Chemtrail Spraying Caught in Action!!

reply to post by ProudBird


You missed my irony

Chemtrails most definitely exist, because they are nothing more than contrails

reply to post by luxordelphi

You incorrigible rogue - always phishing for personal information. I was asking you to judge, for yourself, based on the news story I linked. In a world where airlines have contracts with the government, what is it that you think happens when a pilot says wth or no, I'm not willing to fly this or dump this or spray this or look the other way on this?

WHERE have I "phished" for personal info???

I merely asked if you have bothered to make the simple effort to inter-act with 'KNOWN' airline pilots, besides the one who is at your disposal, here at ATS....but who is 'anonymous', per the ATS protocols.

I suggested that you may wish to 'be-friend' some other airline pilots, in some manner, and thus get some secondary verification of ALL of what I have written, to date.

That is all.

reply to post by Gmoneycricket

Did you leave the part about a pilot dieing out on purpose? I think the point was sometimes people die before the truth comes out or is dealt with.

F-22 Raptor Jet Crashes in Mohave Desert - Pilot Dies

F-22 Raptor pilot confirmed killed in Alaska crash

Yes, G., the main point was to support the pilots that don't want to fly them and are faced with the military monolith when it comes to refusing orders.

Topically, for the thread, it was to give back on those who say that those suspecting would speak out. Would they really! It's to illustrate a point, a rock and a hard place point, of a life and a livelihood, with all its' dependencies.

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket

We are still waiting for you to provide evidence,

Evidence of what?

Surely the onus is on those who think contrails are something else to provide evidence that thay cannot be contrails?

There is plenty of evidence that contrails are contrails - try meteorology 101.

reply to post by luxordelphi


You should be ASHAMED of yourself!!!!

This post has nothing...NOTHING...to do withn so-called "chemtrails"!

Wow. Sinking to a new low?

Originally posted by AndyMayhew

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket

We are still waiting for you to provide evidence,

Evidence of what?

Surely the onus is on those who think contrails are something else to provide evidence that thay cannot be contrails?

There is plenty of evidence that contrails are contrails - try meteorology 101.

So you are claiming to have samples,
from man made clouds that prove they are harmless?
Collected at the source?
You and a weatherman fly up there on live TV and prove it.
If it is so simple whats taking so long?

Weather service can fly planes into hurricanes,
But I am to believe that the weather service,
cannot take samples from man made clouds.
Its that simple, get to it guys,
prove there is no chemicals, in man made clouds.
Contrail forecasts, pollen forecasts, bad air days,
all we are asking for is a modern chemical forecast.
I will be happy with a zero PPM forecast, if you can prove it.

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket

Originally posted by AndyMayhew

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket

We are still waiting for you to provide evidence,

Evidence of what?

Surely the onus is on those who think contrails are something else to provide evidence that thay cannot be contrails?

There is plenty of evidence that contrails are contrails - try meteorology 101.

So you are claiming to have samples,
from man made clouds that prove they are harmless?
Collected at the source?
You and a weatherman fly up there on live TV and prove it.
If it is so simple whats taking so long?

No, but if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quakes like a duck, and duck experts have been studying it for decades without ever thinking it's anything but a duck, then if you want me to believe it's really a 20ft tall green rhinoceros, I want you to prove to me that it isn't duck.

20ft tall green rhinos may exist. But why think they look like ducks?

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


You want meteorologists to spend taxpayers money proving something which they know doesn't exist isn't there?

Isn't it for you to prove it IS there?

What next? We think fairies make lightning and unless NOAA proves fairies don't exist then it must be true .... ? @@:

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
reply to post by Gmoneycricket

 

You want meteorologists to spend taxpayers money proving something which they know doesn't exist isn't there?

Isn't it for you to prove it IS there?

What next? We think fairies make lightning and unless NOAA proves fairies don't exist then it must be true .... ? @@:

So they can't do it,
or are they refusing to bring proof to the table again.
The weather service has planes in the air everyday,
so the extra expense argument does not work,
Try Again.

