over kill chemtrails (pics)

Originally posted by Essan

Originally posted by Point of No Return
reply to post by Phage

 

So how do you explain why so many people are seeing the sky being hazed up, when they weren't seeing this en masse 15 years ago.

Simple. They aren't very observant.

Other people have been seeing the sky hazed up for decades and have been photographing it, reporting it and studying it.

How do you explain this?


[edit on 24-7-2010 by Essan]

It is one documented case of persistent contrails, I'm not debating that.

Why is there suddenly a phenomenon that people see en masse, when they clearly didn't 10-15 years ago.

Not being observant doesn't cut it, everybody knows it didn't use to be like this.

reply to post by fallinstar


Fallinstar.....

i think its sad people would rather believe thier government is here to help them with all the injustices going on today

"I think its sad people would rather believe" in chemtrails.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by Point of No Return


Not being observant doesn't cut it, everybody knows it didn't use to be like this.

Obviously not everybody "knows" it. Many people who have been watching the skiy for decades disagree; as far as I can see the majority in this thread also does not come to the same conclusions when looking at the sky as you.

Here's a bigger perspective. Let's make a list. AUTHORIZED SLOW KILLS Pharaceuticals GMOs Dispersants Nanotechnology Vehicle/Plane Pollution Pesticides Cell Tower Waves Fast Foods Homogenization Food Irradiation Cancer Treatments Oil Slicks Vaccination Acid Rain Factory Pollution Factory Runoff Over-taxation Stress Endorsed Ultraviolence Radiated Produce (ie Brazil Nuts) Nuclear Power Plants Politicians Lies Mr Noodles ... sorry if my list is out of whack; this is from a cell phone. Point is, chemtrails are not a big stretch of the imagination either, as some here make-believe they are.

Originally posted by Point of No Return
Why is there suddenly a phenomenon that people see en masse, when they clearly didn't 10-15 years ago.

Not being observant doesn't cut it, everybody knows it didn't use to be like this.

Well here is one example.

Originally posted by SinkingSun
Since last year, I have always watched the sky for trails. It seemed to be a completely steady schedule until sometime around the late spring this year. For a few weeks or months, we had amazingly clear skies, no trails and no abnormal clouds.

See, it's not so much that people were less observant, but now there are a lot more people, such as SinkingSun, who are being much more observant. If you had no reason to acknowledge contrails in the past, you wouldn't remember them as anything important. But once you assign some kind of importance to them, you are going to start remembering them, and actively looking for them. This goes a long way towards explaining a percieved increase, along with the fact that there has been an increase in air travel.

I have always been fascinated by planes (as a kid I used to beg to go to the airport, where I could sit for hours watching planes), and would constantly read books about aircraft and how they work. I had a fair understanding of what contrails were when I was 6 years old, and recognised them whenever I saw them. Here in NZ, we don't have anywhere near as much flight travel over our skies as the US, but contrails have still been around since as long as I can remember.
Saying "everybody knows it didn't use to be like this" is a pretty broad based assumption, which is really just your opinion. Clearly not everyone thinks this.

I'm not saying that some kind of chemtrails do not exist, but most of the arguments brought forth by those proclaiming mass chemtrails are weak assumptions based on little evidence. It seems that all you need to believe in mass chemtrails is a distrust in governments and a general lack of usefull knowledge and reasoning, along with the ability to ignore those who bring logic and reason, like this...

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
Look i dont trust the conventual mind or its sciences!
an i dont care what you or any other conventual minded person has to say on this subject i know the difference between contrails an chemtrails even though it seems you don't!

Unlike DCDAVECLARKE, I would be willing to look at all possibilites and evidence, instead of just accepting anything that agrees with my own bias. Showing a video of a prop plane with blatant measuring devices, and then ridiculing others for not believing is pretty sad, IMO. I am open to ideas, but to me the pics in the OP looks exactly like a flight corridor should when atmospheric conditions are favourable for contrail production. Feel free to prove otherwise.

reply to post by Northwarden


Your links are a classic example of pseudo-science.

contrailscience.com...

reply to post by Chadwickus


I live on the direct flight path for Tampa international and you can see the normal incoming-outgoing traffic and then see multiple flights allot higher up leaving chem-trails all day making pretty grids in the sky, some flying east to west witch is not normal for commercial air traffic.

