It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Chemtrails Exposed
page: 2share:
reply to post by TheRealMrX
proof?
There are fleets of jumbo jet aircraft which have been retrofitted to spray megatons of toxic substances over populations in most Western countries.
proof?
Originally posted by TMJ1972
i'm thinking about the jumbo-jets electronics-bay size, and imagine how much is needed to fullfill air-worthiness regulations in order to fly it with no crew onboard ... aaaand ... no
the B747 is too complex to be controlled by remote in a way that some official would sign that to have it flying.
Too much could go wrong to have roughly $110mio bucks being flown this way.
Its not that it won't work, but it won't work in a way that there would be no high risk of loosing such a plane due to an issue not being able to be solved by remote.
You never get permission to fly such a thingy over a populated area.
Do you confuse this with old 747 being refitted to drop water over wildfires ?
This is a military operation. You can forget about regulations.
If the B747 is no good for remote flying, then they probably don't use it.
I am not confused.
Originally posted by Nobama
reply to post by TheRealMrX
There are fleets of jumbo jet aircraft which have been retrofitted to spray megatons of toxic substances over populations in most Western countries.
proof?
Thousands of eyewitness accounts, scientific evidence, circumstantial evidence; what kind of evidence would you like?
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Scientific evidence? Perhaps you could help us by linking to a few papers?
I can provide plenty of evidence that scientists think that what you call chemtrails are actually just contrails, and they have been studying them for decades in order to determine just ow and why they form and what effects they have on weather and climate. But I;ve never come across any studies in which they have concluded that contrails are caused by deliberate, secret, spraying. Let alone from a massive fleet of secret Boeing 747s.
Scientific evidence? Perhaps you could help us by linking to a few papers?
I can provide plenty of evidence that scientists think that what you call chemtrails are actually just contrails, and they have been studying them for decades in order to determine just ow and why they form and what effects they have on weather and climate. But I;ve never come across any studies in which they have concluded that contrails are caused by deliberate, secret, spraying. Let alone from a massive fleet of secret Boeing 747s.
Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by TheRealMrX
I see no data at all!
You should really read the post. Check the 'Scientific Evidence' section.
Originally posted by Essan
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Scientific evidence? Perhaps you could help us by linking to a few papers?
I can provide plenty of evidence that scientists think that what you call chemtrails are actually just contrails, and they have been studying them for decades in order to determine just ow and why they form and what effects they have on weather and climate. But I;ve never come across any studies in which they have concluded that contrails are caused by deliberate, secret, spraying. Let alone from a massive fleet of secret Boeing 747s.
Here's a link to my paper, published by GeoengineeringWatch.org:
www.geoengineeringwatch.org...
chemtrails are not contrails.
I never asserted, "that contrails are caused by deliberate, secret, spraying." Contrails are caused by normal operation of a jet aircraft. I am concerned with chemtrails.
Yes, they have massive fleets of jumbo jets. They are very interested in genocide.
Originally posted by TheRealMrX
Here's a link to my paper, published by GeoengineeringWatch.org:
www.geoengineeringwatch.org...
chemtrails are not contrails.
That "paper" does not seem to contain any verifiable evidence of "chemtrails" not being contrails, and in fact contains some basic science errors. For example, it says:
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) produced data showing elevated levels of Barium in surface water between 1988-2001. Along with other elevated readings, a sample from the East Verde River near Payson, AZ taken on July 19, 1999 showed Barium at a level of 340 micrograms per liter (ug/l). This is significant because, unlike such elements as Aluminum, Barium is not commonly found in our soils and water.
But the epa says:
www.epa.gov...
Barium is found in waste streams from a large number of manufacturing plants in quantities that seldom
exceed the normal levels found in soil. Background levels for soil range from 100-3000 ppm barium.
Occurs naturally in almost all (99.4%) surface waters examined, in concentration of 2 to 340 ug/l, with an
average of 43 ug/l. The drainage basins with low mean concentration of barium (15 ug/l) occur in the
western Great Lakes, & the highest mean concentration of 90 ug/l is in the southwestern drainage basins
of the lower Mississippi Valley. In stream water & most groundwater, only traces of the element are
present.
