Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum _ Global Perspectives, Chemtrails vs Contrails, Geoengineering, Etc _ Where Are Pilots For Chemtrail Truth?

Posted by: Hsaive Mar 1 2014, 05:42 AM

Where are "Pilots For Chemtrails Truth?" -- Photo Images of Chemtrails Spray Nozzles Installed on Commercial Airlines
http://wp.me/p2FjTj-3Jp










cleanup.gif

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 1 2014, 05:52 AM

QUOTE (Hsaive @ Mar 1 2014, 04:42 AM) *
Where are "Pilots For Chemtrails Truth?"


First, you do not need to increase the size of your font here. People can read just fine.

Second.... We are in the same place I expressed to you the last time Harold, (along with many others who have concerns regarding 'chemtrails').

P4T has more Pilots than most Airlines have started with... including such Majors as Delta, Northwest, USAir... i could go on.

Your images obviously found on the net... do not prove anything...

"Chemtrails" are perhaps the easiest "theory" to prove. All we need is an airplane to go up there and fly through such "materials". We can lower the landing gear at slow speeds, and at such concentration, the "chemicals" would no doubt stick to every bolt, screw, actuator, intake, flap mechanism, pitot tube.. even the nav lights.. .the list goes on.

Ever seen what a Crop Duster looks like after spraying a field? There is all kinds of shit caked onto the airframe....

Now imagine what it would be like following behind flying in the spray...


Then we land and take samples.

Mike Rivero and Alex Jones have been touting "chemtrails" for years. They have both had multiple "money bombs" to expand their networks/studios.

Why not have a "money bomb" to buy an airplane and go fly up there to get samples?

I have sent such requests to both Mike and Alex over the years... and we are willing to fly it for free. Unfortunately, we have never heard a reply.

So... you want "Pilots For Chemtrail Truth"?

Get us an airplane, show us what you feel is a "chemtrail"... we will go fly through it... and we will find out the truth... as I requested the last time we spoke.

Posted by: MikeR Mar 1 2014, 06:43 AM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 1 2014, 09:52 PM) *
We are in the same place I expressed to you the last time Harold, (along with many others who have concerns regarding 'chemtrails').

P4T has more Pilots than most Airlines have started with... including such Majors as Delta, Northwest, USAir... i could go on.

"Chemtrails" are perhaps the easiest "theory" to prove. All we need is an airplane to go up there and fly through such "materials". We can lower the landing gear at slow speeds, and at such concentration, the "chemicals" would no doubt stick to every bolt, screw, actuator, intake, flap mechnism, pitot tube.. even the nav lights.. .the list goes on.

Then we land and take samples.

Mike Rivero and Alex Jones have been touting "chemtrails" for years. They have both had multiple "money bombs" to expand their networks/studios.

Why not have a "money bomb" to buy an airplane and go fly up there to get samples?

I have sent such requests to both Mike and Alex over the years... and we are willing to fly it for free. Unfortunately, we have never heard a reply.

So... you want "Pilots For Chemtrail Truth"?

Get us an airplane, show us what you feel is a "chemtrail"... we will go fly through it... and we will find out the truth... as I requested the last time we spoke.


Rob .... What would you (not) prove by collecting samples flying behind a chemspraying
airline right in its flight path, that has not been proven a thousand times over by
endless lab testing of air and soil samples at ground level?

The ground samples invariably show a huge INCREASE in aluminum: you telling me that's
from diesel fumes along the freeways?

A lab-tested hair from a woman's head shows TOXIC levels of BARIUM: is that because
her Prius Hybrid is leaking fumes inside the car?

Orofino, ID is way off regular airline traffic routes. So why does the childrens's parade day
get blasted with chem last October, plane tracks can be SEEN turning off the chem spray
before they do the next overrun with chem pouring: The blue sky after sunrise turns
military grey from one fracked horizon to the other.

All the kids are wheezing and coughing, parent's eyes are streaming.

The next day is IDENTICAL weather, not a plane in sight, and the sky is blue all day.

You gonna tell me the cretins are faking intentional condensation trails...
just to fuel my imagination on (y)our forum, Rob? blink.gif

MikeR

Posted by: tumetuestumefaisdubien Mar 1 2014, 06:49 AM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Feb 28 2014, 10:52 PM) *
you want "Pilots For Chemtrail Truth"?

Get us an airplane, show us what you feel is a "chemtrail"... we will go fly through it... and we will find out the truth... as I requested the last time we spoke.

That's very straight and generous offer Rob. Now I wonder if this chemtrail truthers will ever utilize it. I won't hold my breath... rolleyes.gif


Posted by: almerie Mar 1 2014, 07:06 AM

Hsaive,

Are you sure this is not Pylon Drains, as seen in the A320 manual?:







Posted by: almerie Mar 1 2014, 07:10 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 1 2014, 06:43 AM) *
The ground samples invariably show a huge INCREASE in aluminum: you telling me that's
from diesel fumes along the freeways?


I would love to see the lab reports and sample collection procedures for this?


Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 1 2014, 07:18 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 1 2014, 05:43 AM) *
Rob .... What would you (not) prove by collecting samples flying behind a chemspraying
airline right in its flight path,


An end to the controversy.

Are you opposed to actually flying up there and getting samples?



QUOTE
The ground samples invariably show a huge INCREASE in aluminum:


Do you understand how an airliner pressurization system works?

I'll keep this real simple if you do not....

If you feel that there is a "huge INCREASE in aluminum in ground samples", then you MUST accept that anyone who flies in an airplane at the flight levels are breathing in a much higher concentration.

Are you aware of how many flights and humans fly in our atmosphere daily?


Again... this theory is easily proven. Just get us an airplane.. and we will fly in any "chemtrail" pointed out to us...

In fact, I will let you fly the airplane if you want... after all, I am a Flight Instructor... smile.gif

Posted by: tonybird Mar 1 2014, 10:20 AM

Well, I'm not a pilot here, but I've tried to get this group interested in this subject before. I would challenge Rob, whom I assume to be a pilot, to do us all a public service and do exactly what he's suggesting.

I attended the "Consciousness Beyond Chemtrails" conference in L.A. two years ago, and there was a speaker there who had done this from the ground. He was one of the more credible people there. His name is Francis Mangels, a retired USDA biologist living near Mt. Shasta, and he said he got real curious about the subject seeing a lot of chemtrails (if that's what they are) over his place. So he collected fallout samples and sent them in to a science company for a standard analysis, and found lots of chemicals that shouldn't be there--the usual suspects in the chemtrail debate, the barium and aluminum compounds and other metal-related things. I found the fellow quite credible, and he's the only one I know of who has done this. You'll find his material on the internet, together with the usual armchair efforts to debunk him.

I'm serious, Rob, or any of you other pilots so inclined--just do it. This needs confirmation or refutation with evidence other than Mangels's ground-collected samples.

This is one squiggly little controversy. I grew up in the Midwest in the 50s and 60s, spent a lot of time outdoors, and never saw a chemtrail sky, although there was a lot less jet traffic in those days. I've lived in California for more than 30 years and haven't seen a chemtrail sky that sticks in my mind until the last 15 years or so. A chemtrail is a contrail that won't disappear. Rather, it expands into large cloudlike formations which are obviously man-made. However, in one chemtrail discussion I had, someone found a study published in an atmospheric science journal from the 1950s which was discussing the problems of expanding contrails in Colorado and how they might affect air quality--a rather prescient concern for that time.

Link to Mangels' material:

http://globalskywatch.com/reference/chemtrails-geoengineering/Francis-Mangels-Observations.html

BTW, I think Rob has an interesting observation. We get occasional "inside" stuff on the internet about this, like the photograph of an aircraft interior full of chemical tanks or the guarded account by someone claiming to be an airline maintenance worker. Don't know what to believe, but you can make a difference by flying up there, collecting some goup, and sending it in for a simple chemical analysis.

Posted by: almerie Mar 1 2014, 11:13 AM

QUOTE (tonybird @ Mar 1 2014, 10:20 AM) *
I attended the "Consciousness Beyond Chemtrails" conference in L.A. two years ago, and there was a speaker there who had done this from the ground. He was one of the more credible people there. His name is Francis Mangels, a retired USDA biologist living near Mt. Shasta, and he said he got real curious about the subject seeing a lot of chemtrails (if that's what they are) over his place. So he collected fallout samples and sent them in to a science company for a standard analysis, and found lots of chemicals that shouldn't be there--the usual suspects in the chemtrail debate, the barium and aluminum compounds and other metal-related things. I found the fellow quite credible, and he's the only one I know of who has done this. You'll find his material on the internet, together with the usual armchair efforts to debunk him.


If Francis Mangels general credibility on this subject has the same standards as his observations on tomato crops in California, then I can safely say that it is seriously lacking.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/the-claims-of-francis-mangels-a-factual-examination.154/


Posted by: weth Mar 1 2014, 11:19 AM

QUOTE (tonybird @ Mar 1 2014, 04:20 PM) *
This is one squiggly little controversy. I grew up in the Midwest in the 50s and 60s, spent a lot of time outdoors, and never saw a chemtrail sky, although there was a lot less jet traffic in those days. I've lived in California for more than 30 years and haven't seen a chemtrail sky that sticks in my mind until the last 15 years or so. A chemtrail is a contrail that won't disappear. Rather, it expands into large cloudlike formations which are obviously man-made. However, in one chemtrail discussion I had, someone found a study published in an atmospheric science journal from the 1950s which was discussing the problems of expanding contrails in Colorado and how they might affect air quality--a rather prescient concern for that time.

First: there exists no proof with a "procedure of the chemtrails" as proposed from Rob. If, this would be a must to be at least credible and plausible.
All other arguments are secondary and hearsay.
Second: "chemtrails" exist since planes produce contrails. See e.g. the foto in the german wikipedia from US bombers over Austria in 1944
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail
Third: there is a nice (german) chemtrail debunking from a guy who shows (his) photos of the 70ies and 80ies with "chemtrails" resp. contrails.
So your argument, that you have never seen a "chemtrail" (contrail) before 1995 is a proven (personal argument) error.
QUOTE (tonybird @ Mar 1 2014, 04:20 PM) *
BTW, I think Rob has an interesting observation. We get occasional "inside" stuff on the internet about this, like the photograph of an aircraft interior full of chemical tanks or the guarded account by someone claiming to be an airline maintenance worker. Don't know what to believe, but you can make a difference by flying up there, collecting some goup, and sending it in for a simple chemical analysis.

These tanks are explained here (see photo): http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 1 2014, 11:29 AM

QUOTE (tonybird @ Mar 1 2014, 09:20 AM) *
I'm serious, Rob, or any of you other pilots so inclined--just do it. This needs confirmation or refutation with evidence other than Mangels's ground-collected samples.


tonybird, feel free to provide the airplane, and we will fly it to any "chemtrail" you point to.

Posted by: N2264J Mar 1 2014, 12:22 PM

QUOTE (Hsaive @ Mar 1 2014, 04:42 AM) *
Where are "Pilots For Chemtrails Truth?" -- Photo Images of Chemtrails Spray Nozzles Installed on Commercial Airlines


I have no doubt that geo-engineering is being looked at as a last ditch effort to shade the earth. But commercial airliners spraying chemicals? Unlikely.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jul/17/us-geoengineers-spray-sun-balloon

Chemtrails is a metaphor for industry dumping tons of toxins into our public waterways and atmosphere every day while our business co-opted government lets them get away with it and pass the cost of this pollution (in dollars and health problems) onto the taxpayers.

Posted by: Quest Mar 1 2014, 01:24 PM

There is no doubt in my mind that chemtrailing is being done by the military and/or private contractors for puposes of geoengineering the weather, in particular using weather as a weapon; a weapon to get rid of small farmers - many of whom grow organic produce (California drought, Midwest floods), steal land (Agenda 21) by producing floods and drought, and to squash political dissent (Iran/Africa droughts/Northern Colorado "secession movement" flood last fall). This is being done virtually across the entire planet as an accelerant to help bring about the elite's dream of one-world-government and a return to feudalism. The beauty of using weather as a weapon is "plausible deniability". Plausible deniability also allows for the perpetuation of the current economic model.

