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.

 

Potential chemtrails evidence?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by HIWATT
 



Why has Monsanto developed, and patented, an ALUMINUM RESISTANT SEED??


Because not all soil is well-suited for growing crops. Quite a large percentage of the Earth's crust contains aluminum naturally.

A species of plant that was resistant to the aluminium contamination that is present naturally in locations not particularly well-suited for agriculture can now utilize those places, in order to provide a measure of additional food sources for people, where starvation is endemic and arable land scarce.

To suggest the reverse, in some wild-arsed hare-brained Rube Goldberg-inspired machination plot is simply ludicrous.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Man I will tell you. If you are defending Monsanto, then you are obviously a Government Cheerleader. They are the filthiest, most destructive company to the natural world in our entire history. Shame on you. As far as the odor? I strongly doubt it to be Chemtrail related..



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


He's not defending Monsanto, he's explaining why they would want aluminum resistent crops.

And it's not just Monanto. Look at all this non-monsanto research dating back decades:

scholar.google.com...,5&q=aluminum+resistant+crops+-monsanto

edit on 24-10-2011 by Uncinus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


What are you his father?



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


ok - explain how much aluminium must be " sprayed " to alter the soil chemistry of a given area

hint - aluminum is one of the 50 most common elements in soil - but its not the aluminium content that affects plants its acidity + aluminium - which generates aluminium ions

50 ppm aluminium in a ph 4.0 soil is far more destructive to plants than 500 ppm in a ph9.0 soil



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


Monsanto may be all those things......but, the post had noting to do with "defending" the corporation.

It explained the reasons for aluminum-resistant strains of some crops, achieved through genetic manipulation.

Yeah....might well be dangerous, and have unknown side effects on Human health for those who consume the finished product (crop). But, in terms of Monsanto's goals here, it is purely profit-driven, in order to corner the market n producing such strains, to the exclusion of any competitors (hence, the patents).

The insinuation that somehow additional aluminium is being introduced into the environment, based on the existence of the Monsanto patents, is ludicrous.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


How do you think they come up with these strains? Jesus cmon your not that naive. And to the other Govt. cheerleader , who said anything about soil? It's the air you breathe thats you need to worry about , unless you eat dirt for dinner..



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by ProudBird
 


How do you think they come up with these strains? Jesus cmon your not that naive. And to the other Govt. cheerleader , who said anything about soil? It's the air you breathe thats you need to worry about , unless you eat dirt for dinner..


Where do you think dust comes from? 5 million kg of aluminum falls on Lake Michigan every year, quite naturally. You are breathing small amounts of aluminum dust as we speak. It's everywhere.



posted on Oct, 31 2011 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Just a link for those who want more info.
www.youtube.com...#!



posted on Nov, 1 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by PGRacer
Source : www.globalpost.com...

2nd Source : www.bbc.co.uk...

First let me state my case, I am unsure about chemtrails, I tend to flip-flop a bit on believing their existance are a deliberate polution or just a natural byproduct of flying airplanes.

However, this case of a plane being forced to land because of a "strange smell" seems odd. Its mainly the language that grabs my attention. A plane by its very nature is very carefully designed, weight is only where it is needed so you dont get extra stuff in there unexpectedly. So a "strange smell" should be almost instantly identifiable by its location and by taking a quick look at the designed contents of the plane. If it was an air con leak, or a gas leak from an onboard oven (Ok I don't like flying and so have no real idea what is actually on these planes, I imagine they have ovens/warmers for food but I could be wrong) or similar they would have said by now. The language being used and the fact that they havent even attempted to identify the smell in the reports just makes me suspicious.

*IF* chemtrails are a secret extra system in planes as has been suggested, then it stands to reason that eventually one will leak / break. *IF* one did leak, it would likely be handled/reported in the exact way this is, no assertations as to what leaked, respitory problems (chemtrails and respitory problems seem to go hand in hand), and "everyone was perfectly safe" but also some were kept in hospital under observation.

Its a bit flimsy I will admit, and I am in no way claiming this to be proof of anything, I just think it may be deserving of some ATS attention, or maybe not. Anyway my first ever thread post so if I have made a cock up - please be nice.

PGRacer


No, its not odd.

Anytime there is even a possibility it is a fire of some kind, they land immediately. An electrical fire, or wires burning up, will smell bad.

Do you want aircrew that are flying an airliner to take chances, when there is something possibly wrong?