There are limited survey data on the occurrence of barium in drinking water. Most supplies contain less
than 200 ug/l of barium. The average concentration of barium in USA drinking water is 28.6 ug/l (1977
data). The drinking water of many communities in Illinois, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, & New Mexico
contains concentrations of barium that may be 10 times higher than the drinking water standard. The
source of these supplies is usually well water. Currently 60 ground water supplies and 1 surface water
supply exceeds 1000 ug/l.
So your paper is wrong. I suggest you remove the errors, and reconsider.
edit on 10-9-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Oh boy! You are repetitiously published on the Internet! That certainly gives you a lot of credibility!
reply to post by TheRealMrX
If you are refering to your opening post:
I wasted my time, read it a couple of times, and still didn't find "a couple of big paragraphs about CARB data." Nor did I find any sources. All I found was paranoid speculation!
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Bull! The US military IS ALL ABOUT REGULATIONS!
You claimed:
If you KNEW that the above was true, you would certainly KNOW what type of aircraft are being used!
reply to post by TheRealMrX
A truthful expose' would be great! All you have posted is speculation! Under this thread, you haven't even linked sources.
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Nope! You just wasted my time again! There is no "'Scientific Evidence' section" anywhere in this thread!
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Are you kidding? What kind of fool would use themselves as a source of evidence?
PROVE that, and you might gain a little credibility. Please provide sources other than your own postings!
See ya,
Milt USDOCD (United States Department of Chemtrail Deniers)
PS:
Maybe the above is the proof you need.
If you are concerned about all those other posts titled 'Chemtrails Exposed' popping up all over the Internet, well yeah, those are me too.
Oh boy! You are repetitiously published on the Internet! That certainly gives you a lot of credibility!
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Did you read the post? There a couple of big paragraphs about CARB data.
If you are refering to your opening post:
I wasted my time, read it a couple of times, and still didn't find "a couple of big paragraphs about CARB data." Nor did I find any sources. All I found was paranoid speculation!
reply to post by TheRealMrX
This is a military operation. You can forget about regulations.
Bull! The US military IS ALL ABOUT REGULATIONS!
If the B747 is no good for remote flying, then they probably don't use it.
You claimed:
There are fleets of jumbo jet aircraft which have been retrofitted to spray megatons of toxic substances over populations in most Western countries.
If you KNEW that the above was true, you would certainly KNOW what type of aircraft are being used!
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Thousands of eyewitness accounts, scientific evidence, circumstantial evidence; what kind of evidence would you like?
A truthful expose' would be great! All you have posted is speculation! Under this thread, you haven't even linked sources.
reply to post by TheRealMrX
You should really read the post. Check the 'Scientific Evidence' section.
Nope! You just wasted my time again! There is no "'Scientific Evidence' section" anywhere in this thread!
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Here's a link to my paper, published by GeoengineeringWatch.org:
www.geoengineeringwatch.org...
Are you kidding? What kind of fool would use themselves as a source of evidence?
Yes, they have massive fleets of jumbo jets. They are very interested in genocide.
PROVE that, and you might gain a little credibility. Please provide sources other than your own postings!
See ya,
Milt USDOCD (United States Department of Chemtrail Deniers)
PS:
Milt USDOCD (United States Department of Chemtrail Deniers)
Maybe the above is the proof you need.
edit on 10-9-2011 by BenReclused because: Add a "Thumbs Up"and a "PS"
Originally posted by Argyll
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
It's happening friend, it is prevalent over my city.
When you see planes flying in formation and releasing these trails specifically over the city, then you see what's going on.
I don't care what disbelievrs think on this one, it is apparent.
You know you are going to be ripped to shreds, but hey, good on you for keeping this subject bumped.
What city are you in?
What, if any ill affects are you feeling?
Look at his denial, it's hilarious. How cute, he still thinks the government wants to keep his life.