They are not contrails. Contrails don't grow all day long.

Try to explain all the chem-trails that are not near any normal flight corridors.

Yeah those are chemtrails all right. What bugs me about people who don't believe in chemtrails is: chemtrails often are not in ordinary flight patterns. Do you know what kind of permission / clearance you need to go (fly) out of an ordinary flight pattern? The clearance MUST be high. Also, on days of chemtrails where I live, approach patterns to the airport will be diverted to another runway while the chemtrails are taking place. Once they stop, regular air traffic is switched to their ordinary approach paths.

And, about a month ago, I photographed a remote-controlled drone flying next to a passenger jet on approach. Pretty interesting.

Chemtrails are real folks. Look up, pay attention. Ask questions. Look beyond the initial layer of research.

reply to post by Sky watcher


??? I am not sure what this is supposed to mean...

I live on the direct flight path for Tampa international...

I've flown into TPA many, many times. The runways are aligned north/south. So, you live either directly north, or south of the airport?? (I'm guessing north? Unless you're on the peninsula?)


Is that what you mean, you are under/to the side and see the airplanes taking off and landing?

...and then see multiple flights allot higher up leaving chem-trails all day making pretty grids in the sky...

UMM....no, CONTRAILS. These "multiple flights" would be airpalnes passing you by, not departing or arriving in Tampa.

And, "grids" because they are on DIFFERENT headings! You do realize there is an East Coast of Florida, right??

Flights that have left, say...Miami and are headed westbound might pass over your area...and flights going to Central or South America will too....going south on the way there, and north on the way back.

Flights from...oh, Chicago; Minneapolis; Denver; (or pick a city...Toronto, Quebec...etc, etc).

So, after I have cleared that up, can you see why this is wrong?:

...some flying east to west witch is not normal for commercial air traffic.

Check your map again.

Contrails don't grow all day long.

Contrails, once formed, can stay around, depending on conditions aloft....and merge with any cirrus that also develops. For, really, they are a form of cirrus cloud, in essence.

reply to post by OneNationUnder


Apparently, now, there are two of you who didn't bother to read the page immediately prior to this one!!!

How do you 'know' what "normal flight patterns" are??

Typing, without thinking I'm afraid.....

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
reply to post by spikey

 

... there is a depopulation agenda going on at the moment and also weather motivaction without the consent of the people among other things that suit tptb,
...
since the 60s we have been aware of this but what can i say its up to you guys now to fight for the truth!

Since the 60's? And after 50 years the "depopulation" conspiracy has net results of ~ 3.5 billion+ INCREASE in population?

The "truth" is in your imagination.

"Weather motivaction(sic)" has been going on for more than 200 years to help farmers and others dependent on ground water. Please gather facts, instead of posting your fears and paranoia as if they were fact.

reply to post by SinkingSun

Thanks for joining; we welcome your contributions.

Let's start with this:

It's ridiculous how many people brush off the FACT that chem-trails exist.

We've asked before, but no one has yet provided "FACT" to support this statement. Please understand that "You-Tube" is not a reliable "source," and that "wiki-" sites have even less value as factual sources.

Please share with us your studies, reports, documentation, the nature of the threat, harm caused and citations to actual cases in support. I, for one, can't wait.

People will believe in a God they have never seen, but they will ignore a health hazard right in front of their eyes.

Please describe the "health hazard." What is the hazard?
What are the effects? Where are the case studies? Who are the victims? Please identify these for us.

Again, welcome to ATS. I look forward to your factual reply.


.

reply to post by fallinstar

why not observe every shred of evidence via internet.

Please, join with SS, and enlighten us with "every shred of evidence."

Or at least some of it that is not based upon speculation, fear and conjecture.

I can't wait.

Deny ignorance!

jw

Chemtrails are probably part of a climate modulation experiment.

Delaying ot stopping the next ice age, and/or mitigating the effects of Human CO2 emissions.

reply to post by Point of No Return
Hey, you're invited too! Please join FS, SS and the OP and provide FACTS to support your fearmongering.

... everybody knows ...

is NOT evidence.

You can do better. Or can you?