While some of you do not think fires are a big deal, 2 747s have been lost in the last year, from hazardous items catching fire inside the plane. It happened so fast, they did not get a chance to even make it back down.

So you may think your premise though a bit more



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by PGRacer
 


they were going from Germany to Spain... everyone knows those two foods don't jive!

some sauerkraut with your paella Sra?

I'm pretty open minded about chemtrails but can't imagine it would be in commercial aircraft. If it was, would it be ALL of them? If so we'll never have an answer to chemtrails because every contrail could be a chemtrail and that's obviously not the case.

Not really buying the smelly cause; as you said in the OP - flimsy (at best)



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Remember everyone condensed water vapor is harmless.
Don't look at what condenses water or talk about it.
And everything mixed with condensed water vapor
is harmless.


A mushroom cloud is a distinctive pyrocumulus mushroom-shaped cloud of condensed water vapor


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Gmoneycricket
 


So you think that contrails are actually nucelar test mushroom clouds??


Or perhaps you've just had a mushroom or two too many today??



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


You are saying that the deeper we drill for oil we do not bring up radiation buried deep under the earths crust.
So we as humans are so smart we can remove all radiation from oil, turn it into jet fuel, disperse it with jet exhaust,
and it it harmless?

Can you prove to us that all radiation is removed from oil products?
Same as cars, second hand smoke, jet exhaust, we are raining pollution down on us.
Why is so hard for you to comprehend this?



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Gmoneycricket
 


Now.....am I reading this latest nonsense correctly?

You are stabbing in the dark to make the claim that crude oil, and thus Jet-A1 fuel is radioactive??? To the same levels as a nuclear bomb explosion, and resulting mushroom cloud?!?


Well, at least this is an easy assertion to de-bunk.

It's called a "Geiger Counter". Try it sometime......get it up next to the actual jet fuel. Or, how about your own automobile fuel tank? Gasoline (petrol) and aviation-grade kerosenes are produced from different refinement processes.....but, they start out from the same "stuff"....n'est pas??





edit on Wed 2 November 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Gmoneycricket
 


Yes there are radioactive materials in crude oil - and measurement and regulations to control them

there is also radiation "in" concrete, and coal ash - in fact much more in coal ash than in oil.

and in bananas. Oh and sunlight.

So how does that all relate to mushroom clouds from nuclear bombs? Well I guess you could burn some bananas to create something similar??







edit on 2-11-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: trying image sizing......

edit on 2-11-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: still trying image sizing

edit on 2-11-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: meh - to hell with image sizing!



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cloudology
reply to post by PGRacer
 


they were going from Germany to Spain... everyone knows those two foods don't jive!

some sauerkraut with your paella Sra?


--->

And the result of mixing said foods smells like toxic fumes from the aircon.

In both cases landing asap at the nearest suitable rwy is required.



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:09 PM
link   
I just got you to admit that contrails have an regulated amount of radiation in the product.
We all know that its OK to pollute as long as you have a permit and follow the regulations of
said pollution.

Jet airplanes are blocking humans sunlight and polluting the earth and you will never convince me that
contrails do not affect nature.

I know I am a bigger threat as I question Contrails.
I have never made a claim of Chemtrails.

Just discussing what may be in Contrails puts you guys on defense.
OK lets go look up
"History Of Jet Fuel Additives"
to see what else you guys have been polluting our sky's with.



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Gmoneycricket
 


What?!?




I just got you to admit that contrails have an regulated amount of radiation in the product.


Whew!! Are your arms tired? Form that incredible stretching of the truth, and reality?



We all know that its OK to pollute as long as you have a permit and follow the regulations of
said pollution. [


If you own a car, then immediately stop driving it, or else YOU are *part of the problem*!




Jet airplanes are blocking humans sunlight and polluting the earth and you will never convince me that
contrails do not affect nature.


That's a load of horse radish. Any contrails, when they form and persist, last about as long as any other similar types of clouds.

In any case, when you take into account the FULL AREA of the planet, and compare to the teeny, tiny amount of contrails coverage that occurs on an average basis.....like I said, a load of nonsense.

.

OK lets go look up
"History Of Jet Fuel Additives"
to see what else you guys have been polluting our sky's with.


OK...also, take a look at what additives are in your automotive gasoline (petrol). Get a grip on reality, and try to learn some perspective and comparisons.....



edit on Wed 2 November 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


I understand that you have no concept of this discussion and feel trying to laugh or ridicule me is best respond in your case.
So if you want to insult me please try a little harder if you can not answer contrail pollution answers is your only defense.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join