Club Of Rome and Geoengineering
http://thenaturalresponse.org/geo-engineering-and-chemtrailshaarp/
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/planet-earth-under-chemical-attack-from-chemtrails/

There is plenty of photographic evidence in the form flight patterns with horizon to horizon criss-crossing of supposed contrails that prove such a program (geoengineering) exists but also proves the planes cannot possibly be commercial by virtue of the patterns.

My impression of those in the 911 truth movement who deny the existence of the program have simply not researched the topic to any great extent and are not aware of the abundance of photo evidence, air/soil test results, or the statements made by proponents of geoengineering (ie; The military, Bill Gates, John Holdren, David Keith). They simply dismiss the evidence out-of-hand while even more deny it out of political correctness (yes, even 911 truthers are often guilty of political correctness).

Geoengineering Whistleblower ~ Ex-Military ~ Kristen Meghan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHm0XhtDyZA

Who here believes the below photo is that of ordinary contrails left by commercial planes?

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/feature-image.jpg

Posted by: Quest Mar 1 2014, 07:15 PM

Hsaive, IMO, it is highly unlikely that the chemtrail spraying is being done by commercial aircraft. Is it your belief that it is being done by commercial planes? Most of the photo evidence suggests that the spraying is done by NON-commercial aircraft such as the military or private contractors. What do you say?


Posted by: almerie Mar 2 2014, 05:09 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 1 2014, 01:24 PM) *
There is no doubt in my mind that chemtrailing is being done by the military and/or private contractors for puposes of geoengineering the weather...


I think this argument need some backup of factual evidence? And I do not think a photograph or video will be considered substantial evidence.

QUOTE
There is plenty of photographic evidence in the form flight patterns with horizon to horizon criss-crossing of supposed contrails that prove such a program (geoengineering) exists but also proves the planes cannot possibly be commercial by virtue of the patterns.


This argument would have much more weight if not based on a picture after the actual event.
Why not try tracking the aircraft that created these contrails?

QUOTE
Who here believes the below photo is that of ordinary contrails left by commercial planes?


The word believe should not be part of an objective research.

So, why not take up Rob's generous offer?

Posted by: Quest Mar 2 2014, 10:52 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 2 2014, 10:09 AM) *
1. I think this argument need some backup of factual evidence? And I do not think a photograph or video will be considered substantial evidence.



2. This argument would have much more weight if not based on a picture after the actual event.
Why not try tracking the aircraft that created these contrails?



3. The word believe should not be part of an objective research.

4. So, why not take up Rob's generous offer?


1. It's not an argument, it's an opinion. Police detectives make arrests based on opinions all the time. They also make arrests based on photos and videos on a regular basis. Her you ever heard the statement, "It is the opinion of this court..."?

2. I agree with you on that one. In a perfect world, some government body (FAA, FBI?) would actually track one of these planes and search it.

3. Again, "believe" is merely an opinion. Opinion would not necessarily hold up in a court of law, sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Opinions carry more weight when bolstered by additional evidence whether it be DNA, eyewitnesses and yes, photos and videos but criminals are busted based on "opinion" all the time.

4. I agree with Rob, that it would be a great idea but it's not necessary. No more necessary than we would have to make up models of actual size WTC towers and control demolition them to prove they were in fact demolished by explosives. There is already more than enough evidence in which to get a warrant and launch an investigation into the illegal geoengineering of our skies and the evidence comes in the form of videos, photos, ground and soil test samples. Btw, you and I are also eyewitnesses to this crime; just go outside and look over your head and take some air/soil samples. Whether you believe it or not, if I'm right, YOU and YOUR family are breathing this crap and it's destroying YOUR environment as well.

Almerie, can I have your opinion on the following photo? Ordinary contrails? Also, does the pattern of these "contrails" strike you as odd?

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/feature-image.jpg

Posted by: almerie Mar 2 2014, 11:05 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 2 2014, 10:52 AM) *
1. It's not an argument, it's an opinion. Police detectives make arrests on opinions all the time. They also make arrests on photos and videos on a regular basis.

3. Again, "believe" is merely an opinion. Opinion would not necessarily hold up in a court of law, sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Opinions should also be bolstered by facts and actual, factual evidence but criminals are busted based on "opinion" all the time.


Opinions will never hold up in a Court of law.

Law officers may arrest and detain based on circumstantial evidence, and photographs/video could be of that kind (not their own opinions), but it is up to a court of law to justify such an action.

So is your research based on opinions or circumstantial evidence?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

About the contrail patterns in the picture: Can you define odd in this respect? And what would make this picture 'less odd' in your eyes?

Posted by: Quest Mar 2 2014, 11:25 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 2 2014, 04:05 PM) *
About the contrail patterns in the picture: Can you define odd in this respect? And what would make this picture 'less odd' in your eyes?


If you can't see anything odd about that photo then I am wasting my time with you.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/feature-image.jpg

Posted by: Quest Mar 2 2014, 11:28 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 2 2014, 04:05 PM) *
Opinions will never hold up in a Court of law.


Really? You've never heard the term, "It is the opinion of this court...."?

Posted by: tumetuestumefaisdubien Mar 2 2014, 04:43 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 2 2014, 04:28 AM) *
You've never heard the term, "It is the opinion of this court...."?

A court opinion can have some bearing in a civil case, but in a criminal case against government I'm afraid you would need plausible evidence (-for multiple purposes from obtaining warrants to winning the case - and I would bet photos of the pylon drainers and skies with plane trails will be not enough for proving conspiracy of planetary genocide rolleyes.gif). And that's what Rob offers - to help acquire it for the chemtrails truthers, while I can't quite understand why you tell us it is not necessary.
I was myself repeatedly watching very suspicious multiple big airplane activities in the skies on the France-Spain mountainous border, clearly outside usual commercial flight corridors, always early in the morning just before sunrise which in dependence on the wind often resulted in whole sky covered by quite weird haze for the rest of the day and whenever a hole appeared due to uneven winds over the mountains a plane appeared and filled it. I would like to know what they were doing there and what s*it they were using for it. You not?

Posted by: JimMac Mar 2 2014, 05:13 PM

QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 2 2014, 04:43 PM) *
A court opinion can have some bearing in a civil case, but in a criminal case against government I'm afraid you would need plausible evidence (-for multiple purposes from obtaining warrants to winning the case - and I would bet photos of the pylon drainers and skies with plane trails will be not enough for proving conspiracy of planetary genocide rolleyes.gif). And that's what Rob offers - to help acquire it for the chemtrails truthers, while I can't quite understand why you tell us it is not necessary.
I was myself repeatedly watching very suspicious multiple big airplane activities in the skies on the France-Spain mountainous border, clearly outside usual commercial flight corridors, always early in the morning just before sunrise which in dependence on the wind often resulted in whole sky covered by quite weird haze for the rest of the day and whenever a hole appeared due to uneven winds over the mountains a plane appeared and filled it. I would like to know what they were doing there and what s*it they were using for it. You not?


Stop and think about the idea, its not a simple as it sounds. Look at nanothermite as an example, and Neils Harrit. In order to demonstrate any 'believable' outcome the testing organization would need to be a corporate identity with credibility. Then you run into the 'scientific method', the result would need to be repeatable. Then there is the likelihood that there are several compounds in use, not always the same. The idea that you can jump in a plane like some cowboy on a horse and test for chemtrails with a useful outcome is more fantasy than reality. The truth these days, is whatever the PTB want it to be, recall what Karl Rove said:

We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” - Karl Rove

Jim


Posted by: tumetuestumefaisdubien Mar 2 2014, 06:24 PM

QUOTE (JimMac @ Mar 2 2014, 10:13 AM) *
Stop and think about the idea, its not a simple as it sounds. Look at nanothermite as an example, and Neils Harrit. In order to demonstrate any 'believable' outcome the testing organization would need to be a corporate identity with credibility. Then you run into the 'scientific method', the result would need to be repeatable. Then there is the likelihood that there are several compounds in use, not always the same. The idea that you can jump in a plane like some cowboy on a horse and test for chemtrails with a useful outcome is more fantasy than reality. The truth these days, is whatever the PTB want it to be, recall what Karl Rove said:

We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” - Karl Rove

Jim

Whatever.
I think that if you take air samples in prescribed airsample containers, documenting the source, (best if you also can overhear Mode 3 and Mode-S and find out the tailnumber - todays high definition cameras, picture stabilizers and telelenses could make it possible), having witnesses for chain of samples custody and you send it to the certified airquallity lab for analysis, I think the results - if finding it contains high levels of exotic pollutants - hardly could be rejected as inadmissible evidence and in fact could serve as probable cause for warrant to seize the aircraft for inspection.
Establishing forensic evidence has hardly anything direct with repeatability in the method of scientific discovery, the criminal investigation is not a scientific research it is providing plausible evidence for purposes of investigation and prosecution. And anyway if you would have multiple well documented airsamples repeatedly containing high levels of exotic pollutants it iself would constitute repeated pattern.
What I more see here as problem is corruption of the governments and who would there really be eager to pursue such case which would have potential not only get direct perpetrators into jail for long time, but to take the governments down with them.

Posted by: MikeR Mar 3 2014, 12:51 AM

QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 3 2014, 08:43 AM) *
.... that's what Rob offers - to help acquire it for the chemtrails truthers, while I can't quite understand why you tell us it is not necessary.


What Rob offers is totally oxymoronic

What Rob WANTS is for some airplane owner who desperately needs
to bump the number of million flying hours for plane and pilot...

What Rob WANTS is
EITHER for said airplane and pilot to be in the air
24/7/366 ready to take a dive down to catch up with the first contrail seen...
OR
that the said airplane and pilot be at the ready on the tarmac 24/7/366 ...
pre-flight inspected and rarin' to go chasing after.... after what?

The HUGE increase in aluminum content in soils observed and measured
nationwide has to be caused.... needs to come from somewhere,
somehow.... and the worldwide phenomenon, of non-natural sky conditions
which are clearly of recent origin, could be the only cause.

Chemtrail denial will clutch at straws. My hair analysis shows a steady
increase in bodily-takeup of toxic barium... the hair shows the INCREASE
along the length of the hair. Russ Tanner almost lost his life because of
chemtrail spraying ... he can now share his experiences and teach any
who's willing to listen how to best manage the criminal spraying
that none of us was ever consulted on.
http://globalskywatch.com/stories/my-chemtrail-story/#.UxQIloW3tQI

Rob ..... if a chase plane ever collects a toxic-tainted sample from behind
a trail-blazing airplane, what assurance can you (or anybody) give us that
you or one of the debunkers here will open there minds to even that tiny
piece of evidence?

MikeR

Posted by: MikeR Mar 3 2014, 01:02 AM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 1 2014, 11:18 PM) *
... you MUST accept that anyone who flies in an airplane at the flight levels are breathing in a much higher concentration.


Most humans live at ground level, Rob

The ground-level concentration of aluminum increase in recent times has been HUGE
(I could quote figures, but you will be much more impressed by your own foray onto G**gl*)

How would your alleged "breathing in a much higher concentration" way up in the stratosphere relate to
the forests on earth withering and dying, and our crops struggling more each year?

Of course, I have no objection to your chase-plane-sampling idea.... just that the amount of
stuff you collect will be miniscule, and we already have untold tons of soil samples down
here on the ground. If "obvious" ain't sufficiently scientific to point us towards a
more productive line of inquiry I guess I'd best go back to talking no-planes 9/11
or something equally simple and....

...and obvious rolleyes.gif

Posted by: almerie Mar 3 2014, 02:18 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 2 2014, 11:25 AM) *
If you can't see anything odd about that photo then I am wasting my time with you.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/feature-image.jpg


I did not say that.

What I asked was what would make this picture seem less odd in your eyes.


