Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-engineering aka "Chemtrails" DEBUNK THIS !!!!

Originally posted by jdub297
Originally posted by MathiasAndrew

 

My words make no implicit claim that it is happening in this case. But since there is proof that it has happened in the past. I have a right to be highly suspicious that it is happening again in this case.

Mat, you can not escape the inconsistencies in your posts just by saying they didn't happen.

Here is exactly what you said:

protect our selves from people that disregard the rights of others and do not acquire proper informed consent when conducting experiments at our expense.

Those are statements of present perception and present action. Your denial is disingenuous.

Yet, in your denial you implicitly acknowledge that these are past actions that support your present belief that "chemtrails" are happening now. Pretty slim grounds to justify such hysterics.

jw

Your post is disingenuous. You are cutting and pasting two quotes from me and then making up a different story and connection between the two than was originally intended. If that isn't disingenuous I don't know what is.

The first quote was only in reference to biological pathogens in being sprayed. I gave an example that it had been done in the past.

The second quote was stating how the geoengineering projects using aerosol sprays and jet emissions have been kept under wraps which is what my main problem is. This people need to be properly informed of the risks and hazards surrounding this issue.

There is no doubt and no denial (except by debunkers) that these projects have been tested in the real World already. They have been tested over populated areas and the results that were studied were not just about the effects of geoengineering on the environment. They were also about the effects geoengineering would have on the people.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

Originally posted by Essan

 

It's worth noting that Mathias declined to engage in a discussion on why the things people see and call chemtrails can't all just be contrails (mind, so have all the other chemtrails believers).

I didn't decline to engage in that discussion. That is the same discussion I'm already having in at least 5 threads. I said I'm already commenting on too many other threads to get side tracked. You want to work some angle and you want to force the discussion in a direction that leaves important factors out.

There's a big difference between saying I'm too busy talking about that very thing already and not engaging in that discussion in a new thread written by a debunker.

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
Show me a report with the proper data if you want to prove something to me. Don't show me incomplete studies that need more tests and need more funding. Show me the latest aerosol sampling reports with the chemical and physical properties of the clouds included. Why hasn't NASA or some other agency like the EPA or a private company in charge of air quality sampling, like Battelle, put all the rumors and conspiracy theories to rest yet by releasing a proper study?

edit on 26-3-2011 by MathiasAndrew because: edit text

Mat, are you unable to find this on your own because you only want to see what you think might support on of your guesses about "chemtrails?"

Why don't you just Google: "contrail composition?"

If you did, you would see hundreds of test results for the comparison of contrails to cirrus. You would also see that in addition to the expected water vapor and other products of combustion, that particles from the Earth's surface are found in the ice crystals that make up both contrails and natural cirrus.

You are so good at scooping up a mish-mash of videos and snippets of articles, that this should be a breeze for you. Either you already know this or you do not want to know it because it will undermine all of your suppositions and speculations.

deny ignorance

jw

reply to post by MathiasAndrew

the geoengineering projects using aerosol sprays and jet emissions have been kept under wraps which is what my main problem is. This people need to be properly informed of the risks and hazards surrounding this issue.

Anyone who has looked into the AGW debate knows that theories on the use of sulfur dioxide aerosols in mitigation have been studied for years. There is no on-going "project" actually applying them.
(And you know this.)

If there are dozens of websites on this theory alone, how can you and your "chemtrail" faithful brethren claim it is "under wraps?" You and I know about it. Thousands of people have considered the proposition.

What, exactly, are "the risks and hazards" you believe are attendant to this proposal? When, where and how are you going to "properly inform" us?

There is no doubt and no denial (except by debunkers) that these projects have been tested in the real World already.

Oh, really? Stratospheric aerosol spraying to mitigate "global warming?"
Where were they tested, and when? What were the results? What were the observed "risks and hazards" that you are going to inform us about?
Why are the AGW advocates still complaining of increasing temperatures, if they've implemented this method of reducing them?

They have been tested over populated areas and the results that were studied were not just about the effects of geoengineering on the environment.

Let's start with those; what were the effects on the environment? Where can I find the "results that were studied?"

They were also about the effects geoengineering would have on the people.

Which "populated areas" were they tested over? When did this occur? Isn't it the "chemtrail" belief that "chemtrails" are presently being used? Where?

What were "the effects geoengineering would have on people?" What about the effects they ARE having on people?
Where can I find the "results that were studied?"


OK, Mat.
Your hypothesis seems to be: "They are spraying aerosols in the stratosphere that appear to be contrails, but are geo-engineering projects to mitigate against the effects of global warming; and which are sickening the people of the Earth."

Is that close?
(I'm going to propose answers to each of the questions below, because I do not expect you to do so.)

