Chemtrails Perfectly Revisited

Originally posted by dw31243
Great video. It explains alot about Chemtrails. I will definitely bookmark it to show others.

Keep up the good work.

You're welcome, it's good to see a clear and unadulterated mind in this thread.

reply to post by HypotheticalSituationist


Rather than post more YouTube videos, I was wondering if you could get to the point in time where you actually fulfill your stated objective and respond to the member questions...There are numerous direct questions...please, you asked us to submit questions...I know Phage has submitted several and I know I have submitted four...if you could please address the questions, it would be appreciated...thank you.

Originally posted by Uncinus
I think I must literally have seen that KSLA video ("Could a strange substance found by an Arkansas man ...") crop up over two hundred times. The KC-10 video is fast gaining on it though. Both have been on ATS tens of times.

It would be great to gather all the best chemtrail evidence in one place. But really it's highly counterproductive to present evidence that has been clearly and unequivocally debunked three years ago.

Really, if you want your theory to gain acceptance, then you need to cut away the bunk. Focus on the verifiable facts.

You mean like these verified images of chemtrails? Thanks for asking.

Chemtrails Verfied

Chemtrails Verified 2

Originally posted by ProudBirdHelp me to understand.....when I posted information, facts and evidence that directly refuted the claims presented in your video, that is considered to be "nonsense"?

Exactly, your post was without merit.

OK, let me put it another way. In the movie Jurassic Park, there's a scene where a researcher sticks her hand in a pile of dinosaur #, digs around, and pulls out an undigested berry. I'm sure if I read more Proud Bird nonsense, I too may discover a crap covered berry, but to me, the price is way too high.

Originally posted by Uncinus
...the claim that unusually high levels of barium were found was fully debunked. That fact cannot be argued. The actual lab report they held up for the camera clearly shows the actual level of barium was 1/100th the amount they stated.

Hence the claim of excess barium is debunked.

Scientific citations, pls. Everyone wants them from me, I'm posting relevant truths now own up or get off the thread.

Thanks.

The majority of the test results (in the US) have shown Aluminum Oxide, Barium and Strontium 90. These metals (when sprayed as microparticles) have been listed in a number of patents on Geoengineering, as a way to reflect sunlight - however there are also many other uses for them. I personally feel that Geoengineering to curb global warming is merely a theory, and is not actively being pursued with this technology. It has been the most commonly promoted 'theory' behind chemtrails, whereas I think that it's a convenient PR job to 'legitimize' them without actually admitting to them.

The main effect, is that heavy spraying will cause the atmosphere to become densely packed with these metal particulates, which make it very responsive to electromagnetic energy. Devices like HAARP, through high powered antennas, can then manipulate the atmosphere and create changes in temperature and pressure, thus affecting weather patterns. They've been experimenting with various weather modification techniques since at least the 1960's, and I think that today they are beyond experimentation, and are actively engaged in continuous weather modification.

There are many other applications for creating metallic aerosol clouds, such as OTH Radar and enhanced radio communications etc, but it may not just be these metal particulates that are being sprayed. There could be any number of compounds in use, such as experimental drugs, stealth pathogens, or other pharmaceuticals to affect large numbers of people. Some of these other compounds may also have weather mod applications too, as I am sure there are many different methods for different projects.

As for Argon, it is a natural element and one of the most common found in our atmosphere, and would be common in any similar Oxygen based atmosphere. I am unsure if it has any special relationship to chemtrails.

It is the only thing I am unsure.

reply to post by HypotheticalSituationist


Photo 1) Contrails + clouds
Photo 2) Contrails + clouds

Unless of course you have documentation verifying the presence of something else...

Now, once again, you stated the reasons for spraying were SECONDARY to us (the readers) acknowledging your posting of your "mini-documentary," and asking questions...I, along with others, have all acknowledged you put together this "mini-documentary," and have asked you VERY pertinent questions...I know that I am very interested in reading your answers...Thank you.

The Chemtrail/Geo-Engineering Coverup Revealed.