Posted by: almerie Mar 3 2014, 02:22 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 2 2014, 11:28 AM) *
Really? You've never heard the term, "It is the opinion of this court...."?


You are playing with words here.

The phrase 'It is the opinion of the court' is the term used for the courts verdict.

You also forget the long process before this phrase, which is weighing evidence in the case at hand.



Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 3 2014, 02:30 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 3 2014, 12:02 AM) *
Most humans live at ground level, Rob


You are correct, but thousands of humans also "live" in the air.... up to 8 hours a day, 30 hours per week, 100 hours per month, 1200 hours per year.

They are called Pilots. And those are only the domestic pilots. International pilots (and many passengers.. ie frequent flyers) "live" in the air for much longer durations.

To put this into perspective, although the ground concentrations show a "HUGE increase" (according to you), the dispersal of the substance by the time it hits the ground is like tilting your head back, opening your mouth and sipping rain drops. In contrast, when flying behind a "spraying" aircraft (or in any visible "chemtrail"), it would be like trying to take a sip off a fire hose. The cabin's would be filled with chemicals in concentrations MUCH higher than anything you would find on the ground, not only would every passenger/crew member need an O2 mask at all times, but you probably wouldn't even be able to see in the cabin. Airline passenger cabins are not a sealed unit. The air you breathe in a passenger cabin comes directly from outside the airplane, through the engines, it is then compressed and then dumped into the cabin for all the earthlings to consume. The cabin pressure is regulated by what is called an Outflow valve where all the other gasses escape, such as CO2 and gasses produced by your morning burrito.

Also keep in mind, the samples collected from the ground have no chain of custody from the air to the ground. In other words, it cannot be proven such samples came from an airplane. The only way to prove such details would be to fly behind an aircraft allegedly spraying, or through what one thinks is a result of spraying "chemtrails" such as the http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/feature-image.jpg.


In fact, you could probably get such an experiment done with less than 100k if you want to charter an airplane for a week. An example, A light jet usually runs about 2500/hr (an older model Lear or Hawker). So if you were able to raise 100k, you would have 40 hours of flying to obtain samples from coast to coast, all week long. I think Alex raised 250k in his first "money bomb"? Should be a piece of cake for those who really want the truth regarding "chemtrails". The more you raise, the more you can fly, the better the results will be.

Let me know if you need phone numbers to some charter operators. I know several across the country that will be happy to serve.

Again, this theory is very easy to prove. All we need is an airplane. And then finally we will have conclusive proof either way, in which no one will be able to ignore.

Posted by: weth Mar 3 2014, 02:35 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 2 2014, 04:52 PM) *
4. I agree with Rob, that it would be a great idea but it's not necessary. No more necessary than we would have to make up models of actual size WTC towers and control demolition them to prove they were in fact demolished by explosives.


You cannot compare an event which was in the past with an alleged event which occurs (in your opinion) nearly every day, leaving detectable traces behind.

To proof the idea of chemtrails, you must come out of the closet and show the (in this case easily reproducible) scientific proof via lab tests.
My preditiction: negative.

Posted by: JimMac Mar 3 2014, 03:04 AM

QUOTE (weth @ Mar 3 2014, 02:35 AM) *
You cannot compare an event which was in the past with an alleged event which occurs (in your opinion) nearly every day, leaving detectable traces behind.

To proof the idea of chemtrails, you must come out of the closet and show the (in this case easily reproducible) scientific proof via lab tests.
My preditiction: negative.


Good 2nd post. Let me guess you were just driving by and noticed the chemtrail conversation...

Posted by: tumetuestumefaisdubien Mar 3 2014, 08:18 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 2 2014, 05:51 PM) *
The HUGE increase in aluminum content in soils observed and measured
nationwide

Source of the HUGE claim?
And because aluminium is very reactive and more or less never found in nature in its elemental state, but forms different compounds in different environment I would like to know in which form is the aluminium which according to you hugely increases in soils nationwide.

QUOTE
has to be caused.... needs to come from somewhere,
somehow.... and the worldwide phenomenon, of non-natural sky conditions
which are clearly of recent origin, could be the only cause.

One thing is interesting: You know how aluminium is called in the Czech language? "http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hlin%C3%ADk". What's the etymology of the word "hliník" in the Czech language? It comes from the word "http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hl%C3%ADna". The translation of the word "hlína" in the narrow sense is "loam", but in fact the word is generally used as http://www.wordreference.com/czen/hl%C3%ADna.
Why is it? Could it be because http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#Natural_occurrence

QUOTE
Chemtrail denial will clutch at straws. My hair analysis shows a steady
increase in bodily-takeup of toxic barium... the hair shows the INCREASE along the length of the hair.

That's interesting. Could you please share with us your hair analysis charts and results?

QUOTE
Russ Tanner almost lost his life because of
chemtrail spraying ...

Is this a subjective opinion of Russ Tanner or he has an objective proof of it?

QUOTE
Rob ..... if a chase plane ever collects a toxic-tainted sample from behind
a trail-blazing airplane, what assurance can you (or anybody) give us that
you or one of the debunkers here will open there minds to even that tiny
piece of evidence?

I'm quite not sure why you cite me and talk to Rob. But for myself I must say I'm not a chemtrail debunker. I just want to see plausible evidence. So far I've seen only poorly sourced claims and pictures showing misidentified airplane parts.
But I must say I've also repeatedly seen on my own eyes something which very well could be chemtrail spraying activity and its resulted in for hours persistent sunscreen which it created in the sky. So I'm more than open to real evidence.

Posted by: Quest Mar 3 2014, 10:25 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 3 2014, 07:18 AM) *
I did not say that.

What I asked was what would make this picture seem less odd in your eyes.


Almerie, do you or do you not see anything odd in this photo? Yes or no? If yes, what is odd?

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/feature-image.jpg

Posted by: almerie Mar 3 2014, 10:43 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 3 2014, 10:25 AM) *
Almerie, do you or do you not see anything odd in this photo? Yes or no? If yes, what is odd?

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/feature-image.jpg


This question can not be answered with a simple yes or no, because more information is needed:

1. At what exact global position or latitude/longitude was this photo taken?

2. What was the exact date and time (GMT).

3. What was the weather conditions, not only at ground level but also at higher altitudes prob. going up to 40000 ft. reported intervals for aviation purposes.

Do you know why I am asking you these questions?


Posted by: Hsaive Mar 3 2014, 01:59 PM

We really don't need to collect samples.

Scientific observation has long confirmed that jet aircraft are spraying aerosols. However, it would be good to know what is in the air we breathe ... for the benefit of pilots, crew and passengers who have a right to know -- do they not?

Persistent contrails that litter the sky cannot possibly be formed under atmospheric conditions typical at flight level above 28K ft where relative humidity is almost always far below saturation.

Also, the efficiency of high-bypass engines makes contrail formation less likely than older low-pass engines since 80% of the thrust is generated by the turbo fan as opposed to combustion. We all know that combustion is required to produce the water vapor that ultimately becomes a normal "contrail", don't we?.

We are simply looking for a whistleblower to supply an account of the details and alleged motive.


Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 3 2014, 02:12 PM

QUOTE (Hsaive @ Mar 3 2014, 12:59 PM) *
We really don't need to collect samples.


If you keep posting threads such as, "Where Are the Pilots For Chemtrail Truth" (your second thread with such a title by the way), then you should not be surprised when asked for direct samples.

As you have seen, not many Pilots have an interest in "Chemtrails" due to the fact Pilots know how pressurization systems work, how many flights are airborne daily, containing thousands of humans. Again, if some people believe that Chemicals sprayed at the Flight Levels are killing people on the ground, then surely the thousands of people flying at altitude daily would already be dead or dying...? and the whole airline infrastructure would collapse...? economies across the world would freeze...? Trade would become stagnant....?

We have Pilots in our own organization alone with 25 - 30,000 hours flight time and are very healthy. How is that possible if they were/are flying in/among the "Chemtrails"?

With that said, I do feel that further investigation is required based on the information I have seen (If I didn't think so, this forum section would not exist... and perhaps I would ban the discussion altogether).

When I offer an avenue of how to get such evidence and conclusive proof, you then respond with, "We really don't need to collect samples"?

In that case... I suppose you have your answer to why there isn't a "Pilots For Chemtrail Truth".

Pilots require conclusive evidence before making any decision. A good example of this is an Instrument Pilot shooting an approach to minimums. From day 1, we are taught to evaluate multiple sources of data to continue the approach. We are taught the full "chain of custody" of such data (Systems Knowledge). We are taught, and it is proven, if the data does not add up, we go missed, or people may die.

By the way Harold, please use normal font. There is no need to enlarge and bold every word of your posts.

Posted by: tumetuestumefaisdubien Mar 3 2014, 03:53 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 3 2014, 03:25 AM) *
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/feature-image.jpg

Actually very similar picture what is seen on the photograph I've seen repeatedly on my own eyes. It was on the foot of the Pyrenees at the mediteranian side on the border between Spain and France. It was always same pattern: In the very early morning, before sunrise I came to the wineyards on the steep slopes and watched for the sunrise. The shore is just miles away, but because the hills are very steep there one gets quickly in like 1500ft altitude and sees a big panorama (for idea something like http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Panorama_C%C3%B4te_Vermeille.JPG). If the sky was clear quite suddenly airplanes came one after another usual airroute around the shore which is the corridor from Perpignan for approach to Gerona and Barcelona airports. Then the planes went off course and turned inland into the mountains more or less right at the France-Spain border. And quite suddenly started to leave very thick trails. It took just like 10-15 minutes after they passed and the sky looked much like at the photograph, just the light was different because it was always just around the sun rised. The trails gradually dissolved into kind of a haze covering whole the sky, and sometimes, when there was low wind for it to blow it away it took many hours for the haze to disappear, sometimes until late afternoon. I've also noticed couple of times that whenever a hole appeared in the haze an airplane appeared there again diverting from the usual corridor and again leaved trails there which gradually dissolved and covered the hole. All this didn't look normal to me and it repeated itself in the similar pattern multiple times I was there watching it. The planes as far I can say were large double and four engine jets, flying very high until they disappeared over the montains.
But I'm asking myself why they would be doing this, on what purpose? Ther's nothing, just mountains and couple of small wine making towns and villages.

Posted by: weth Mar 3 2014, 05:36 PM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 3 2014, 06:51 AM) *
What Rob offers is totally oxymoronic
Why this? I can t see that this offer is contradictory.To the contrary, this offer should help you to get (scientific)proof of your claim.
So easy: you claim, you proof, and Rob even would help you to get a proof. Up to now there is no proof of chemtrails . So what?

Posted by: MikeR Mar 3 2014, 06:51 PM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 3 2014, 06:30 PM) *
In contrast, when flying behind a "spraying" aircraft (or in any visible "chemtrail"), it would be like trying to take a sip off a fire hose.


The cabin's would be filled with chemicals in concentrations MUCH higher than anything you would find on the ground, not only would every passenger/crew member need an O2 mask at all times, but you probably wouldn't even be able to see in the cabin. Airline passenger cabins are not a sealed unit. The air you breathe in a passenger cabin comes directly from outside the airplane, through the engines, it is then compressed and then dumped into the cabin for all the earthlings to consume.

.... All we need is an airplane. And then finally we will have conclusive proof either way, in which no one will be able to ignore.


You're the Flight Instructor, Rob .... this visually-impaired geriatric you'd never want to try teaching is still might curious why your putative heavy-metal detecting airplane is flying so close to the jet-contrail exhaust of the plane in front?

If an idiot traffic cop were tailgating that close, she would be smart to position her squad car in the lane to one side or t'other for when not if the demented victim hits the stop button.

The typical SAG http://www.laprogressive.com/the-war-on-drugs-and-the-politics-of-failure-from-the-vietnam-to-the-afghan-quagmire/http:// clearly shows that each aircraft lays a new chemtrail off to one side. The air the pressurized pilots breathe is accordingly not affected too much more than abnormal by the emissions from the lead kite.