If not, please restate it correctly for me.

If it is correct, please answer, or correct, the following:

Who are "they?" The governments of the US, the UK, and no one else.
Where are they spraying? Over the continental US in limited areas at a time, and in places over the UK.
What are they spraying? Sulfur dioxide.
How are they spraying it? Specially designed apparatus for military aircraft.
What are the expected results? Lowered global temperatures.
What are the observed results? Increasing global average temperatures.
Which populations have been affected? None.
How have they been affected? They have not, stratospheric SO2 aerosols are invisible from the ground, and remain aloft in the stratosphere rather than settle directly over the places below where they were applied.
Who has documented any of these effects? No one, this is a fantasy.
Where are the studies that document these projects and their effects? There are none, because this has never been attempted.

THAT is your hypothesis. Debunked!

Show me where I'm wrong, if you can.
I will accept your inability to do so as your admission that you cannot.

deny ignorance
jw

reply to post by MathiasAndrew


You may well have presented good evidence as to why what people call chemtrails cannot be contrails in one of the many on-going threads. But if so it's gotten lost in the chaff. Which is why I started a thread specifically for that purpose. Maybe you coud find said posts and just copy them over? After all, if I'm wrong, I'd like to know why.

reply to post by jdub297


Anyone who has looked into the AGW debate knows that theories on the use of sulfur dioxide aerosols in mitigation have been studied for years. There is no on-going "project" actually applying them.
(And you know this.)--jdub297

How exactly would people 'know this'? At what point in frequency do 'studies' turn into 'application' and wouln't it be reasonable to think that atmospheric studies rely on applications? And who is to say if these 'studies', (being carried out in the atmosphere) are only limited to any type of mitigation? I would say it is reasonable to at least question if some of these DOD or other applications may have as much to do with "Star Wars" or other military considerations than simple mitigation.

reply to post by Tecumte


Well firstly, don't you think the scientists looking into the subject would know? Especially given the questions raised about whether it wou work and other consequences. And where exactly are these new super aircraft flying from? From whence comes the money? Why has no-one noticed any of them?

And wouldn't the increase in SO2 in the stratosphere be rather obvious to those studying the stratosphere?

Or is everyone in on the conspiracy?

reply to post by Essan


Well, let's start with first things first. I posted this link at another thread, but let's review it here so we can get a better handle on just what EXACTLY people are seeing that makes anyone feel that the exhaust of some planes appears to be very much different than the exhaust coming out of other planes. That really is at the heart of this whole issue so i think it is a good starting point. Let's review:

www.disclose.tv...

Originally posted by Tecumte
Well, let's start with first things first. I posted this link at another thread, but let's review it here so we can get a better handle on just what EXACTLY people are seeing that makes anyone feel that the exhaust of some planes appears to be very much different than the exhaust coming out of other planes. That really is at the heart of this whole issue so i think it is a good starting point. Let's review:

www.disclose.tv...

Those trail could be different because the planes may be flying at different altitudes. If the planes are flying at different altitudes, then the conditions at those altitudes (temperature, humidity, pressure) may be different. A difference of only a couple thousand feet could make a big difference in trail production. This concept has already been discussed here.

I can't tell what altitude those planes are flying, but it would surprise me if they are the same altitude, considering how close they appear to be "laterally". The easiest and most common way to separate two planes that want to be in similar columns of space is by "stacking" them vertically.

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by jdub297

 

Anyone who has looked into the AGW debate knows that theories on the use of sulfur dioxide aerosols in mitigation have been studied for years. There is no on-going "project" actually applying them.
(And you know this.)--jdub297

How exactly would people 'know this'?

Ever since Hansen first described his concept of "global warming" in 1988, people have considered ways to halt, remedy or mitigate the effects, if true. There are numerous published peer-reviewed scientific papers on mitigation, including stratospheric application of SO2.

Not a single one of them supports or relates to mythical "chemtrails."
Of course, no comparable analysis has ever been published regarding "chemtrails."

Mat knows this because he has researched deeply into his "geo-engineering" theory and found not one published report or study on actual (as opposed to theoretical) application.

Don't you think that any person, organization or government who found a working "cure" for global warming would publicize it to the ends of the Earth? They would be among the most influential AGW "experts" in the world!

This fact that they haven't is what relegates Mat's "geo-engineering" proposition to theory rather than reality.

At what point in frequency do 'studies' turn into 'application' and wouln't it be reasonable to think that atmospheric studies rely on applications?

No. Climate studies most often involve the use of "modeling," in which objective, observable data are used. Almost every AGW mitigation theory includes consideration of the possibility that it is wrong as well as that it is correct. Unfortunately, the "chemtrail" advocates seem to think that consideration that the theory (whichever of several they espouse) amounts to "disinfo" and "shilling." The former is a scientific approach, the latter is doctrinal.

