If you don’t believe in chemtrails why are you here?

reply to post by dplum517

A funny thing happened in a chemtrail thread.
The debunkers were pwned. Imagine that.

reply to post by killemall


I havn't posted in a "Chemi" thread for a while, but just to keep my hand in
i thought i might as well drop buy to remind you all
that Chemtrails are NOT real. Ordinary vapour trails thats all, don't stress it.

reply to post by rigel4

Oh. Okay.
I feel so much better now. (Sarcasm).

reply to post by dplum517

Yeah. Welsbach materials.

Edward teller also wrote about the possibility of injecting aerosols by the use of aircraft in order to enhance scattering. He had an interesting comment about it, one that you don't often see mentioned in connection with "chemtrails":

Interestingly enough, such Rayleigh scattering of sunlight, performed by stratospherically-deployed aerosols whose diameters are several-fold smaller than the wavelength of light itself, will selectively scatter back into space the largely deleterious ultraviolet component of sunlight while diminishing the light that we see – and that plants use for photosynthesis – only imperceptibly.

From the human perspective, skies would be bluer, twilights would be more visually spectacular, plants would be less stressed by UV photodamage and thus would be more productive, and children playing out-of-doors would be much less susceptible to sunburn (and thus to skin dysplasias and dermal cancers as adults), if this stratospheric Rayleigh scattering system were to be deployed.

www.geoengineeringwatch.org...
Strange. I don't see anyone talking about the sky being any bluer. I only see complaints about how "chemtrails" produce cloudy skies. So, does that mean Teller was wrong or does that mean that there is no geoengineering actually occurring? That "chemtrails" are just clouds which are induced by high altitude airplane traffic?

reply to post by Phage


That is a thick read.

And ....more likely ..... none of us fully understand what's happening.

Maybe the time it takes for the particles to spread out in the atmosphere is not instantaneous. So when a group of planes leave persistent trails, we immediately see the aerosols in the form of white cloud looking trails which then creates that haze (which can produce some crazy colors and sundogs if you are a skywatcher)

Do I see a nice blue sky a couple days later? Possibly ....depends on the forecast. But I most certainly will still see beautiful Blue skies.

This might be a bad analogy but it's like:

Spraying a can of air freshener in the room. We see the spray for a few seconds before it disappears and a few minutes later you can smell what was sprayed across the room. When you spray air freshener, deodorant, wd-40, etc .... they all "look" the same in the air. Just like something would coming out of a plane unless you purposefully put color dye in the product.

In the case of Chemtrails ..... it would be different since they are different chemicals being released in a different environment. So, certain processes may take different amounts of time.

reply to post by dplum517

Supposedly "chemtrails" have been sprayed since the 90's. 15 years isn't enough time?

Not blue skies, bluer skies...permanently. He's not talking about clouds.
Where are the bluer skies? Where are the spectacular sunsets?

The existence of a patent is evidence of nothing other than a hope to cash in on the global warming bandwagon. Here are a few more:
www.google.com...
www.google.com...
www.google.com...
www.google.com...

reply to post by Phage

So, this is the extent of the debunking for the material that was brought to this thread? The fact that Teller wasn't able to accurately predict the visual affects of spraying materials that no one even acknowledges as being done in the first place?
Weather forecasters often fail at predicting the next days weather, and they are usually meteorologists are they not?
Anybody with an ability to read can, thankfully, put the puzzle pieces somewhat together. As has happened in the past, on many occasions, there are the few that DO and the rest of us that are left trying to figure out just what that is. Phage, I have never seen you subscribe to ANY conspiracy, perhaps you could enlighten me?
You are the epitome of the official story, and we know how that has worked out over the years. Perhaps I am wrong. Please, enlighten me.

Originally posted by killemall
New evidence has arrived proving contrails are just a hoax and chemtrails really have been around from the beginning of fuel powered flight.
I put it to anyone to prove a contrail from a plane ever really did exist and is not a chemical trail.
Hoax contrails are created and consist of hot exhaust fuel vapours mixed with cool air.
So there we have the evidence finally to put these silly contrail myths away for good and refer to the correct term chemical trail, contrails debunked

If "chemtrails" have existed that long, they really aren't working. My Grandmother is 83, and in great health.

Contrails are a hoax?

Does that mean car-exhaust is also a hoax?

Seriously, man... I am not following you at all.

What "new evidence"?

