

Currently, the properties of soot generated by aircraft exhaust are not well understood. We do not know how effective these particles are as ice nuclei. We are using our cirrus cloud microphysical model to simulate the impact of soot particles on cirrus cloud frequency and climate for a wide range of assumptions about the soot properties. We are evaluating these effects for a range of environmental conditions, including cirrus anvils generated by strong convective storms and thin cirrus generated in fair-weather conditions. A final determination of the exhaust impact on cirrus and climate will require aircraft observations of natural and anthropogenic upper tropospheric particles, laboratory studies of ice nucleation on soot particles, and numerical modeling of the formation of cirrus altered by exhaust soot particles.

Ok, my second part of this issue:

Do purpose built sprayers exist for the purpose of saturating the atmosphere with metallic particles to assist HAARP with weather modification experimentation?

These metal particles (aluminum/barium mix?) are supposed to allow the atmosphere to heat up faster when the ELF waves from HAARP target the saturated area.

I don't have enough reliable info to be even able to form a coherent sentence on this one. Any thoughts on this?


[Edited on 17-12-2003 by dexxy]

Originally posted by dexxy
geo.arc.nasa.gov...

A final determination of the exhaust impact on cirrus and climate will require aircraft observations of natural and anthropogenic upper tropospheric particles, laboratory studies of ice nucleation on soot particles, and numerical modeling of the formation of cirrus altered by exhaust soot particles.

HAHAHAHA!!! you rock, dexxy! right from the horses mouth. NASA doesn't understand it but howard and stuart do! NASA admits they're screwing around up there, but howard and stuart won't. HAHAHAHAHA!!!

Here is some intersting info on potential weather modification, have a look at the part on weather control:

Quote from site:

The third project also utilizes the mixture of barium salts in the atmosphere.

Weather control is a project of the U.S. Air Force and utilizes Nikola Tesla concepts of radio frequency radiation against the ionosphere above the earth and to control the jet stream.

Fragile life support systems in our environment are being manipulated, tested, and altered by government for military advantage. Air Force documents implied, �the risks are high but the rewards are worth it.� The mixture of barium salts, supporting moisture, is encouraged along the weather fronts and manipulated in a control fashion. It is believed microwave energy is also utilized in the weather control program. Weather data is also a required input to the VTRPE program of the RFMP system.

In the broadest sense, weather control can be divided into two major categories: suppression and intensification of weather patterns. In extreme cases, it might involve the creation of completely new weather patterns, attenuation or control of severe storms, or even alteration of global climate on a far-reaching and/or long-lasting scale. In the mildest and least controversial cases it may consist of inducing or suppressing precipitation, clouds, or fog for short times over a region. Other low-intensity applications might include the alteration and/or use of near space as a medium to enhance communications, disrupt active or passive sensing, or other purposes. The primary areas include generation and dissipation of precipitation, clouds, and fog; modification of localized storm systems; and the use of the ionosphere and near space for space control and communications dominance.

home1.gte.net...

oh ya, here is a really interesting cloud formation, taken from that site, is it a photoshop special?:




[Edited on 17-12-2003 by dexxy]