And who is to say if these 'studies', (being carried out in the atmosphere) are only limited to any type of mitigation?

They are not. They are unlimited in scope and include consideration that AGW is not happening at all. Again, climate science doesn't accept a conclusion to the exclusion of all others. There is a give-and-take, often heated and always fervent, in which ALL possible explanations for objectively observable data are evaluated. You will never see that in ANY of the "chemtrail" resources, typically blogs and YouTube.

I would say it is reasonable to at least question if some of these DOD or other applications may have as much to do with "Star Wars" or other military considerations than simple mitigation.

I think that is a laudable position to take. However, it is a huge leap to go from a "question if" to a "conclusion that" any of the possible scenarios for "chemtrails" are in fact true. Most scientific discoveries arise from questions asked, not conclusions adopted.

I tend to think that military applications would not be attempted in plain view of the American public, precisely because of the presence of forums such as this. Any "secret testing" would not remain secret very long. A more reasonable scenario for military testing would involve people and places far removed from easy access to media and telecommunications. Recall that the early A-bomb and H-bomb tests were conducted in the middle of deserts and the Pacific ocean.

jw

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by jdub297

 

At what point in frequency do 'studies' turn into 'application'

At the point where the studies stop and the application begins.

Studies do not us fleets of aircraft, and they do not manufacture the rquisite volume of material (whatever it may be),

and wouln't it be reasonable to think that atmospheric studies rely on applications?

No it would not. the studies invariably describe in great detail how they gather their information, and none of them involve spraying chemtrails.

it would be reasonable to assume that applications rely upon the studies, if the applications ever begin.

There are many on ATS being paid by the elites to tell you Chemtrails aren't real. You can tell who they are because all they do is parrot the government line about Chemtrails, 911, Ufos etc. Their arguments are childlike and make no sense whatsoever. Any rational human that looks at the evidence and is even modestly familiar with aircraft and what is normal knows immediately that the US government is behind this and many of our crooked NWO politicians are behind it too. You see this plainly in the film I mentioned above when they go to Washington and you see the cockroaches run for elevators and dart behind doors rather than talk with the rabble about Chemtrails. Our government are nothing but liars. Our CIA killed Kennedy and now our CIA is killing all of us with the Chemtrails and lying about it like they did about Kennedy

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


"At what point in frequency do 'studies' turn into 'application'?" --TC

"At the point where the studies stop and the application begins"--ATG

Is that a real answer, it seems to beg the question. I think it's quite likely we are seeing studies being carried out in the field not just in the lab, why would anybody doubt this? All sorts of non publicized (until much later) tests and studies have been well documented for decades where the public has been used as a guiniea pig for all sorts of testing. Do you doubt this has historically occurred???

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

"At what point in frequency do 'studies' turn into 'application'?" --TC

"At the point where the studies stop and the application begins"--ATG

Is that a real answer, it seems to beg the question. I think it's quite likely we are seeing studies being carried out in the field not just in the lab, why would anybody doubt this?

Because there is no evidence for it?

Honestly - where is the evidence for any of these studies actually doing anythng "in hte field" by way of spraying anythgni from planes??

All sorts of non publicized (until much later) tests and studies have been well documented for decades where the public has been used as a guiniea pig for all sorts of testing. Do you doubt this has historically occurred???

no, not at all.

But those all show that various governments and agencies have been "cavalier" in the past, and do not comprise evidence that hey are doing so RIGHT NOW.

Why is it so difficult to see that programmes that we KNOW finised in eth 1950's or 60's or 70's are simply irrelevant to whatever it is that is being proposed now?

Are you also suggesting "they" are still everything dodgy "they" _ever_ did?

Originally posted by GlennCanady
There are many on ATS being paid by the elites to tell you Chemtrails aren't real.

I must have missed out - where's my paycheck??!!

You can tell who they are because all they do is parrot the government line about Chemtrails, 911, Ufos etc. Their arguments are childlike and make no sense whatsoever. Any rational human that looks at the evidence and is even modestly familiar with aircraft and what is normal knows immediately that the US government is behind this and many of our crooked NWO politicians are behind it too.

Really? cool - I need US$'s - they're worth a fair buit here - certainly better value than the locl currency even though we had contails while we had a much publicised dispute with the US that saw an alliance torn up.....

And since I am slighly more than "modestly familiar with aircraft", having worked on and around them for teh 36 years since I was 16, I expect higher pay for my technical knowledge.

Do you have the contact details?? If this counts as working for the US Govt can I get a green card??

