Pilot admits chemtrails and says they are a "necessary evil"........

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


It seems you are debunking your selves.

The good thing is you can't help your self but reveal your true colours in time as you've done.

reply to post by OneManArmy


First few seconds, she talks about clouds being seeded to create raid. This is the act of introducing particulate matter into existing cumulus clouds to start the process of precipitation. There is nothing remotely secret or mysterious about this and so is not relevant. This process is illustrate on James Mays Man Lab Christmas Special. Available on You Tube (cloud seeding segment starts at 18 mins 20 secs) and was broadcast on BBC 1. That's how secret that process is.

This is clearly not chemtrail theory which has for 20 years claimed that artificial clouds are being created in grid patterns etc These clouds are cirrus type, Cirrus Aviaticus to be precise, which is a type that does not produce rain.

She then starts to define chemtrails by contrasting them with contrails, which she says are 'short exhaust trails, which usually evaporate within a few minutes' and that chemtrails are the the ones that linger and spread in the sky.

Given that those are the words that come out of her mouth, why do you give any credence to any claim at all that she makes?

As soon as I know someone hasn't got a clue what they are talking about, I tend to stop listening. Which I did.

reply to post by waynos


I think I must be.

Yep, I am.

What's your excuse?

reply to post by fireyaguns


Ham fistedness in my hurry to to finish typing.

Do you believe that contrails rapidly dissipate? If so, why?

reply to post by tommyjo


Please refer to the Geo Engineering and Chemtrail forum here at ATS for all you evidence reading and watching pleasure.

It all in the Ats Geo Engineering and Chemtrail forum.

But stupidity and arrogance won't help anyone including you too.

reply to post by waynos


Please refer to my post above.
Thank you.

reply to post by fireyaguns


I have seen lots of evidence.

Evidence that scientists are seriously looking into and considering GE strategies

Evidence that many inventors have patented ideas for disbursing materials into the atmosphere

Evidence that there are people out there who scaremonger on purpose by spreading lies

Evidence that people cannot identify aircraft or translate German into English too

But where is the evidence that contrails are chemtrails? Which ones are they?

And could you answer my question too?

fireyaguns
reply to post by waynos

 

Please refer to my post above.
Thank you.

I just did. But it has nothing to do with the question I asked.

waynos
reply to post by fireyaguns

 

I have seen lots of evidence.

Evidence that scientists are seriously looking into and considering GE strategies

Evidence that many inventors have patented ideas for disbursing materials into the atmosphere

Evidence that there are people out there who scaremonger on purpose by spreading lies

Evidence that people cannot identify aircraft or translate German into English too

But where is the evidence that contrails are chemtrails? Which ones are they?

And could you answer my question too?

.


I agree with the first 4 sentences but the rest you have been Shown over many many threads yet you have Continually dismissed all evidence to this day with Arrogance.

I love these post you guys put up now, once it annoyed me but now it just proves Chemtrails are real with every post you guys make.

Thanks for helping speed the word.

fireyaguns


But stupidity and arrogance won't help anyone including you too.

You mean ignorance and gullibility as demonstrated by the 'evidence' posted on that forum? So when will all this 'evidence' become mainstream and astound the world and stop all the 'shills' in their tracks? In twenty years time you will still be shaking your fist at the big white lines in the sky and the penny still won't have dropped. Correct?

waynos

OneFreeMan

fireyaguns
Wow, keep digging that hole, what fun this is.

You guys are so transparent.

Now you are coming in with old post, might I say this is what you all do every time you're defeated, bring in the old rusty guns. Can't shoot straight with rust guns.

I never have take much notice of a bloke that can't shoot straight.

All the evidence is right here on Ats and you guys just make the whole Chemtrail story so much more real. Just think about how many post you have contributed to and how crazy a person must be to have the count you all do no this Chemtrailing subject.

Not even us members whom are in agreement that we are assaulted by Chemtrail programmes have the counts you all do.

Very odd indeed.

Yet, not odd at all really.

I'll tell you what is odd.

You keep appearing with a bit of one-line cheerleading, like this, but you studiously avoid having a discussion about points you raised yourself.

That is very odd, it's almost as if you have no knowledge or opinion of your own and you just want to cheerlead for the gang.

Still, at least we can all see it.

What can I say? I trust my senses and my mind is made up on the chemtrailing matter.
I don't believe any of you are coming from the point of view of private concerned
citizens and I refuse to deal too much with people who I know are deceiving me
and are trying so desperately hard to get me to distrust myself and mine own eyes.

The evidence is all around for those with eyes to see. The harder you try, the more
I know you are protecting something that desperately needs protecting. Cumulatively,
how many posts have you and your friends racked up now on denying this issue? It
beggars belief, if you were coming at it from an honest antagonists point of view.
Otherwise it makes perfect sense.

And it does make perfect sense.