Originally posted by AndyMayhew

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket

Originally posted by AndyMayhew

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket

We are still waiting for you to provide evidence,

Evidence of what?

Surely the onus is on those who think contrails are something else to provide evidence that thay cannot be contrails?

There is plenty of evidence that contrails are contrails - try meteorology 101.

So you are claiming to have samples,
from man made clouds that prove they are harmless?
Collected at the source?
You and a weatherman fly up there on live TV and prove it.
If it is so simple whats taking so long?

No, but if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quakes like a duck, and duck experts have been studying it for decades without ever thinking it's anything but a duck, then if you want me to believe it's really a 20ft tall green rhinoceros, I want you to prove to me that it isn't duck.

20ft tall green rhinos may exist. But why think they look like ducks?

So you are saying the duck experts have never seen a Mallard,
a duck that looks the same but has different habits?

reply to post by Gmoneycricket

The weather service has planes in the air everyday,
so the extra expense argument does not work,
Try Again.

Go troll somewhere else....mmmmkay??

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Gmoneycricket

 

The weather service has planes in the air everyday,
so the extra expense argument does not work,
Try Again.

Go troll somewhere else....mmmmkay??

I have been a member longer then you SIR!

I will move on if you will SIR!

So you are admitting you have no means to back the facts,
you claim with samples of man made clouds?
It is easier to try and chase me away?

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


Since you claim there is a conspiracy it is up to you to back that up with facts, so far there has been none.

Originally posted by Ivar_Karlsen
reply to post by Gmoneycricket

 

Since you claim there is a conspiracy it is up to you to back that up with facts, so far there has been none.

I can
Cancer causing chemicals in contrails,
from combustion of petroleum fuels.
Your turn..

reply to post by Gmoneycricket


Not sure if I should "rise" to your "challenge" (sir??)....

So you are admitting you have no means to back the facts.....

But....I have provided NOTHING but facts.

Hope everyone else can claim the same. .... (??)

Originally posted by Ivar_Karlsen
reply to post by Gmoneycricket

 

Since you claim there is a conspiracy it is up to you to back that up with facts, so far there has been none.

Global dimming from shade created from byproducts of combustion,
in all forms of man made travel.
Your turn...

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Gmoneycricket

 

Not sure if I should "rise" to your "challenge" (sir??)....

So you are admitting you have no means to back the facts.....

But....I have provided NOTHING but facts.

Hope everyone else can claim the same. .... (??)

Give me parts per million of the exhaust of aircraft and prove,
there is no chemicals in a contrail.
Prove there is no effects to the environment from global dimming when I have watched you discuss
how contrails will shade the clouds below them.
That is 2 simple ones to start with.

reply to post by Gmoneycricket

I can Cancer causing chemicals in contrails, from combustion of petroleum fuels. Your turn..

Just a quick observation here, but you seem to be only fixated with cancer being caused by contrails and yet you still have not proven in this thread or any other that anyone has ever died or contracted cancer because of exposure to contrails.So again I ask for the proof that anyone has ever contracted cancer because of contrails.

Maybe you should be more worried about these causing cancer...





Than I would these causing cancer....

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
reply to post by Gmoneycricket

 

I can Cancer causing chemicals in contrails, from combustion of petroleum fuels. Your turn..

Just a quick observation here, but you seem to be only fixated with cancer being caused by contrails and yet you still have not proven in this thread or any other that anyone has ever died or contracted cancer because of exposure to contrails.So again I ask for the proof that anyone has ever contracted cancer because of contrails.

Maybe you should be more worried about these causing cancer...

Than I would these causing cancer....

Thank You
The pictures back up the truth as you have shown us pictures of cities with airports in them and
we all know that planes pollute the most during take off,
adding to the smog.

And the pictures of contrails above clouds show that persistent contrails may expand
and effect how clouds would react without man made clouds shading them.

I will let it slide how you were talking down to us again like a second class citizens,
as you again try to twist the truth that contrail pollution is harmless.