You see this plainly in the film I mentioned above when they go to Washington and you see the cockroaches run for elevators and dart behind doors rather than talk with the rabble about Chemtrails. Our government are nothing but liars. Our CIA killed Kennedy and now our CIA is killing all of us with the Chemtrails and lying about it like they did about Kennedy

Well they're failing miserably at that then - the world population has grown by over 1 billion since chemtrails supposedly started in the late 1990's - stupid fecking CIA can kill a president in secret, but can't poison the whole world in plain sigh!!

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

"At what point in frequency do 'studies' turn into 'application'?" --TC

"At the point where the studies stop and the application begins"--ATG

Is that a real answer, it seems to beg the question. I think it's quite likely we are seeing studies being carried out in the field not just in the lab, why would anybody doubt this? All sorts of non publicized (until much later) tests and studies have been well documented for decades where the public has been used as a guiniea pig for all sorts of testing. Do you doubt this has historically occurred???

Well, most chemtrail believers say that ALL persistent trails are actually chemtrail. Therefore, that would mean that if they are conducting field tests, these tests are being done all the time and world-wide using thousands of planes everyday.

That's some field test.

reply to post by GlennCanady


Flapping your gums about NOTHING again, "Glenn"???

"Lies, lies and DAMNED lies...." (I forget where and what context I read that, once before.....)...?

Paraphrasing, from vague, dim memory.....BUT, paranoid schizophrenics like to promote this sort of nonsense. AND, unfortunately, otherwise 'rational' people sometimes have a tendency to (temporarily, one hopes) "believe" in any crackpot idea, no matter how ridiculous. For a while....UNTIL they get an education.

On the other hand, there exist a veritable plethora of profiteers and provocateurs who DELIGHT i instigating any and ALL 'conspiracy" ideas, no matter how inane, unsupportable by facts, or just complete 'woo-woo'.

I think we can tell WHO they are, by now......

Originally posted by GlennCanady
There are many on ATS being paid by the elites to tell you Chemtrails aren't real. You can tell who they are because all they do is parrot the government line about Chemtrails, 911, Ufos etc....

I suppose I could make the claim that the people who are trying to make the case for chemtrails on ATS are paid shills for the people who make money from chemtrail websites and by selling chemtrail literature...

...I don't really believe anyone in this thread is actually a chemtrail website shill, but look how easy it was for me to simply make that outrageous claim.

""Four years ago I wrote one of the first articles (published in Eco Decision magazine) describing how atmosphere-altering contrails in high-traffic routes such as the Atlantic corridor between the USA and Europe can occasionally persist for hours, forming cirrus-type clouds that drift over a large area.""

That is Will Thomas from around 2000, who created the Chemtrail Hoax in 1998. When he first created it, it had nothing to do with high altitude persistent contrails. He claimed there were low level aircraft making giant contrails, and he claimed to have many photos of it.

Later Will changed it to be about high altitude persistent contrails, once the game was up on his hoax of low altitude trails.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by Tecumte
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

"At what point in frequency do 'studies' turn into 'application'?" --TC

"At the point where the studies stop and the application begins"--ATG

Is that a real answer, it seems to beg the question. I think it's quite likely we are seeing studies being carried out in the field not just in the lab, why would anybody doubt this?

Because there is no evidence for it?

Honestly - where is the evidence for any of these studies actually doing anythng "in hte field" by way of spraying anythgni from planes??

All sorts of non publicized (until much later) tests and studies have been well documented for decades where the public has been used as a guiniea pig for all sorts of testing. Do you doubt this has historically occurred???

no, not at all.

But those all show that various governments and agencies have been "cavalier" in the past, and do not comprise evidence that hey are doing so RIGHT NOW.

Why is it so difficult to see that programmes that we KNOW finised in eth 1950's or 60's or 70's are simply irrelevant to whatever it is that is being proposed now?

Are you also suggesting "they" are still everything dodgy "they" _ever_ did?

edit on 27-3-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

"But those all show that various governments and agencies have been "cavalier" in the past, and do not comprise evidence that hey are doing so RIGHT NOW.
Why is it so difficult to see that programmes that we KNOW finised in eth 1950's or 60's or 70's are simply irrelevant to whatever it is that is being proposed now?
Are you also suggesting "they" are still everything dodgy "they" _ever_ did?"--ATG

No, you're right it doesn't show 'evidence' in and of itself, but it does show a long sordid history of not caring stretching back many many decades. I would simply wonder based upon past historical data why it would surprise anyone that tests on the population are still being carried out. Would this really be so surprisingly shocking, I just don't see it. Was there some mass religious conversion on the part of those who for almost a century or longer showed absolute disdain for their fellow man and used them in all sorts of horrendous ways as guinea pigs? At what point in time did this conversion occur, I'm simply not aware of it.