Thus far, none of you and your brethren have responded with FACT. A "You-Tube" video or a "wiki" quote are not facts, by the way.

Deny ignorance!

jw

reply to post by __rich__

Chemtrails are probably ...

is nothing more than speculation. Please provide citations and support for those of us who do not know what you do.

jw

reply to post by Sky watcher


Sky Watcher.....

Try to explain all the chem-trails that are not near any normal flight corridors.

Those would be contrails.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by __rich__

 

Chemtrails are probably ...

is nothing more than speculation. Please provide citations and support for those of us who do not know what you do.

jw

I have provided ample evidence in other threads on the subject of Chemtrails.

But, just for you:

"It has been suggested that large-scale climate changes, mostly due to atmospheric injection of greenhouse gases connected with fossil-fired energy production, should be forestalled by internationally-agreed reductions in, e.g., electricity generation. The potential economic impacts of such limitations are obviously large: greater than or equal to $10[sup 11]/year. We propose that for far smaller - less than 1% - the mean thermal effects of greenhouse gases may be obviated in any of several distinct ways, some of them novel. These suggestions are all based on scatterers that prevent a small fraction of solar radiation from reaching all or part of the Earth. We propose research directed to quite near-term realization of one or more of these inexpensive approaches to cancel the effects of the greenhouse gas injection. While the magnitude of the climatic impact of greenhouse gases is currently uncertain, the prospect of severe failure of the climate, for instance at the onset of the next Ice Age, is undeniable. The proposals in this paper may lead to quite practical methods to reduce or eliminate all climate failures."

www.osti.gov...

Then there's this:

theheavystuff.com...


The question remains : "Why have taxpayers funded research in to the cost effectiveness of various climate modulation techniques vs. simply reducing CO2 emissions?"

The general consensus is that mandatory carbon reductions will cost magnitudes of order more than applying artificial "sunscreen" in the upper atmosphere.

reply to post by Chadwickus


lol Pseudoscience is it? Observation is the truest science of all and it's available to everyone. It doesn't need to be from an official agency, or from people who hold a degree to qualify as scientific. There's no lack of science in what I provided either, if you bothered to read them! This is a lousy issue Chadwickus, as we both know. Let's leave it as a pollution problem, already discussed to death then. Goethe already cracked it, most recently to my recollection, and I've thrown up my information several times already too. It stems from geoengineering & various military operations. I'm a personal fan of the Hughes patent proofs, the remote sampling proofs (far from any factory plumes), and the switch-on/switch-off chemtrails that have been witnessed myself. The massive and professionally drafted geo-engineering essays detailing sulphur dioxide spraying and UN-backed global "climate control" initiatives are just icing on the cake in my books. People will believe what they want, and anything "new and improved" must be of lesser quality than their own.

reply to post by Northwarden


Yes. PSEUDO-SCIENCE.

The figures collected have been interpreted incorrectly, this is where the pseudo-science part comes in.

I find it odd that you will laugh at such a thing, I mean if the results are to be believed (which you do) the toxicity levels are so high, not a single living creature would be alive in the area, they would be dead several hundred times over.

Because of this, there is something seriously and obviously wrong with the test results.

But I guess since the chemtrail theory is shrouded in pseudo-science that pseudo-science will be embraced by those that are too weak minded to tell the difference.

I'm a personal fan of the Hughes patent proofs

A patent proves nothing, absolutely nothing!

the remote sampling proofs (far from any factory plumes)

What sampling proof?

Arizona skywatch? like I said, pseudo-science.

KSLA news about barium?

Well and truly debunked.

Absolute proof would be to sample the trail coming directly out of the aircraft.

If you've read all of this thread, you would have seen I link to a group who has the means to do such tests.

and the switch-on/switch-off chemtrails that have been witnessed myself.

I've seen them myself!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fc98d5dce32f.png[/atsimg]

But guess what...this photo was taken in the middle of the desert, the nearest town is a few hundred kms away, the nearest city is thousands of kms away.

Unless you actually believe that a chemtrail plane is switching on and off their sprays in the middle of literally no where?

To what ends? Stop global warming? In outback Australia where it's always bloody hot no matter what?

To poison people? Who? The couple of hundred people who work at this mine site?