Originally posted by killemall
New evidence has arrived proving contrails are just a hoax and chemtrails really have been around from the beginning of fuel powered flight.
I put it to anyone to prove a contrail from a plane ever really did exist and is not a chemical trail.
Hoax contrails are created and consist of hot exhaust fuel vapours mixed with cool air.
So there we have the evidence finally to put these silly contrail myths away for good and refer to the correct term chemical trail, contrails debunked

Just thought you should know, as a new member, that spamming the same message into several threads is against the T&C's of the board. Just a heads up for the future

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow


How does the fact that Carnicom found a piece of dust that they couldn't identify support the chemtrail conspiracy theory?

It's only compelling if you already believe. The argument is essentially this: "We found this piece of dust and we don't know what it is. Therefore, there is a multinational geo-engineering conspiracy in which harmful aerosols are sprayed from airplanes over populated areas in order to mitigate the effects of global warming. The piece of dust is proof because the fact that we can't identify it means that it must actually be some of what they are spraying." That's not a reasonable conclusion to make. Finding something and not knowing what it is doesn't really indicate anything in particular, it's just an unknown. You already believe the theory so you use it to explain unknowns, like this piece of dust they found.

Also, Carnicom has this to say:

It can now be shown with conviction that environmental filament samples and the filaments that are characteristic of the "Morgellons" condition are of one and the same nature. This has been demonstrated visually at the microscopic level on two prior occasions (please see An Environmental Source and The Breath of a Decade) but there has been a reluctance on the part of the general public to engage in the truths of this issue.

www.carnicominstitute.org...

According to numerous peer reviewed scientific publications, Morgellons disease was first reported over 300 years ago. There were certainly no chemtrails back then. So, if Carnicom can show "with conviction that environmental filament samples and the filaments that are characteristic of the 'Morgellons' condition are of one and the same nature," and Morgellons has been around for hundreds of years, doesn't that mean that the environmental filaments definitely are not from a secret geo-engineering project that was supposedly started in the 90's?

Source - American Journal of Clinical Dermatology
Source - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
Source - Journal of Dermatologic Therapy

Is Carnicom wrong about the filament being the same as their sample from Morgellons? Or, are they wrong about it being from chemtrails?

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow

I posted that in specific response to the posting of a patent. The insinuation that since a patent for such a process exists, it is some sort of evidence that it is being done.

Teller was describing the visual effects which would result from the application of a program to increase stratospheric scattering. The very thing that such a program would be doing would produce those effects. It is the physics of the thing. That's how it works, the result of scattering light back into space would be bluer skies and magnificent sunsets. So there is no evidence, visual or otherwise, that it is being done.

The trouble with "chemtrail" believers is that, because they have no actual evidence, they try to pound any piece they can find into any empty space they can find. The trouble is, the pieces don't fit. You try to bend them and twist them but they still don't fit right. You end up with a puzzle that doesnt' look like it's supposed to look. You end up with nonsense.

reply to post by OnceReturned

Surely you know that Morgellons Disease has never officially been really considered a disease.

What is Morgellons Disease

So when people claim, or have claimed that they have Morgellons, what the patient has actually been suffering from has either been diagnosed as some other disease or a mental condition.

You are not really interested in the truth are you? I suspect not.

The fibers that Carnicom has analyzed have been collected from rainwater samples and submitted to him. They weren't found in a landfill, or some other such nonsense that you appear to be trying to convey.

reply to post by Phage

Granted.
The trouble with chemtrail debunkers, since you are lumping all believers in the same category I suspect you will allow me the same privilege, is they don't really address the breadth of material that is brought to support the likelihood of chemtrail spraying. And, when they do, it is personal attacks on the credibility of the author of said material, without much justification, if any.
None of us are infallible.
I suppose you will not address the rest of my response?

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow

The rest of your response? The part about me?
I'm here to discuss content. Not personalities.

reply to post by Phage

When YOU say "chemtrail believers" YOU are talking about other members. I never inquired about your personality.
I noted that you don't subscribe to any conspiracy theories that I can tell, yet so many have been proven to be fact. You pick a perceived weakness in an argument and attack it, yet you put forth no real theories of your own.
Hmmmm.

I'm still waiting to see evidence of chemtrails as I am with a lot of other 'mainstream' conspiracy theories that earn a few people at the top of the pyramid shed loads of money while preying off the gullible masses.
Problem is, the majority of people really don't understand jack about these topics on any scientific level and latch onto anything that makes them feel knowledgeable and special among their peers while the big boys at the top perpetuating this nonsense reap the rewards in $$$ through sales of their media products, website traffic and airtime. Even if you don't actively earn them money, simply by subscribing to the nonsense and talking about it you inevitably help perpetuate it amongst the masses increasing the number of potential 'customers'.
If you believe in this type of crap, chances are you're also an Amway entrepreneur too. The same wild eyed denial that you've been lured into some ridiculous farce that only serves a few at the top is present both in pyramid selling and mainstream conspiracy theories and the victims are usually the same types of people.