I say ABnormal, because the experiment that I think you have in mind has been carried out at zero relative altitude and in supremely-simple scientific form as described in this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrFemzbsU9A. The air we merely human beings is collected, sampled from a fishbowl.

We beings should be horrified... if only we're smart enough.

Posted by: MikeR Mar 3 2014, 07:27 PM

QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 4 2014, 12:18 AM) *
(1) Source of the HUGE claim?

(2) That's interesting. Could you please share with us your hair analysis charts and results?

(3) Is this a subjective opinion of Russ Tanner or he has an objective proof of it?


(1) At the serious risk of debunkers accusing me of dodging direct hits...
I would respectfully suggest your G**gl* investigation search would be vastly more
acceptable to you than whatever I were to find under search terms such as
"aluminum soil analysis"

(2) Glad you find it interesting... in that case you will much prefer an expert opinion
to my singular typical case study. Dr. Russell Blaylock, retired neurosurgeon, neurotoxin expert and author...
admits that at first he was skeptical about chemtrail reports until he began noticing them himself.

Dr Blaylock has become aware of their aluminum content. He explains that aluminum nanoparticles
can enter the brain and spinal cord quickly through the lungs and nostrils, adding that nanoparticles
are much more inflammatory to tissue than other forms of environmental aluminum.

He sees a connection of chemtrails' aluminum deposits to the rise of neurodegenerative diseases,
especially among young people. He's talking about Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and Lou Gehrig's diseases,
not autism spectrum disorders from vaccines, which Dr. Blaylock has covered extensively.

Dr. Blaylock also expressed concern over the saturation of plant, crop life, and water with
aluminum nanoparticles. He thinks chemtrailing must be curbed before it's too late
to minimize the threat of constant aluminum toxicity surrounding us.

(3) If you or I woke up in hospital after a near-death experience, we might hope some others
wouldn't be too dismissive of our subjective experience... but do feel free to http://russtanner.com/

Russ Tanner shares a large amount of information from his own research experience,
as well as the objective results of others'

MikeR

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 3 2014, 07:41 PM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 3 2014, 05:51 PM) *
You're the Flight Instructor, Rob .... this visually-impaired geriatric you'd never want to try teaching is still might curious why your putative heavy-metal detecting airplane is flying so close to the jet-contrail exhaust of the plane in front?


In order to get samples of the substances you alleged, one does not have to fly directly behind another aircraft as I have already explained above.


All we have to do is fly through layers of visible/persistent "chemtrails".




Are you now saying the above photograph is not "chemtrails"?

Are the above "chemtrails" spread by only one aircraft?

If not, are the above "chemtrail" crews flying in a sealed cabin?

If not, are they wearing O2 masks while criss-crossing the sky?

Posted by: Quest Mar 3 2014, 10:41 PM

QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 3 2014, 08:53 PM) *
Actually very similar picture what is seen on the photograph I've seen repeatedly on my own eyes. It was on the foot of the Pyrenees at the mediteranian side on the border between Spain and France. It was always same pattern: In the very early morning, before sunrise I came to the wineyards on the steep slopes and watched for the sunrise. The shore is just miles away, but because the hills are very steep there one gets quickly in like 1500ft altitude and sees a big panorama (for idea something like http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Panorama_C%C3%B4te_Vermeille.JPG). If the sky was clear quite suddenly airplanes came one after another usual airroute around the shore which is the corridor from Perpignan for approach to Gerona and Barcelona airports. Then the planes went off course and turned inland into the mountains more or less right at the France-Spain border. And quite suddenly started to leave very thick trails. It took just like 10-15 minutes after they passed and the sky looked much like at the photograph, just the light was different because it was always just around the sun rised. The trails gradually dissolved into kind of a haze covering whole the sky, and sometimes, when there was low wind for it to blow it away it took many hours for the haze to disappear, sometimes until late afternoon. I've also noticed couple of times that whenever a hole appeared in the haze an airplane appeared there again diverting from the usual corridor and again leaved trails there which gradually dissolved and covered the hole. All this didn't look normal to me and it repeated itself in the similar pattern multiple times I was there watching it. The planes as far I can say were large double and four engine jets, flying very high until they disappeared over the montains.
But I'm asking myself why they would be doing this, on what purpose? Ther's nothing, just mountains and couple of small wine making towns and villages.



Tume, small towns are target practice. Watch the following that occurred over a small town in the Pacific northwest and see what the locals and police have to say about plane activity just before the townsfolk got sick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_RNcyWVIOI

Posted by: Quest Mar 3 2014, 11:48 PM

Who that denies the existence of an active large-scale geoengineering program would like to answer the following?

1. Has there ever been a documented case(s) where our government ever used weather as a weapon? I'll give you a few freebies...
RAF rainmakers 'caused 1952 flood'
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/aug/30/sillyseason.physicalsciences
Vietnam - Operation Popeye
http://www.globalresearch.ca/military-weather-modification-chemtrails-atmospheric-geoengineering-and-environmental-warfare/5356630

2. Are there any current major individuals, businesses or government bodies who are proponents of geoengineering?

3. Are there any current major individuals, businesses or government bodies who are proponents of geoengineering who stand to profit from weather futures or weather related disasters?

4. Have there been soil/air samples taken where no industry resides yet displays large amounts of aluminum, barium and strontium, the same ingredients Harvard professor and geoengineering proponent David Keith suggests using to combat 'global warming' ?

5. Has the government/corporations ever tried poisoning the US public on a national scale? I'll spot you this one.
Fluoride Deception Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3y8uwtxrHo

6. Is the plane in the following video leaving an ordinary contrail?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNgCDCnKx1Q#t=105

7. How long has the idea existed of putting out contrived threats (UFOs, Global Warming) to the masses as a way of ushering in global governance? Who are some of the notable political figures who pushed these fake issues?

8. Who purchased/owns "Weather Central"? I'll spot you this one as well.

Rothschild’s, And The Geoengineering Empire
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/rothschilds-and-the-geoengineering-empire/

Posted by: almerie Mar 4 2014, 02:14 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 3 2014, 07:27 PM) *
(1) At the serious risk of debunkers accusing me of dodging direct hits...
I would respectfully suggest your G**gl* investigation search would be vastly more
acceptable to you than whatever I were to find under search terms such as
"aluminum soil analysis"


Well, I for one think you are dodging this question.
I have really tried to get several forum members who show some of the research behind their claims, but no luck so far.
And I really do not under stand why this is dodged.

You obviously think of chemtrails as a serious threat to human health and even survival.
If that is so should the research of this threat be done with the utmost professionalism?

I have seen most of the video links posted, but these videos are 99% hearsay.
To label such videos that I have seen so far with words like 'scientific' and 'research' is simply misleading.

QUOTE
(2) Glad you find it interesting... in that case you will much prefer an expert opinion
to my singular typical case study. Dr. Russell Blaylock, retired neurosurgeon, neurotoxin expert and author...
admits that at first he was skeptical about chemtrail reports until he began noticing them himself.


I have tried to find the research done by Dr. Blaylock on chemtrails, but have found none.
Could you point me to some of his scientific papers on this matter?

QUOTE
(3) ...Russ Tanner shares a large amount of information from his own research experience,
as well as the objective results of others'


I have read the website of Russ Tanner and seen the videos.
There are no research to be found that would meet normal scientific standards, but lots of hearsay, some of it about Mr. Tanners own ailments.


Posted by: Quest Mar 4 2014, 02:23 AM

Almerie, would you mind answering the questions in my previous post?
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=22626&view=findpost&p=10811830

Posted by: almerie Mar 4 2014, 02:26 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 3 2014, 11:48 PM) *
Who that denies the existence of an active large-scale geoengineering program would like to answer the following?


I am not going to do your work of presenting data, that would obviously be easy for someone like you that know the background to this subject.
Why present this as questions instead of answers?

Trying to manipulate weather with chemical agents is nothing new.
E.g. tt has been tried to suppress the build up of hurricanes by spraying various substances around it, but without any success unfortunately.

QUOTE
8. Who purchased/owns "Weather Central"? I'll spot you this one as well.
Rothschild’s, And The Geoengineering Empire
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/rothschilds-and-the-geoengineering-empire/


You will have to tell me why owning a weather service can be linked to chemtrails and geoengineering? I have no idea.



Posted by: Quest Mar 4 2014, 02:32 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 4 2014, 07:26 AM) *
I am not going to do your work of presenting data, that would obviously be easy for someone like you that know the background to this subject.
Why present this as questions instead of answers?

Trying to manipulate weather with chemical agents is nothing new.
E.g. tt has been tried to suppress the build up of hurricanes by spraying various substances around it, but without any success unfortunately.



You will have to tell me why owning a weather service can be linked to chemtrails and geoengineering? I have no idea.


Almerie, I HAVE done my homework and I know the answers to the above questions. Can you answer these questions as you stand right at the moment, without having to look them up right now? I am trying to determine if you've done ANY homework on the topic or if you merely dismiss the topic out of hand. Do me a favor and humor me. Please answer fully each question. I will be more than glad to answer any questions you cannot.

Posted by: almerie Mar 4 2014, 04:23 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 4 2014, 02:32 AM) *
Almerie, I HAVE done my homework and I know the answers to the above questions. Can you answer these questions as you stand right at the moment, without having to look them up right now? I am trying to determine if you've done ANY homework on the topic or if you merely dismiss the topic out of hand. Do me a favor and humor me. Please answer fully each question. I will be more than glad to answer any questions you cannot.


I have no intention whatsoever of researching and answering these questions, why should I ?

Is this some sort of contest I am not aware of on P4T?

I was under the impression that you have a theory about chemtrails/geoengineering and therefore wanted to present them to the public???

QUOTE
You will have to tell me why owning a weather service can be linked to chemtrails and geoengineering? I have no idea.


But you can answer this for me.


Posted by: Quest Mar 4 2014, 01:35 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 4 2014, 09:23 AM) *
I have no intention whatsoever of researching and answering these questions, why should I ?


Then why are you in this thread? Just to waste time? Or tick off members that actually do research the topic? If you don't already know the answers to these questions why would anyone here in a thread on geoengineering be interested in anything you have to say?

Posted by: Quest Mar 4 2014, 01:47 PM

Almerie wrote;

QUOTE
You will have to tell me why owning a weather service can be linked to chemtrails and geoengineering? I have no idea.


Oh I don't know, why would the military want to influence CNN?

CNN AND PSYOPS
http://www.counterpunch.org/2000/03/26/cnn-and-psyops/

QUOTE
Military personnel from the Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, have until recently been working in CNN’s hq in Atlanta.

CNN is up in arms about our report in the last issue of CounterPunch concerning the findings of the Dutch journalist, Abe de Vries about the presence of US Army personnel at CNN, owned by Time-Warner. We cited an article by de Vries which appeared on February 21 in the reputable Dutch daily newspaper Trouw, originally translated into English and placed on the web by Emperor’s Clothes. De Vries reported that a handful of military personnel from the Third Psychological Operations Battalion, part of the airmobile Fourth Psychological Operations Group based at Fort Bragg, in North Carolina, had worked in CNN’s hq in Atlanta.





Posted by: almerie Mar 4 2014, 02:32 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 4 2014, 01:47 PM) *
Almerie wrote;



Oh I don't know, why would the military want to influence CNN?

CNN AND PSYOPS
http://www.counterpunch.org/2000/03/26/cnn-and-psyops/


You answer my question with another question?

Posted by: almerie Mar 4 2014, 02:36 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 4 2014, 01:35 PM) *
Then why are you in this thread? Just to waste time? Or tick off members that actually do research the topic? If you don't already know the answers to these questions why would anyone here in a thread on geoengineering be interested in anything you have to say?


I am here to find out if this subject has any substantial evidence to offer.

I believe you to have that sort of information, but I am not playing some sort of cat and mouse game.

Why is it so hard to get chemtrail experts to show their research and evidence?


Posted by: Quest Mar 4 2014, 06:11 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 4 2014, 07:36 PM) *
I am here to find out if this subject has any substantial evidence to offer.