By now everyone has seen crisscrossing streaks of white clouds trailing behind jet aircraft, stretching from horizon to horizon, eventually turning the sky into a murky haze. Our innate intelligence tells us these are not mere vapor trails from jet engines, but no one yet has probed the questions: who is doing this and why. With the release of this video, all of that has changed. Here is the story of a rapidly developing industry called geo-engineering, driven by scientists, corporations, and governments intent on changing global climate, controlling the weather, and altering the chemical composition of soil and water — all supposedly for the betterment of mankind. Although officials insist that these programs are only in the discussion phase, evidence is abundant that they have been underway since about 1990 — and the effect has been devastating to crops, wildlife, and human health. We are being sprayed with toxic substances without our consent and, to add insult to injury, they are lying to us about it. Do not watch this documentary if you have high blood pressure.

Time for a reality check, mates.

Originally posted by adeclerk
Spectacular, more testimony! Is any of it based on evidence, though? Doesn't seem to be too much in the way of evidence for what any "chemtrail" promoter is claiming.

Just jumping aboard here with a pet peeve - nothing to do with the topic itself. You CAN prove a negative proposition.

As one classic 2000+ year old case, consider that it is child's play to prove "there is no rational number equal to the square root of 2."

But this theory assumes there are no thoroughly negative propositions. That for every "not", there is an "is". In the above example for instance, you're not actually proving that an answer doesn't exist, you're offering proof that something doesn't exist in the form of a contrary positive.

I have a long standing position of not aiding people who won't do any work themselves. Either watch the videos or leave the thread. Anything else is just attention seeking.


Your theory fails when faced with propositions concerning things that
can't be so easily measured, like "there is no God".

Our innate intelligence tells us these are not mere vapor trails from jet engines, but no one yet has probed the questions: who is doing this and why. With the release of this video, all of that has changed.

reply to post by HypotheticalSituationist

But people have questioned the claims of that stupid movie. There is no evidence of "spraying". Just evidence of stupidity or intentional deception on the part of the makers of the video.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

An example of the work you require. Instead of just watching stupid videos, do some research into their claims.

One more time, here is a quote from your OP:

The real reasons behind the spraying are almost secondary compared to the importance of getting people to acknowledge it and start asking questions addressed to me about it.

I know I have met this requirement...I would like my questions answered. Thank you.

reply to post by HypotheticalSituationist


Oh, really?

Exactly, your post was without merit.

Refute each and every point raised, then. To show how they were lacking any merit. Was my evidence faulty? If so, then prove it.

Prove your claims.

Oh, one more question/challenge: Based on your join date.....care to come clean as to your actual agenda, here? Because, as shown, the initial start out of the gate was a pile of incorrect assertions, via the video in the Opening Post. Subsequently, the "proofs" shown in two photographic images are of very normal contrails, overhead a city that appears to be European, or in the UK possibly.

So, the opening video proven to be flawed and insubstantial.

The photographic "evidence" is nothing of the sort.

And, the general dismissive tone is borderline repugnant, and rude. Some here might think an explanation is in order.....

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by HypotheticalSituationist

Originally posted by jeichelberg
I would like my questions answered. Thank you.

I have looked back at this thread and you have asked NOquestions, you have only made specious statements.

You cannot refute anything I actually say so now you have attempted to invent a straw man and put words in its mouth. What a dishonest arse you are!

Okay...here they are from page 1...

1) Where is the evidence that "chemtrails," exist?
2) Why have you not presented any evidence to a reputable (or for that matter, disreputable) law firm?
3) If you have presented the evidence to a reputable (or for that matter, disreputable) law firm, what was their response?

I, for one, do not appreciate your name calling...I am reporting this to the mods and will seek to have your account banned for failing to follow T&C...

Here are MORE images above my very head PROOF of chemtrails, view and weep.

MORE Chentrail Proof

MORE Proofs 2

Click here for more information.

reply to post by HypotheticalSituationist


1st photo: Normal contrails, and some cirrus.

2nd photo: Lots of overcast cirrus clouds.

Now, can you please provide some proof?

reply to post by HypotheticalSituationist

We know that certain chemicals have been put in the tankers to spray populations with -

Again please....where is the proof? Or, any evidence, at all.

You have none, am I correct? Because, show proof, or else this is just your opinion.

It is fine to have the opinion....it's just, such things belong elsewhere on ATS. There are Forums devoted to such discussions.

Prince was right and I called this fact earlier in this thread.

I am at a loss for words, truly.