They would kill you without hesitation if it meant saving them a #ing dollar. Grow up and realize that they do # that cannot be proved. Your idiocy is proof to me they are spraying your city, your IQ is the ill effects you say we should feel.
Chemtrails are real, sorry.
reply to post by Uncinus
Ok, Uncinus you win. I have removed the offending sentence. You are right, barium appears somewhat commonly in certain areas. I was projecting my local findings upon the Southwest. My local water department here in San Rafael, CA told me that Barium is not usually found, but I see now they meant it is not usually found AROUND HERE.
Your EPA barium factsheet also gave me information which reinforced my argument. Here is the section with the added information in all caps:
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) produced data showing elevated levels of barium in surface water between 1988-2004. Along with other elevated readings, a sample from the East Verde River near Payson, AZ taken on July 19, 1999 showed barium at a level of 340 micrograms per liter (ug/l). THE EPA SAYS THE AVERAGE SURFACE WATER CONCENTRATION OF BARIUM IS 43 ug/l.
The ADEQ analyzed many water samples taken at different times from the Nogales Wash Channel between 1993 and 2002. Among other elevated readings, they found barium at levels of: 850 ug/l, 950 ug/l and 900 ug/l. THE EPA SAYS THAT 99.4% OF SURFACE WATER THEY EXAMINED CONTAINED BETWEEN 2 TO 340 ug/l BARIUM.
Chemtrails 303 and Chemtrails Exposed will have the new sentences in lower case.
I sincerely thank you, Uncinus. I was looking for a reference point to these numbers. I found your EPA factsheet very informative. Do you have one for aluminum? If you do I would appreciate a link.
Ok, Uncinus you win. I have removed the offending sentence. You are right, barium appears somewhat commonly in certain areas. I was projecting my local findings upon the Southwest. My local water department here in San Rafael, CA told me that Barium is not usually found, but I see now they meant it is not usually found AROUND HERE.
Your EPA barium factsheet also gave me information which reinforced my argument. Here is the section with the added information in all caps:
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) produced data showing elevated levels of barium in surface water between 1988-2004. Along with other elevated readings, a sample from the East Verde River near Payson, AZ taken on July 19, 1999 showed barium at a level of 340 micrograms per liter (ug/l). THE EPA SAYS THE AVERAGE SURFACE WATER CONCENTRATION OF BARIUM IS 43 ug/l.
The ADEQ analyzed many water samples taken at different times from the Nogales Wash Channel between 1993 and 2002. Among other elevated readings, they found barium at levels of: 850 ug/l, 950 ug/l and 900 ug/l. THE EPA SAYS THAT 99.4% OF SURFACE WATER THEY EXAMINED CONTAINED BETWEEN 2 TO 340 ug/l BARIUM.
Chemtrails 303 and Chemtrails Exposed will have the new sentences in lower case.
I sincerely thank you, Uncinus. I was looking for a reference point to these numbers. I found your EPA factsheet very informative. Do you have one for aluminum? If you do I would appreciate a link.
reply to post by Motumz
That little "rant" certainly reflects poorly on your IQ, and especially, your sanity. Perhaps you ARE the "smoking gun" that will confirm that chemtrails DO exist, and ARE used for nefarious purposes.
Though I don't feel it's needed, do you have any additional evidence?
Where do you live?
See ya,
Milt
Look at his denial, it's hilarious. How cute, he still thinks the government wants to keep his life.
They would kill you without hesitation if it meant saving them a #ing dollar. Grow up and realize that they do # that cannot be proved. Your idiocy is proof to me they are spraying your city, your IQ is the ill effects you say we should feel.
That little "rant" certainly reflects poorly on your IQ, and especially, your sanity. Perhaps you ARE the "smoking gun" that will confirm that chemtrails DO exist, and ARE used for nefarious purposes.
Though I don't feel it's needed, do you have any additional evidence?
Where do you live?