I believe you to have that sort of information, but I am not playing some sort of cat and mouse game.

Why is it so hard to get chemtrail experts to show their research and evidence?


Never said I was an expert on chemtrails and certainly no more an expert on chemtarils than anyone here is an expert on controlled demolitions of skyscapers. That being said, it's not necessary to be an expert to decipher what you can see with your own eyes.
If you are actually interested in the topic, the following site offers a wealth of info on Geoengineering.

http://www.Geoengineeringwatch.org

Start reading and get back to me.

Posted by: almerie Mar 4 2014, 11:05 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 4 2014, 06:11 PM) *
http://www.Geoengineeringwatch.org

Start reading and get back to me.


Already been there.

The website is a just collection of hearsay and undocumented events. Nothing substantial.

QUOTE
That being said, it's not necessary to be an expert to decipher what you can see with your own eyes.


This seems to be the main 'evidence' of chemtrails apparently.
But its not enough.
If you want pilots and aircraft engineers interested in this, then more substantial evidence is needed.

Posted by: Quest Mar 5 2014, 05:36 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 5 2014, 04:05 AM) *
Already been there.

The website is a just collection of hearsay and undocumented events. Nothing substantial.



This seems to be the main 'evidence' of chemtrails apparently.
But its not enough.
If you want pilots and aircraft engineers interested in this, then more substantial evidence is needed.


That's your opnion, Almerie. I can live with it. Fortunately people are waking up to trolls and shills. Don't know what category you fall under, but carry on. salute.gif

Posted by: MikeR Mar 5 2014, 09:20 PM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 4 2014, 11:41 AM) *
In order to get samples of the substances you alleged, one does not have to fly directly behind another aircraft as I have already explained above.


All we have to do is fly through layers of visible/persistent "chemtrails".




Are you now saying the above photograph is not "chemtrails"?

Are the above "chemtrails" spread by only one aircraft?

If not, are the above "chemtrail" crews flying in a sealed cabin?

If not, are they wearing O2 masks while criss-crossing the sky?


Ah, I see what you're heading towards, Rob.

So... your intrepid pilot gets a sample of blue sky between all that aircrap...
and produces the lab results.

Expert Chemtrail Debunker, examining sample labelled "blue sky", sez
"Nothing there, told ya..."

Your intrepid pilot produces sample labelled "aircrap": the lab results show Al, Ba, Hg, etc...

Expert Chemtrail Debunker, struggles to remember Chem 101:
"The CO2 and the H20 and the CO and the Carbon... that's just jet exhaust.
Like I said, it's just condensation from plain (sic) exhaust."

So, Mr ECD smartypants...what about the Al, and the Hg and the Ba, and the St, and the DU....?
Ya won't find heavy metals in aviation exhaust burning plane kero.

Expert Chemtrail Debunker "Yeah, but it's not very much you must admit.
Not enough to worry us. I told ya there's nothing there..."

At which stage, the experiment would have been no less productive if it
was all conducted at ground level....

The question arising still challenges D. Bunker's intelligence to the limit:

"Where did the 673% measured increase in ground Aluminum content, spread
over 50 States and eleventeen years, come from, if it wasn't the result of
intentional secret aerosol spraying operations?"

"Dunno .... maybe it's in Round-Up?"

MikeR

Posted by: Quest Mar 5 2014, 11:12 PM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 6 2014, 02:20 AM) *
Ah, I see what you're heading towards, Rob.

So... your intrepid pilot gets a sample of blue sky between all that aircrap...
and produces the lab results.

Expert Chemtrail Debunker, examining sample labelled "blue sky", sez
"Nothing there, told ya..."

Your intrepid pilot produces sample labelled "aircrap": the lab results show Al, Ba, Hg, etc...

Expert Chemtrail Debunker, struggles to remember Chem 101:
"The CO2 and the H20 and the CO and the Carbon... that's just jet exhaust.
Like I said, it's just condensation from plain (sic) exhaust."

So, Mr ECD smartypants...what about the Al, and the Hg and the Ba, and the St, and the DU....?
Ya won't find heavy metals in aviation exhaust burning plane kero.

Expert Chemtrail Debunker "Yeah, but it's not very much you must admit.
Not enough to worry us. I told ya there's nothing there..."

At which stage, the experiment would have been no less productive if it
was all conducted at ground level....

The question arising still challenges D. Bunker's intelligence to the limit:

"Where did the 673% measured increase in ground Aluminum content, spread
over 50 States and eleventeen years, come from, if it wasn't the result of
intentional secret aerosol spraying operations?"

"Dunno .... maybe it's in Round-Up?"

MikeR


MikeR, by this same rational, that is, the suggestion that we can't prove geoengineering is taking place unless we follow a supposed chemtrail plane in action that we haven't proven anything, I also guess we also don't know the WTC towers weren't control demolitioned because no one built a full scale mock-up of the towers and demo'd them to prove that's why they collapsed. rolleyes.gif There is already a mountain of evidence to prove an active geoengineering program is under way. Those that ignore it do so at their own peril and the peril of their spouses, sons and daughters, friends and relatives. Oh well.... some people would rather bury their heads in the aluminum, barium and strontium laden sand. The sheeple can just put a little more ketchup on the delicious aluminum resistant seed GMO grown Monsanto meal to make it palatable. Yum.

Posted by: Quest Mar 5 2014, 11:31 PM

Golly, these 'contrails' sure do seem to do a good job keeping the sunlight from reaching the earth. Just imagine if anyone ever did want to cool the atmosphere for some supposed feel good cause, all they would have to do is criss-cross the sky with planes and block the sun. Just plain ol' water vapor. No fancy and expensive aluminum, barium and strontium as Harvard professor David Keith says at a geoengineering symposium, just plain old passenger planes wandering aimlessly across the sky. whistle.gif


Posted by: almerie Mar 5 2014, 11:42 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 5 2014, 05:36 PM) *
That's your opnion, Almerie. I can live with it. Fortunately people are waking up to trolls and shills. Don't know what category you fall under, but carry on. salute.gif


Again, why the name calling instead of relating to the topic?

Everytime substantial evidence is asked for the question is dodged this way.


Posted by: Quest Mar 5 2014, 11:50 PM

A shill or troll is not a "name", it's a guess at what you are. My bet is , with your 37 posts, you're a shill. Rob, admins, mods, "Almerie" is spamming this thread. Please ban this character.

Posted by: JimMac Mar 6 2014, 01:19 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 5 2014, 11:50 PM) *
A shill or troll is not a "name", it's a guess at what you are. My bet is , with your 37 posts, you're a shill. Rob, admins, mods, "Almerie" is spamming this thread. Please ban this character.


He is working, we are doing this for free, because we don't want to pay the ultimate price of our freedom. It's a hell of difference. There is kaz, SteveF, Kozer1, almerie, weth, hanky, and about a 1/2 dozen more. The troll brigade is here.
Jim

Posted by: MikeR Mar 6 2014, 01:47 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 6 2014, 03:12 PM) *
.... no one built a full scale mock-up of the towers and demo'd them to prove that's why they collapsed. rolleyes.gif


I do wish you could develop this idea into a full-scale working prototype,
keep the sholling trills gainfully employed building a 1 to 1 model of
only the very top 110 stories of just one of the 3 Twin Towers...
then watch them fire a full-scale Boeing mockup into the glass wall ...
just to see if the plane really does dissolve into the glass just like
we all saw in the Hollywood movie of the same name on 9/11/2001...

...shades of the creative character who's building a full-scale replica
of a Boeing wing ready to test at 589 MPH as it slams into something
scintillating

Oh My Goddess .... if only I knew how to harness such stupendous energy
into helping mix concrete for my barn foundations this coming weekend. rolleyes.gif

MikeR

Posted by: almerie Mar 6 2014, 01:52 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 5 2014, 11:50 PM) *
A shill or troll is not a "name", it's a guess at what you are. My bet is , with your 37 posts, you're a shill. Rob, admins, mods, "Almerie" is spamming this thread. Please ban this character.


How does it matter if I have 1 or 10000 posts?

Why not just relate to the topic at hand and not speculate for whatever reason people post on this forum?

I have yet to get a chemtrail expert to show me substantial evidence, e.g. some thing else than a photo/video of contrails.

I have seen several chemtrail websites by now and they all just present the same hearsay and undocumented events.

In the light of the seriousness with which you regard chemtrails (murder seems to be the most popular label), then one would expect the same seriousness when researching this phenomena.

This is not the case however.
When asked for substantial evidence, the question is dodged and personal attacks are initiated.

Why?

When Rob generously offers to fly in these chemtrails, so that samples can be collected, then this is also dodged by putting words in his mouth and all sorts of speculation of motive is presented.

Why?



Posted by: Quest Mar 6 2014, 07:33 AM

Almerie, two questions;

1. Do trolls or shills exist? Yes or no?

2. How do we know you aren't a troll?

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 6 2014, 02:56 PM

Warning. Stop accusing others of being trolls, shills, socks.. .etc. Please discuss the topic and not each other.

Posted by: Quest Mar 6 2014, 04:18 PM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 6 2014, 07:56 PM) *
Warning. Stop accusing others of being trolls, shills, socks.. .etc. Please discuss the topic and not each other.


Rob, troll is not a name nor is it an insult; someone either is or isn't. Whether you like it or not, trolls and shills exist. That being said, I, and others here I am sure like to feel I have some kind of say on this site as I have invested time and energy here but if you are going to let people you don't know from Adam spam your forums, I am not sure what the wisdom in that is. You won't see me post here anymore and I am sure others will drop off as well. What's the point of posting? Any thread a troll/shill wants to take down will by forcing legit posters to stop asking questions. It's not a dare, it's just that I won't waste the time. Your call, Rob. Just a suggestion, some sites used to have areas where new members had to prove their legitimacy before posting in the main forums. Why can't we do that here?

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 6 2014, 04:27 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 6 2014, 03:18 PM) *
Rob, troll is not a name nor is it an insult; someone either is or isn't. Whether you like it or not, trolls and shills exist. That being said, I, and others here I am sure like to feel I have some kind of say on this site as I have invested time and energy here but if you are going to let people you don't know from Adam spam your forums, I am not sure what the wisdom in that is. You won't see me post here anymore and I am sure others will drop off as well. What's the point of posting? Any thread a troll/shill wants to take down will by forcing legit posters to stop asking questions. It's not a dare, it's just that I won't waste the time. Your call, Rob. Just a suggestion, some sites used to have areas where new members had to prove their legitimacy before posting in the main forums. Why can't we do that here?


The rules of this forum are clear. Those who follow the rules can stay, those who break the rules will be warned, then suspended, then banned if repetitive violations occur. The rules apply to everyone.

If you have a problem with a forum user, feel free to PM me or someone else in the staff. Stick to the topic, not each other. If you have a problem with another user, ignore them. If you have a problem with the way we run this forum, no one is forcing you to post here.

That is all which will be discussed on this matter in this thread. Any further concerns feel free to start a thread in the Website/Forum Squawks section.

Any further discussion which does not discuss the topic of this thread will be split and moved and the user warned ...

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 6 2014, 04:43 PM

Off topic posts have been split and moved here.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22642

Any further off-topic posts will be met with warnings, the user placed on mod preview, and possible suspension.

Posted by: MikeR Mar 17 2014, 02:16 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 6 2014, 03:31 PM) *

Golly, these 'contrails' sure do seem to do a good job keeping the sunlight from reaching the earth. whistle.gif


ONE reason "They" add "chem" to the "CON" is so that the CONtrails are persistent.

Exact-same thing happens when the sky is covered with natural cloud... the surface temperature
is maintained. Otherwise, no cloud, and the temperature drops rapidly overnight.
When not if there's a need for cloud cover to keep the temperature up,
'THEY' send up the spray-planes, civilian AND military, and blanket an whole region
or cover an entire State.