I'm a little bemused by the continuing debate about chemtrails, being one of the many thousands of people who witness them right over our heads. A plane is at it right now, and the usual types of clouds are beginning to form to ruin our beautiful sunny day (again). Because so many people have doubts about it, I consulted a friend who is an engineer in a field that includes geoengineering, and he said the same as the pilot essentially, that they are a necessary evil - except that my friend approves of them because he has bought into a version of climate change theory that has been spread through the academic community. He thinks it is protecting us, or potentially so, from damaging solar radiation. I don't, having read the leaked emails from East Anglia and realised how full of holes that whole theory is. However, I recently attended a lecture at Aberystwyth University by other academics who have an alternative version of climate theory, which is that blocking out solar radiation (by any means, natural or otherwise) could hasten what they think is a coming ice age. Great, just what we need. What concerns me more immediately is the cocktail of chemicals they are putting into the air which are drifting down into what we breathe and, via the soil and animals, what we eat. I agree with the contributor who wrote that we should be analysing these. And one question I haven't seen anybody ask - as it seems the planes involved don't appear on the air traffic schedules that are published, how do we know who they are, and whether they have the same kind of benign - if misguided - intent that my friend has? I would like to know who it is that has the arrogance to do this to communities without proper debate and the consent of those communities, and by the way when we find out, if they are "ours" as it were, they will have to start answering some hard questions. If they are not "ours" then the government will have to answer for not having stopped them.

reply to post by fireyaguns

It seems you are debunking your selves.

The good thing is you can't help your self but reveal your true colours in time as you've done.

Please explain how that is even possible for one to debunk themselves?

Again please use a dictionary or at least spell check...

The word your looking for is colors...

You are right this is fun...

reply to post by Anthony2

I'm a little bemused by the continuing debate about chemtrails, being one of the many thousands of people who witness them right over our heads.

Quick question for you...

How do you know they are chemtrails?

And since your a witness to them you should be able to answer this simple question.

reply to post by Anthony2

Because so many people have doubts about it, I consulted a friend who is an engineer in a field that includes geoengineering, and he said the same as the pilot essentially, that they are a necessary evil - except that my friend approves of them because he has bought into a version of climate change theory that has been spread through the academic community. He thinks it is protecting us, or potentially so, from damaging solar radiation.

Any chance you can get this friend to come to ATS and hopefully answer some questions like where are these planes being flown out of and what exactly is being sprayed?

These should be easily answered since he is in the field of geoengineering.

Btw you may want to see what the top geoengineering scientist had to say about chemtrails...

Anthony2
And one question I haven't seen anybody ask - as it seems the planes involved don't appear on the air traffic schedules

Really? I suggest you do some searching on YouTube/web. Have a search on Peekay22, MrMaxBliss or search for Clare Swinney. All these believers regularly film and identify commercial airliners via Flight Radar 24, Flight Aware, etc and claim that they have caught them in the act of spraying.

For example Peekay22 identifying the commercial flight and type and trying to pass off crow instability as something strange and sinister. Is it any wonder aviation professionals and enthusiasts mock this kind of ignorance.



1970 paper on Crow Instability named after S.C. Crow

Crow Instability

reply to post by Anthony2

And one question I haven't seen anybody ask - as it seems the planes involved don't appear on the air traffic schedules that are published, how do we know who they are, and whether they have the same kind of benign - if misguided - intent that my friend has?

That is a question asked in every chemtrail thread in this forum, because if a plane flies it has to file a flight plan with the FAA, and after 9/11 how many planes do you think could fly without one?

reply to post by tommyjo

For example Peekay22 identifying the commercial flight and type and trying to pass off crow instability as something strange and sinister.

I truly enjoy his response to this comment on his video...

Yes,it must be the fuel as QF63 & QF64 are the same planes. If you compare rego' numbers,you will know this. So why do they have different trails? Well,QF63 takes off from Sydney,with type "X" fuel. QF64 takes off from Johannesburg,with what has to be a different fuel. The question is why do they put in a different fuel? A "fuel" refined only for QF64,so it seems.

to which his reply was...

F##k off idiot...thats why QF64 is the only flight we see do this

I just love the chemtrail believer crowd as they are so elegant with their replies to common sense.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


I agree. Peekay22 is a fine example of the utter ignorance that is out there. I wonder what his response would be to crow instability being photographed back in the 1950s?

Scroll down and see the image showing 'typical decay into curved eddies or closed loops'. This was noticed by aviation enthusiasts long before S.C Crow studied it in-depth.

'IDENTIFICATION BY CONTRAILS Possibilities Investigated by the Aircraft Recognition Society' 1956

Page 2 showing the image

Page 1

Another thing to note in the article from 1956 is the observation of the horizon to horizon contrail. How many times have we heard from believers that they didn't start seeing horizon to horizon trails until the 1990s? Aviation enthusiasts were noting this back in the 1950s.

Another consideration is the length of the contrail: it may persist, and stretch from horizon to horizon

reply to post by Anthony2



I'm not sure how an engineer gets involved in geoengineering? But in any case, your friend is very mistaken. Contrails protect us from nothing, but they do cause a very small amount of net global warming - the very thing geoengineering has been proposed to counter!

phys.org...