See ya,
Milt
reply to post by Chadwickus
Oh, excuse me. The data is in another post here called 'Chemtrails 303'. Here is a link:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I have so many postings and stuff going on right now that I lose track.
Oh, excuse me. The data is in another post here called 'Chemtrails 303'. Here is a link:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I have so many postings and stuff going on right now that I lose track.
Originally posted by TheRealMrX
I sincerely thank you, Uncinus. I was looking for a reference point to these numbers. I found your EPA factsheet very informative. Do you have one for aluminum? If you do I would appreciate a link.
Thanks for incorporating the new information. Although I'm not sure it really helps your conclusions as you suggest.
For Aluminum the CDC Toxicological Profiles contains a lot of info about ordinary levels of Aluminum in air, soil, and water.
www.atsdr.cdc.gov...
and there's the shorter ToxFaq:
www.atsdr.cdc.gov...
With interesting facts:
Virtually all food, water, air, and soil contain some aluminum.
The average adult in the U.S. eats about 7-9 mg aluminum per day in their food.
Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
It's happening friend, it is prevalent over my city.
When you see planes flying in formation and releasing these trails specifically over the city, then you see what's going on.
I don't care what disbelievrs think on this one, it is apparent....
What exactly do you mean by "formation". I'm someone who is somewhat interested in aviation, so I know that over my house is one of the northeast US air routes. That air route (and the many other air routes like it) can have multiple "lanes" in order to keep airline traffic separated horizontally -- something like a multi-lane freeway. A freeway goes to one place, but there could be multiple lanes of traffic on that freeway.
Therefore, it is very normal to have planes flying over my house in these multiple "lanes" of air traffic. So, on days which the atmospheric conditions at cruising altitude are conducive to contrail persistence, I can have multiple contrails going across my sky.
There is not necessarily anything sinister about this.
Originally posted by TheRealMrX
The ADEQ analyzed many water samples taken at different times from the Nogales Wash Channel between 1993 and 2002. Among other elevated readings, they found barium at levels of: 850 ug/l, 950 ug/l and 900 ug/l. THE EPA SAYS THAT 99.4% OF SURFACE WATER THEY EXAMINED CONTAINED BETWEEN 2 TO 340 ug/l BARIUM.
Readings such as these need more info. It's a reading that's higher than the normal range, but what actually is the Nogales Wash?
www.azdeq.gov...
Nogales Wash is the main drainage for the cities of
Nogales, Sonora, Mexico and Nogales, Arizona. The Wash
flows north into Nogales, Arizona in a concrete tunnel
that emerges into an open concrete channel. It eventually
returns to a natural sediment bed channel before its
confluence with Potrero Creek. Heavy rains can flush many
pollutants from the urban landscape into the wash and large
volumes of rain water can enter wastewater infrastructure
in Nogales, Sonora causing overflows that introduce sewage
to Nogales Wash. Even during base flow conditions sewage
can escape from the collection system and pollute the wash.
It's basically an open sewer, running from Mexico into the US.
Of course it's going to have contaminants in it. Hence the readings are meaningless, and you should remove them.
reply to post by TheRealMrX
My theory...
I think the spraying is because there is something seriously wrong with the magneticfield of the Earth or the ozon layer. Or maybe it is because of a changed intensity of the Sun''s radiation.
Either way the Sun is the reason why the spraying is neccesary. To reflect the infrared radiation or whatever radiation in order to protect the peoples of the Earth..... or eventually only the elite.
Only certain kind of metals are effective to do the job. The whole operation is kept a close secret because damage to the environment and biological systems are to be expected.
Because it is a global problem and an international operation there is no time for debate and democratic decision making with the citizens and all nations of the Earth. Therefore it is done in secrecy.
The ''chemtrails" and tunneling underground is payed by a carefully planned money-drain organised by the biggest banks in the world. A money-drain we experiance and call the global economic crisis.
Because the problem can not be solved with the technology of today we can not spray until eternity. We are eventually forced to continue to live underground. The spraying will stop when most of the underground infrastructure is completed. The scale is huge...major cities of different countries are connected underground.