That keeps the temperature elevated, and all the fat-salaried Algorian scientists
can report with increasing certainty that global warming is for real

Guess what? Al Gore's carbon-credit rating$ sky-rocket.

Cover the whole nation, state by state, night after night, and the global mean temperature
keeps carbon credits priced through the roof.

...and all who thought MikeR is just a boring old cynic, are thereby destitutionally doomed to disappointment
by MikeR's axiomatic Revelations of the Truth

:-)

M rolleyes.gif

Posted by: marklookingup Mar 17 2014, 03:01 AM

What would need to be sprayed to create all the persistant contrails in the above photo? Water?

Posted by: MikeR Mar 17 2014, 04:53 AM

QUOTE (marklookingup @ Mar 17 2014, 07:01 PM) *
What would need to be sprayed to create all the persistant contrails in the above photo? Water?


I'm not a pilot, and in some quarters, a qualified architect is deemed insufficiently
qualified amongst such august company as pilots, to have any opinions taken seriously,
so take no notice of what I say.... but meteorologists I respect, including Scott Stevens and
Todd Gross, say that in dry air, a condensation trail OR some types of raincloud
(aka H20) will turn to invisible water vapor ... and presumably therefore be
useless for heat retention if MikeR's theory in his last post has validity

So, call me underqualified if you dare, but my professional-architectural opinion
is that 'They" would NOT waste taxpayers dollars spraying water.

But
(1) you already know that, otherwise why ask the Q?
and
(2) 'They' waste taxpayers dollar$ spraying some aerosolised chemical gunk
(which has been tested, contains Aluminum and Barium and
a hundred other also-toxic substances....
and
(3) 'They' have not sought, nor do they have, the approval of We the People,
which is why
(4) 'They' conduct the experiments in such secrecy that even intelligent P4T
pilots (but NOT crazy architects) honestly believe the continuous sky lines
are actually condensation trails.

Shame on the intelligence concerned, agencies and all of US rolleyes.gif

Posted by: almerie Mar 17 2014, 07:02 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Mar 17 2014, 02:16 AM) *
...and all who thought MikeR is just a boring old cynic, are thereby destitutionally doomed to disappointment
by MikeR's axiomatic Revelations of the Truth


You should be aware that 'revelations of truth' is only qualified to be so, if backed by evidence.

What you have presented so far is only hearsay.


Posted by: MikeR Apr 9 2014, 05:01 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Mar 17 2014, 11:02 PM) *
You should be aware that 'revelations of truth' is only qualified to be so, if backed by evidence.

What you have presented so far is only hearsay.



Actual evidence would be way beyond your understanding.

Posted by: almerie Apr 9 2014, 05:29 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 9 2014, 05:01 AM) *
Actual evidence would be way beyond your understanding.


Well, you should try anyway.

Others on this forum might have an opinion as well.

Posted by: MikeR Apr 10 2014, 06:19 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 9 2014, 09:29 PM) *
Well, you should try anyway.

Others on this forum might have an opinion as well.



'Others on this forum' are a silent majority
of sharp-sighted plain spotters, those able to
read a skyful of chem which has been secretly
(as in "we neither confirm nor deny that
we will even listen to your question")
sky-dumped, illictly sprayed from one
was-blue horizon to the military-grey other.

People who won't think for themselves what are
the implications on their and their kids' health
of what they see.... and by nightfall, smell and
taste ... and people who point-blank won't make
connections, will continue to be poisoned
just as much as the rest of mankind.

You want more proof? You clearly have no intention
of reading a word I say... which as A-OK by me....
but it's YOUR kids who will look at YOU at some stage.

When the truth finally comes out of the closet,
what will you say to them, when they ask why you
let them down?

My curiosity about the psychology of why
people refuse to check the evidence is irrelevant,
reflecting as it undoubtedly does the uphill
battle Paul Tabori's publishers have marketing
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1566192404/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1566192404&linkCode=as2&tag=adne-20">The%20Natural%20History%20of%20Stupidity</a><img%20src="http://ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=adne-20&l=as2&o=1&a=1566192404

My aff hasn't yet sold one copy rolleyes.gif:-)

MikeR

PS http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1893157105/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1893157105&linkCode=as2&tag=adne-20 gives us the real lowdown...
and the printers can hardly keep up with the demand... :-)

Posted by: almerie Apr 11 2014, 12:46 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 10 2014, 06:19 PM) *
<snip>
You want more proof?
<snip>


Yes, please.

I have not seen any evidence yet, just dramatic claims.


Posted by: MikeR Apr 12 2014, 12:19 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 11 2014, 04:46 PM) *
Yes, please.

I have not seen any evidence yet, just dramatic claims.


Yeah, maybe .... but how can anybody help you out
if we have no idea how you came in?

Posted by: almerie Apr 12 2014, 05:13 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 12 2014, 12:19 AM) *
Yeah, maybe .... but how can anybody help you out
if we have no idea how you came in?


I think you need to elaborate a bit more on that?


Posted by: MikeR Apr 12 2014, 06:59 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 12 2014, 09:13 PM) *
I think you need to elaborate a bit more on that?


I have no idea what might be your problem
trying to get your pretty head round chemtrails....
it's blatantly obvious to some of the smart humans
you share this world with .... why you make it so
difficult for yourself is totally beyond me.'
You leave no clue how anybody can throw any
light on your subject....if Dane Widdington
can't answer any questions.... search me, mate...
your problem not mine.

But you already know that.....

Over and out

Posted by: almerie Apr 12 2014, 09:43 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 12 2014, 06:59 AM) *
<snip>
your problem not mine.
<snip>


That is where you are completely wrong.

You make the claims, therefore you have the burden of evidence.


Posted by: Pablo Apr 12 2014, 12:48 PM

QUOTE (marklookingup @ Mar 17 2014, 12:01 AM) *
What would need to be sprayed to create all the persistant contrails in the above photo? Water?


A few observations about this thread so far.
1) This above question, is, imo, THE most important question asked so far. Can somebody (somebodies) who is/are qualified to answer it please help us out here? i.e., is it "normal" for regular contrails to last so long and spread out so much? (And try to answer any of the other clearly-related questions that logically come up.)

2) I have NO firm position at all on chemtrails. I do have strong suspicion that they exist. I base that primarily on having lived for years in a remote area where few if any commercial flights are scheduled, yet on a daily basis the sky is systematically striped with trails behind planes, which last for hours, which expand, which end up covering the sky completely.

3) I agree with Rob about keeping the discussion as civil as possible. Rob you display exemplary patience, imo; please never change this aspect of your activities.

4) I appreciate Rob's offer to help with organizing a scientific in-air testing program if anyone can come up with the financing. Thus, these two questions: a
a) Can/is anybody working on trying to raise such funds?
b) Rob (and/or other pilots): can a pilot or passenger in a plane, that goes thru one of the trails, somehow collect anything that might be useful for this investigation?

5) I think it is generally, in this thread at least, that the pro-chemtrail advocates need to struggle for more patience and care in their posts. i.e., more data/info; less name-calling. Also some of these posts have been incredibly hard to read - could you attempt to wait to post until you have tidied them up, please.
Why is the "onus" on the pro-chemtrail-ers? ONLY because it isn't (never is!) easy to convince the honest amongst us of new and usually "unpopular" ideas. So, please ignore those you consider provocateurs, and help the rest of us.

6) I think that those who question the pro-chemtrail-ers, particularly amerie, come across a little eagere/scarcastic, i.e., too antagonistic. I wish they'd use as much care as possible; so that their posts seem less antagonistic; and to offer concrete contributions, at least occasionally, so that the discussion/debate is facilitated rather than frustrated.

So, in general, could we have as little heat and as much light as possible, from all sides, please?
Thanx,
Pablo

Posted by: almerie Apr 12 2014, 01:19 PM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 12 2014, 12:48 PM) *
2) I have NO firm position at all on chemtrails. I do have strong suspicion that they exist. I base that primarily on having lived for years in a remote area where few if any commercial flights are scheduled, yet on a daily basis the sky is systematically striped with trails behind planes, which last for hours, which expand, which end up covering the sky completely.


You continue to claim this, but ran away from our earlier discussion when I asked you for facts about this?

QUOTE
6) I think that those who question the pro-chemtrail-ers, particularly amerie, come across a little eagere/scarcastic, i.e., too antagonistic. I wish they'd use as much care as possible; so that their posts seem less antagonistic; and to offer concrete contributions, at least occasionally, so that the discussion/debate is facilitated rather than frustrated.


Could you please give an example of such a ' too antagonistic' argument from our earlier 'discussions' ?
If you think someone is breaking the rules on this forum, then report them to the moderators.




Posted by: Pablo Apr 12 2014, 01:44 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 12 2014, 10:19 AM) *
You continue to claim this, but ran away from our earlier discussion when I asked you for facts about this?



Could you please give an example of such a ' too antagonistic' argument from our earlier 'discussions' ?
If you think someone is breaking the rules on this forum, then report them to the moderators.


Hey almerie,
All I've got as "facts" are my near-daily objective (imo) observations of easily observable occurences right over my/our heads, over a period of several years. (My wife agrees completely with what I have reported here, btw; for whatever that may be worth).
If I am not lying, nor unintentionally believing I am seeing what I am in fact not seeing; then, it seems to me, that my observations count as facts.

They don't count as analysis; I don't claim such. But they might just be a small contribution, "piece of the puzzle" to what is going on (perhaps around the world); which might help lead to discovering deeper answers.\

Yes you have asked me for facts; but my observations are the only facts I've got. Better some than none, no?

My reference to "too antagonistic" was NOT in reference to any posts you've made in response to any posts I've made. imo, you've been civil enough in your responses to me.
All I was doing was trying to "cool" the heat from both sides; so that everybody, especially the rest of us, could find it easier to understand the debate (not getting as distracted by the heat).
- - - -
Please take this next point as given by me in the spirit of cooperation.
Elsewhere you guess I'm along the west coast of the state of Sonora. But I did say that I am east (not west) of Hermosillo (remember I pointed out that on the map/image you provided, that only two flight-paths head eastward, i.e. in my general direction?. So that'd put me solidly inland. I'm actually closer to the Sonora-Chihuahua border than I am to the coast.
- - - -
The thing about the size of the Hermosillo airport.
It seems/seemed to me that you were more interesting in discrediting me as a "witness" than in ascertaining the truth of what I reported.
Grated that H'illo is 9th in Mexico. That tells us close to nothing about how big or small it might be; GIVEN that Mexico, despite its large geographical size and large population, has a disproportionately small level of commercial air-travel due to the high level of poverty.
I report that one can walk from end to end of the actual airport in under 10 minutes. That to me is small. Is it big in your opinion?
You stated that there are a little over 50 commercial flights a day thru H'illo; that works out to 2 an hour - which is NOT a lot at all; but instead, pretty small. Do you deny this?
You added that there are cargo and military flights as well. I have not denied this.

My main point in all this, is that the flights into and out of H'illo overwhelming do not go east (where I am; and from where I report many flights a day overhead).
Repeating, according to the image you provided, there are only two flight paths to/from H'illo that go eastward; and according to me, neither of them comes close enough to where I am to even be seen/heard.

Therefore, the numerous (and cloud-covering-with-vapor-trails (of who knows what kind) flights overhead we have here, are not coming from nor going to H'illo.
When you point out that H'illo can be a stop off point for planes that can't continue on to T.J.; I accept that; BUT, TJ-bound flights don't overpass us; we are way too far to the east; we are definitely not on the flight paths from southern-central Mexico to T.J.

From the getgo, I have said (and repeated) that I do not as yet have a firm position on whether these are contrails or chemtrails. Why not? Because I readily admit that I am not yet in the position to take such a stand.

IF we are on the same side in seeking the truth, why do your posts in response to mine feel like their intent is NOT to find the truth; but instead to discredit my information?


Posted by: MikeR Apr 12 2014, 06:21 PM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 13 2014, 05:44 AM) *
Hey almerie,
IF we are on the same side in seeking the truth, why do your posts in response to mine feel like their intent is NOT to find the truth; but instead to discredit my information?


