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.
waynos
Korg Trinity
waynos
Korg Trinity
And you mr all powerful super intelligence understanding of all.... are you the one to judge what is the upper limit of my mental capacity..
Give me a break!
Korg.
Not at all, where have I ever claimed that, but your behaviour throughout this thread kind of speaks for itself. You are happy to debate something right up the point where your only logical next post is to admit you may have made an error OR there is a gap in that part of the theory and then the doll is straight out of the pram, its quite funny really.edit on 12-10-2013 by waynos because: (no reason given)
You're absolutely right. I am always wrong and a complete gimboyd.
Well done for winning the argument. you may go directly to the president and gain a medal..
Welldone.. really!
Korg.
So, just more of the same then. Ah well, you cant educate pork, as the saying goes
Chemtrails violate all known science.
tsurfer2000h
reply to post by Korg Trinity
Chemtrails violate all known science.
And you can show where that has been said by a debunker?
That is why geoengineering is not be done at this time in large scale, because they just don't know the consequences
And then I asked you how do you know for sure and you link me to talks (about geo-engineering/weather modification) in the UK.
Rutgers University’s Alan Robock, for example, thinks that field tests in the absence of regulation are a bad idea. “Outdoor geoengineering research . . . ” he wrote in a 2012 paper, “. . . is not ethical unless subject to governance that protects society from potential environmental dangers.”
U.S. weather modification research and governance developed between 1947 and 1980
exiteternity
reply to post by MamaJ
noone is disputing weather modification
this is about chemtrails here buddy
Knowing this i am incredibly open to chemtrail theory. But I must also admit there are no current proof for it.
Thats why i climbed back over the fence