Do you remember the summer of the 70-80ties? Those days a sunblock of 3 was sufficient to protect your skin from sun-burn. Today it is adviced to use sunblock 10-15 or higher. When the spraying will stop top-side will be slowly scorched by the sun and will it be dangerous to expose your skin directly to the sunlight for too long.
That is why we see these (chem)trails in the sky, hear strange rumbles and feel more and more earthquakes in most earthquake-free places in the world....."" They" are digging like moles...everywhere...
My theory...
I think the spraying is because there is something seriously wrong with the magneticfield of the Earth or the ozon layer. Or maybe it is because of a changed intensity of the Sun''s radiation.
Either way the Sun is the reason why the spraying is neccesary. To reflect the infrared radiation or whatever radiation in order to protect the peoples of the Earth..... or eventually only the elite.
Only certain kind of metals are effective to do the job. The whole operation is kept a close secret because damage to the environment and biological systems are to be expected.
Because it is a global problem and an international operation there is no time for debate and democratic decision making with the citizens and all nations of the Earth. Therefore it is done in secrecy.
The ''chemtrails" and tunneling underground is payed by a carefully planned money-drain organised by the biggest banks in the world. A money-drain we experiance and call the global economic crisis.
Because the problem can not be solved with the technology of today we can not spray until eternity. We are eventually forced to continue to live underground. The spraying will stop when most of the underground infrastructure is completed. The scale is huge...major cities of different countries are connected underground.
Do you remember the summer of the 70-80ties? Those days a sunblock of 3 was sufficient to protect your skin from sun-burn. Today it is adviced to use sunblock 10-15 or higher. When the spraying will stop top-side will be slowly scorched by the sun and will it be dangerous to expose your skin directly to the sunlight for too long.
That is why we see these (chem)trails in the sky, hear strange rumbles and feel more and more earthquakes in most earthquake-free places in the world....."" They" are digging like moles...everywhere...
Originally posted by Bartibog
reply to post by TheRealMrX
White unmarked jets - belong to the UN (makes sense)
White aircraft "belonging" to the UN have UN markings - see www.aircraft-insignia.com...
Here's an example - a Russian AN-72
The UN of course also charters aircraft owned by other companies - using this set of guidelines
also I've yet to se a photo of an actual "white unmarked jet" - I've seen lots of photos of jets what are white - often too far away for the registration marks to be legible, but somethines you can see they are there.
Also plenty of cases of airline aircraft taken at such a distance and from underneath where most of them are white - often a little bit of the colour on the tail is visible but it is still trumpeted as an "unmarked aircraft".
Edit to add link to thread at Airliners.net about why a/c are often painted white - basically, for old a/c retired to charter service and the like, white is just the easiest base colour to use in case you do need to paint some markings on it.
Why paint at all?? corrosion prevention is my considered opinion - as an aircraft mechanic corrosion prevention is a big deal. Aluminium does not corrode normally, but an aircraft left exposed for a long period of time (decades!) outdoors encounters all sorts of conditions and chemicals.
Chemicals contain a bacteria-based-chemical that eats upper greenhouse gasses.
It`s an ongoing experiment to see if they can reduce these gasses and particles.
And what is that chemical??
I overheard military guys talking at a tim horton`s parking lot a year ago...That is all I remember.
True or false...I have no idea...just sharing.
Sharing a report overheard in a bar (??) parking lot from some guys (anonymous) tyou tell us are military (what evidence) that cannot be checked??
Yeah - thanks for that - real useful sharing!!
edit on 12-9-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)
edit on
12-9-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by zatara
reply to post by TheRealMrX
Do you remember the summer of the 70-80ties? Those days a sunblock of 3 was sufficient to protect your skin from sun-burn.
I remember them, and no it wasn't.
You still got burned - but no-one much cared about it.
I remember as a kid in the 1960's "peeling" huge areas of skin that had been burned - and thinking it was fun!! No melanomas for me....yet....but I know a few of my contemporaries who have had them!