Hey Pablo,

Some people discredit others because they actually truth is a 4-letter word...
especially when their Minders bribe them to distract (y)our attention
WITH endless taxpayers' ca$h:

You know who is in this for truth: just ignore the liars.

You and your wife's skyfuls of chemtrail EVIDENCE is actually very valuable:
EVERY skyfull of toxic chemtrail must be recorded and posted in protest.

How??.

Get the SkyderALERT app for your iPhone or Android device
take a photo of EVERY chemtrailed sky you ever see..
Your smartphone on autopilot then forwards each photo direct
to the real powerbrokers, to those with ears who are forced to listen to us.
($1.99 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1TRQpJrYmU no affiliation)

The real criminals are getting our antichemtrailing messages.
They have tried in vain to bribe these idiots to post garbage here and on YT.
That trick ain't working, we ain't that stupid.

They're so peed they can't get their grubby hands on SkyderALERT.

Check out the 10 min intro video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1TRQpJrYmU ... and watch how easily
all (y)our trolls and shills get cut off from the perpeTRAITOR's ceaseless ca$h supply.

MikeR

Posted by: almerie Apr 13 2014, 03:17 AM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 12 2014, 01:44 PM) *


QUOTE
The thing about the size of the Hermosillo airport.
It seems/seemed to me that you were more interesting in discrediting me as a "witness" than in ascertaining the truth of what I reported.
Grated that H'illo is 9th in Mexico. That tells us close to nothing about how big or small it might be; GIVEN that Mexico, despite its large geographical size and large population, has a disproportionately small level of commercial air-travel due to the high level of poverty.
I report that one can walk from end to end of the actual airport in under 10 minutes. That to me is small. Is it big in your opinion?
You stated that there are a little over 50 commercial flights a day thru H'illo; that works out to 2 an hour - which is NOT a lot at all; but instead, pretty small. Do you deny this?
You added that there are cargo and military flights as well. I have not denied this.


I never said that Hermosillo Airport was big, but you claimed:

"the regional airport in the state capital, Hermosillo, is a tiny airport with very few flights to anywhere"

From the webpage of Hermosillo Airport I counted the Departures/Arrivals for a day, which is 18 hours operating time for this airport.
There were 64 departures and 72 arrivals, which is a total of 136 flights.
Please remember that traffic at an airport most often has a morning and an afternoon rush with many flights, so they cannot really not be measured per hour in 24 hours.
So ofcourse most airports have very low traffic in periods during the day.

Furthermore this is an International airport and the following Airlines have flights here:

Delta Airlines, Skywest Airlines, KLM, US Airways, American Airlines and Air France.

The runway can also accomodate Boeing 777s now and that is a really big aircraft.

Hermosillo Airport also has a manned Tower and an Approach area probably with controllers (they have an approach frequency anyway).

So this is NOT and i repeat NOT "a tiny airport with very few flights to anywhere".

QUOTE
My main point in all this, is that the flights into and out of H'illo overwhelming do not go east (where I am; and from where I report many flights a day overhead).
Repeating, according to the image you provided, there are only two flight paths to/from H'illo that go eastward; and according to me, neither of them comes close enough to where I am to even be seen/heard.


The image I provided did not include a distance unit, so how would you know if any airways comes close to you?

But with your unknown location this is still a guessing game.

This is from Google Earth and shows most of Sonora state with your approx. area in the red square:



This is a map of airways though Sonora state and your approx. area in the red Square:



So apparently you have a number of airways going through your approx. area.
Also remember that each line on this map often consist of several airways.

Again, why am I the only one contributing facts to this discussion?

Posted by: almerie Apr 13 2014, 07:40 AM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 12 2014, 01:44 PM) *
Grated that H'illo is 9th in Mexico.
That tells us close to nothing about how big or small it might be; GIVEN that Mexico, despite its large geographical size and large population, has a disproportionately small level of commercial air-travel due to the high level of poverty.


Sorry, but I had to comment on this as well.

Mexico is ranking no. 14 among the richest countries in the world (GDP) and no. 10 if calculated as Purchasing Power (PPP).

I do not doubt that wealth is not distributed equally neither regional nor individual, but even so that is PRETTY GOOD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Mexico

And with this economic wealth comes an expanding infrastructure and also expanding commercial air travel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_Mexico#Airports_and_air_travel

"Mexico has an extensive network of modern airports all throughout the territory;[13] flying domestically is considered efficient and safe.[13] Airport infrastructure in Mexico is the most advanced in Latin America:[14] all the cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants have an airport."

I am sorry Pablo, but most of what you claim come out as untrue, if one takes a closer look at it.

Posted by: Pablo Apr 13 2014, 11:27 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 13 2014, 04:40 AM) *
Sorry, but I had to comment on this as well.

Mexico is ranking no. 14 among the richest countries in the world (GDP) and no. 10 if calculated as Purchasing Power (PPP).

I do not doubt that wealth is not distributed equally neither regional nor individual, but even so that is PRETTY GOOD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Mexico

And with this economic wealth comes an expanding infrastructure and also expanding commercial air travel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_Mexico#Airports_and_air_travel

"Mexico has an extensive network of modern airports all throughout the territory;[13] flying domestically is considered efficient and safe.[13] Airport infrastructure in Mexico is the most advanced in Latin America:[14] all the cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants have an airport."

I am sorry Pablo, but most of what you claim come out as untrue, if one takes a closer look at it.


"Most of what you claim come out as untrue..."

I've been trying to "give you the benefit of the doubt", assuming you are (at least mostly) interested in the truth. I'll continue with this attitude.

About Mexico's economy. One would expect a country with over 100 million inhabitants, and thus one of the 10 most-populated countries to have a high ranking in regards its overall economic activity.
This does not necessarily indicate much at all about the level of poverty that might exist there. I'm sure that India, the 2nd most populous country in the world, is, per capita, amongst the poorest; YET, they must have a huge economy with some 1 billion inhabitants.

The non-precise facts are that Mexico has a huge unemployment (and under-employment) problem. Do you know what the minimum wage is? It turns out that the minimum wage is not uniform throughout the country, but instead is set separately for different regions.
The combination of very high un(der)-employment and super-low minimum wage, means that the Mexican people (particularly those who don't live/work in the US) are quite poor.

It is for the very reason of very high unemployment and very low wages, that the US (and increasingly others) have invested so heavily in Mexico (factories, farm-land, resorts, bank-loans, and illegal activities like drugs, prostitution, etc.) The massiveness of the foreign investments also tells us very little about the internal wealth of the country. Why not? Because those super-profits don't remain in Mexico; they fly out of the country headed towards NYC and other international capitals of Capital.

During the last decade or so, 60,000 some (mostly) very young men have been gunned down in the drug wars. Seemingly, outside of Mexico City region (where conditions are remarkably peaceful), shootings, torture and disappearances are everywhere and increasing.
Thus, tons of money being made; but the Mexican people doing anything but benefitting from it.

All over the country, you see massive amounts of poor out "living" on the streets. A large percent of the population is crowding more people (family members, even friends) into their living quarters. Perhaps that's a big part of the explanation for why some 30 million Mexicans / Mexican-Americans live / work in the US - driven there by poverty and the hope of finding a better-paying job.
Heck, a serious portion of the income of Mexicans living in Mexico is the money sent to them by relatives / friends, working in the US.
Particularly in northern Mexico, because of the last few years of greatly increased repression / deportations of Mexican workers in the US, this region has been super-hard-hit.
So, despite the large size of the Mexican economy, the large majority is, indeed, living seriously in poverty.

How come your facts don't even come close to addressing this aspect of things? Did I not state that most Mexicans, due to poverty, never fly? So, telling us about the size of the economy is missing the point, isn't it?

Have you ever been to Mexico? Before living here for most of the last decade, I had visited it, on average twice a month for 40 years (Let's round that out to 1,000 separate visits, averaging, let's say 1.5 days per visit, to be conservative about it)!
Those visits were not "tourist-type" visits. They were almost all personal visits to friends. I have friends in all 32 states.

So, I might know quite a bit about Mexico.
- - - -
Having flown into / out of H'illo a number of times, and many more times having been in the airport, I stand by my claim that the airport is tiny (both in number of flights and in physical size of the airport building). If you like, we could compromise to: "quite small".
Having "witnessed" personally the lack of east-west flights thru our region (they'd have to be east-west to come from or go to H'illo); and having seen your map/image, I stand by my claim that the significant number of over-flights here, TRAILING long-lasting, artificial-cloud-forming, full-sky-covering that we experience don't originate from H'illo.
Your red box actually covers a large geographic region, and within it, there are a number of pockets not transversed by flights. Do you want to try to claim, without ZERO way of knowing, that I can't possibly live in one of the non-traversed pockets??? Well, whatever your agenda-driven wishes; I DO live in one of them.

I ask you this (others might be willing to chime in on this one too):
If we had heard from some unknown source about the large number of overflights and resultant massive clouding, but didn't know if the source was reliable; wouldn't we, if we could, send someone there (here) to check it out. Wouldn't that be real investigating? Wouldn't the info that was discovered constitute facts?
Well, just because I was already here, doesn't, per se, make my "findings" less relevant, less "factual".

From your long distance away, do you want to insist on being sure that multiple passes with amazing amounts of resulting clouds are NOT happening on a DAILY basis here?
Then go ahead and try to believe what ever your non-fact-based agenda causes you to want to believe; and go ahead and try to convince others that your "fishing expeditions for facts that back your agenda" really constitute a "worthy" argument / case.

My facts easily trump your assumptions, because your assumptions are not based on anything real; while my facts are; and are easily verifiable.

Posted by: Pablo Apr 13 2014, 11:31 AM

According to your "logic", consider this.
Supposedly, THE richest man in the world is Carlos Slim, a Mexican.
Therefore, does that mean (for you?) that the average Mexican must be quite wealthy???

There are probably 100,000 (that's thousands) quite-rich Mexicans. I'm sure they fly a lot; (though they might not "lower themselves" to flying commercial; when many of them have access to private jets).

There are also, undoubtedly close to 100,000,000 (that's millions) quite-poor Mexicans. In our region of some 100,000 people, virtually none of them (except for the tiny minority of rich ones) have ever flown even once in their lives.
Heck, most of them have never even once left the region.
Heck, lots of them have never even once stepped foot outside their own town!
Why? Could have a lot to do with NOT having the money to travel at all, much less in an airplane.

Think about that!

Posted by: almerie Apr 13 2014, 12:25 PM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 13 2014, 11:27 AM) *
Having flown into / out of H'illo a number of times, and many more times having been in the airport, I stand by my claim that the airport is tiny (both in number of flights and in physical size of the airport building). If you like, we could compromise to: "quite small".


After all the facts I have given you on Hermosillo Airport, this is really nonsense.
I give you facts and you give me nothing in return...

QUOTE
Having "witnessed" personally the lack of east-west flights thru our region (they'd have to be east-west to come from or go to H'illo); and having seen your map/image, I stand by my claim that the significant number of over-flights here, TRAILING long-lasting, artificial-cloud-forming, full-sky-covering that we experience don't originate from H'illo.
Your red box actually covers a large geographic region, and within it, there are a number of pockets not transversed by flights. Do you want to try to claim, without ZERO way of knowing, that I can't possibly live in one of the non-traversed pockets??? Well, whatever your agenda-driven wishes; I DO live in one of them.


Again a guessing game. I do not know where your location are.
If you are concerned by unknown overflights, why not go to friends, neighbours, authorities?
Why do you fixate on East-West flights from Hermosillo? I never claimed that the overflights came from there?

QUOTE
<snip>
My facts easily trump your assumptions, because your assumptions are not based on anything real; while my facts are; and are easily verifiable.
<snip>


I think you are being deliberately ignorant here? Please verify your facts then and present them here.


Posted by: almerie Apr 13 2014, 12:37 PM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 13 2014, 11:31 AM) *
There are also, undoubtedly close to 100,000,000 (that's millions) quite-poor Mexicans. In our region of some 100,000 people, virtually none of them (except for the tiny minority of rich ones) have ever flown even once in their lives.