I think it's funny that people feel the need to jump in and say NO.....if you don't agree then fine....but besides stating that and maybe supporting evidence as to why.....why stay.....why get involved in threads you have no interest in....

while it is important to clear things up and fact check everything....it is not imperative to see things through as though you are the honor guard of your "cause"

speak your mind and leave....or preferably don't if it is just opinion.....that is just a waste....myself included....our opinions are perfect for conversations....but awful for debates......and there is a difference....

there are people here who really take themselves seriously....too seriously....like having something said here on ATS will define that for the rest of the world....we are here to learn and grow...not police each other's minds...

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
reply to post by OnceReturned

 

Surely you know that Morgellons Disease has never officially been really considered a disease.

I'm familiar. The CDC has been investigating reports of Morgellons for years, trying to determine if it's actually a distinct disease or not. Their report is pending. See: www.cdc.gov...

Nevertheless, Morgellons does refer to a specific set of symptoms that people do report and that the medical community is aware of. It's just that the majority of experts believe the disease to be psychological, not dermatological per se. The symptoms of Morgellons have been reported for hundreds of years, and the third source in my previous post provides a history of the phenomenon.

So when people claim, or have claimed that they have Morgellons, what the patient has actually been suffering from has either been diagnosed as some other disease or a mental condition.

The CDC's conclusion on this issue is still forthcoming, but clinically Morgellons is almost always treated as delusional parasitosis.

You are not really interested in the truth are you? I suspect not.

The only reason that I mention Morgellons is because the source that you provided - when I asked you what the most compelling aspect of the pro-chemtrail argument is - is a website focused largely on the fibers that people with Morgellons disease report finding in and on their skin. This is your source, remember. Carnicom claims in no uncertain terms that the fibers from Morgellons patients are the same as the fibers from the rainwater. You're the one advocating Carnicom as a thorough and legitimate researcher, and you believe the fiber from the rain water is a compelling piece of evidence in the chemtrail debate. Yet, you - like most experts - doubt that Morgellons disease even exists. So, how can you possibly take seriously someone who writes essays about how the fibers supposedly from Morgellons disease are the same as the fibers that are supposedly from chemtrails? Isn't that clearly non-sense?

I am interested in the truth. I think your reasoning is absurd. Do you just pick and choose which of Carnicom's work you will believe? Do you tell yourself that the Morgellons "research" is nonsense (because it's about fibers that are the result of a disease which you yourself don't even believe in), but that they must have gotten their act together when they worked on the piece of dust from the raindrop? Isn't it painfully obvious that you're not following the evidence here, and that instead you're just interpreting things in a way that supports what you already believe?

The fibers that Carnicom has analyzed have been collected from rainwater samples and submitted to him. They weren't found in a landfill, or some other such nonsense that you appear to be trying to convey.

A piece of dust they found in a puddle and can't identify isn't nonsense? Where do you think they get those Morgellons fibers that they analyze and write about? They have pictures of the Morgellons fibers next to the rainwater fibers and they claim they're the same thing. How do you reconcile this? You know the Morgellons fibers are BS, so you know his conclusion about the environmental fibers and the Morgellons fibers being the same must be BS, yet you're still convinced that the fact that these clearly incompetent scientists don't know what their sample is indicates that the chemtrail conspiracy is true? Really?

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow

When I say "chemtrail believers" I'm talking about the content of their arguments. There is no "perceived weakness" to those arguments. There is complete weakness. They are based on fabrications, misconceptions and ignorance.

If you wish to attack the content of my arguments please do so. Whether or not I subscribe to any particular conspiracy theory or other is irrelevant to the discussion of the facts.

reply to post by OnceReturned

You cited examples of people that have reported Morgellon Disease symptoms for much longer than this chemtrail phenomenon could have ever existed. Carnicom found a link, fibers, that apparently cause similar symptoms to occur in people.
You attempted to debunk his research by citing the fact that people reported these symptoms before chemtrail spraying could ever occur.
For that reason, I suspect that you have no real interest in the truth. I provided material for you, and rather than dispute much of any of it, you resort to this?
I hate wasting my time. Good day.