Are you being serious here?
I do not doubt the severity of poverty in Mexico, but this is not helping you.

The mexican population in 2013 was estimated at 118 mill.

The poverty rate is calculated around 45-46%:

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/mexico%E2%80%99s-latest-poverty-stats

As no Airline has gone bankrupt lately, on the contrary actually, someone in Mexico obviously can afford to travel by air.


Posted by: Pablo Apr 13 2014, 02:16 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 13 2014, 09:37 AM) *
Are you being serious here?
I do not doubt the severity of poverty in Mexico, but this is not helping you.

The mexican population in 2013 was estimated at 118 mill.

The poverty rate is calculated around 45-46%:

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/mexico%E2%80%99s-latest-poverty-stats

As no Airline has gone bankrupt lately, on the contrary actually, someone in Mexico obviously can afford to travel by air.


Geez. What an armchair "scholar" you appear to be! A couple of days ago, major articles appeared in the newspapers about the ongoing ramifications from the relatively recent bankruptcy of Mexicana (de Aviacion); which, not all that long ago, had been Mexico's #2 airline.
So much for "no Airline has gone bankrupt lately"! Yikes.

I say there's massive poverty in Mexico, and you "disagree, even ridicule me for claiming this, then you provide absolute proof!
If almost 50% of the entire country "lives" (if you can call it that) below the poverty line; then one could reasonably guess that another 25% live ABOVE the poverty line, BUT not much above it. Then there must be an additional 10% that are neither clearly poor nor well enough off to be able to afford plane tickets. I just "guestimating" these percents; but I bet if one were to look at the many poor countries around the word, the numbers would be quite close to this.
50% plus 25% plus 10% = 85%. Thus, you proved me absolutely right while claiming I was absolutely wrong. This is just NOT HONEST on your part.

This will be my last response to you in this thread (baring the unforeseen circumstance that you either: post something specifically useful vis-à-vis MY Original Post; or at least acknowledge that I have, indeed, contributed some (at least slightly) useful info / facts).

Every single one of your posts has been NON-germaine to my original point:
Too many flights, on not "normal" flight-paths, leaving behind totally visible trails (of something) that inevitably turn into sky-wide hours-long artificial clouds.

BASICALLY THE DYNAMIC WE TWO HAVE HAD IS: I offer facts, then you respond by providing corroborating info; but claim that such info proves me wrong and/or ridiculous.
Zero truth / headway can result from you persistent behavior of this kind.


You ridicule every single one of my posts and the points within them. According to you, I present zero facts; and never respond correctly to any of your points.

I say you appear to be trying to defeat my original post / points NOT thru refuting them; but instead by "character assassination" using the dual method of:
1) making fun by presenting yourself as "shocked" or "incredulous" by my would-be inanity;
2) posting stuff that might appear germaine, but which in fact, adds ZERO clarity whatsoever to the discussion. Why not germain? Again, because you only address theoreticals and generalities; which don't clarify anything because they can't clarify anything.
3) a good portion of what you've posted "in answer" to what I've said, has turned out to be (intentionally or due to your sloppiness) just plain wrong.
This can easily be recognized by any fair, impartial observer who simply carefully reads our back-and-forth.

It is neither my responsibility nor useful for this thread to go over the many details.

However, back to my main point (which you have refused to even once address directly):

REASONABLY-EXPLAINABLE FLIGHT PATHS DO NOT PASS OVER OUR REMOTE AREA.
Early-on, you provided a map/image of the H'illo region, which showed exactly two flight paths going eastwards. There is a pretty sizeable angle in between them. The map/image covers a lot of area. Knowing that area, and the larger area to its east; I can recognize that extending those two flight-path lines further eastward (one further north-east-ward, the other further south-east-ward) that they both miss our local region by a lot.
You claimed that you are NOT trying to pin down my location; but this appears to be exactly what you ARE trying to do. You refuse to take my word for things; and keep insisting on ever-more narrowed down specifics about where I am.

Following an imaginary line from H'illo thru our area and continuing on eastwards takes you to / thru no major city for a humongous distance if at all. This is why most of the lines / flight paths into / out of and/or over H'illo are "north-south" (to anticipate your next nit-pick objection: north-north-west - south-south-east).
Further, exactly because there is no big city north of us, AND because the big cities generally north of us, are far to the east or west, there are no commercial routes north-south thru our region.
Further, there are NO major military air-bases anywhere's near us; nor ones further than that from us that would normally justify so many flights thru here (if indeed these are (mostly) military flights).

Certainly the Mexican government has historically been notorious for corruption (and wasting precious money on useless military flights would qualify). Yet the US is easily 100s more corrupt (though it tends to better hide that corruption). But my point here is that, there are many more profitable (for the Rich Mexicans and their US overlords) to corruptly spend money; than by continually running these "flight to nowhere thru nowhere".
UNLESS, they ARE up to something illegitimate.

Lastly, on this sub-point, one might ask if all of this could be to help fight the region-wide, 15-year long major drought we've been suffering. BUT, it appears much more likely that the spraying (if that is what it is) is, at least, contributing to the drought, rather than helping to alleviate it. After all, there has been no alleviation to speak of.

This leaves me with no reasonable legitimate explanation for the quantity of overheads and the seeming systematic filling of the sky with artificial clouds.

How about we "agree to disagree" and just cease any further back-and-forth; it's basically just a complete waste of P4T forum-users precious time and energy?
- - - - -
To everybody else:
I apologize for the length of this (and any repetition in it). My excuse? I've gotten pretty frustrated, and I've just had to try to re-write the whole thing because when I tried to post the previous version it just disappeared.
Sorry.

Posted by: almerie Apr 13 2014, 10:35 PM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 13 2014, 02:16 PM) *
Geez. What an armchair "scholar" you appear to be! A couple of days ago, major articles appeared in the newspapers about the ongoing ramifications from the relatively recent bankruptcy of Mexicana (de Aviacion); which, not all that long ago, had been Mexico's #2 airline.
So much for "no Airline has gone bankrupt lately"! Yikes.


Please give me a break here. This is not really recent history as the latest events is just the final legal procedure of the Mexicana Airline ceasing operations and filing Chapter 11 in 2010.

QUOTE
<snip>
BASICALLY THE DYNAMIC WE TWO HAVE HAD IS: I offer facts
<snip>


Simply not true.

QUOTE
You claimed that you are NOT trying to pin down my location; but this appears to be exactly what you ARE trying to do.


Not really since I could just have asked you where you live?
Forego the paranoia that I will send men in dark suits accompanied by black helicopters.


Posted by: almerie Apr 13 2014, 10:48 PM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 13 2014, 02:16 PM) *
REASONABLY-EXPLAINABLE FLIGHT PATHS DO NOT PASS OVER OUR REMOTE AREA.


I agree, lets forego Hermosillo airport, the Mexican economy and other distractions, however interesting.

I have a problem with your honesty though...

In your OP you also wrote that no flight paths crossed your remote area.

But at that time I had not yet shown you the position or even existence of airways in Sonora state.

You did however come to that conclusion nonetheless and that is my problem with your honesty.

Also, why not ask your friends, neighbours, media, authorities about these overflights?
Seems like a natural thing to do.

If we are to progress one inch further with this investigation you will have to provide proof of some other kind that your written statement.
That is nothing personal, but just how things are done.

Posted by: MikeR Apr 14 2014, 08:43 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 14 2014, 02:48 PM) *
That is nothing personal, but just how things are done.


Just your shilly way almerie .... nothing personal of course laughing1.gif

Posted by: almerie Apr 15 2014, 03:43 AM

QUOTE (Pablo @ Apr 13 2014, 02:16 PM) *
This will be my last response to you in this thread (baring the unforeseen circumstance that you either: post something specifically useful vis-à-vis MY Original Post; or at least acknowledge that I have, indeed, contributed some (at least slightly) useful info / facts).


In other words you are running away? How disappointing...

Posted by: hanky Apr 15 2014, 05:26 PM

I was hoping someone here could verify the flight paths and timing of these chemtrails vs regularly scheduled traffic. Surely that would be less hazardous than collecting a flying sample. Right here in Dallas, you have all the evidence you need to at least settle their existence as a program separate from normal commerce or military operations.

Posted by: MikeR Apr 15 2014, 08:34 PM

QUOTE (hanky @ Apr 16 2014, 09:26 AM) *
I was hoping someone here could verify the flight paths and timing of these chemtrails vs regularly scheduled traffic. Surely that would be less hazardous than collecting a flying sample. Right here in Dallas, you have all the evidence you need to at least settle their existence as a program separate from normal commerce or military operations.


The chemtrailed skies over the entire US of all things A
have vast tracts of military grey chem-laden air space
where no regular air traffic ever flies.... yet which get
covered with chemtrail lines from airplanes that
can have only one possible reason for spraying their
evil emissions.

Our problem on this and other forums including Mick's notorious
debunking idiots, is one of perception.... and until we
each open our individual minds and smell the air and
watch for the blatantly-obvious evidence, we will
allow ourselves to get seduced by the chemtrailers
who for whatever shilly reasons want us to avert our gaze

MikeR



Posted by: almerie Apr 16 2014, 12:42 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 15 2014, 08:34 PM) *
<snip>
watch for the blatantly-obvious evidence
<snip>


I am still waiting to see that...


Posted by: MikeR Apr 20 2014, 10:33 PM

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c34U0Pwz4_c#t=72

Climate Engineering, Weather Warfare and the Collapse of Civilization

This is one of those videos that is a shock to the system.
All thanks to Dane Wigington for the amazing presentation.
Check him out on Facebook: Please visit the site for more info,
these guys know what they are talking about:
Dane Wigington presents hard data which reveals
what these catastrophic programs have done to our planet to date
and what they will do if they are allowed to continue.
Take the time to watch this video, follow up
with some investigation of your own
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org
and share the information.

Do it for your kids' sakes ....even if you do know you could care
a whole lot more for (y)our health and welfare.

MikeR

Posted by: almerie Apr 21 2014, 08:11 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 20 2014, 10:33 PM) *
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c34U0Pwz4_c#t=72


Why do we always have to sit through hours of video instead of just presenting the facts here? yahn.gif

QUOTE
<snip>
these guys know what they are talking about
<snip>


Apparently not...

QUOTE
Dane Wigington presents hard data which reveals
what these catastrophic programs have done to our planet to date
and what they will do if they are allowed to continue.


Could you please show us these data or just a sample of them?

QUOTE
Do it for your kids' sakes ....even if you do know you could care
a whole lot more for (y)our health and welfare.


I want my kids to first and foremost have critical thinking skills and demand evidence, if claims are thrust at them this way.
That is a much healthier way to live your life.

Posted by: MikeR Apr 21 2014, 03:05 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 22 2014, 12:11 AM) *
(1) Why do we always have to sit through hours of video instead of just presenting the facts here? yahn.gif

(2) I want my kids to first and foremost have critical thinking skills and demand evidence, if claims are thrust at them this way.
That is a much healthier way to live your life.


(1) some people can understand ideas presented audiovisually:
others apparently find video doesn't suit their minders' agenda.

(2) Think for your kids as critical and demanding as possible:
I'll live my life in as healthy way I like it lad.

Posted by: almerie Apr 24 2014, 05:17 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 20 2014, 10:33 PM) *
Dane Wigington presents hard data which reveals
what these catastrophic programs have done to our planet to date
and what they will do if they are allowed to continue.


I am still waiting for these data...

Why is it so hard to present here and why is this question always dodged?


Posted by: MikeR Apr 25 2014, 01:48 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 24 2014, 09:17 PM) *
I am still waiting for these data...

Why is it so hard to present here and why is this question always dodged?


Whatever makes you think Dane has ever seen your questions...
and as he obviously hasn't, why not email him direct....
and ask?

Then tell us all the result of your great effort rolleyes.gif

M

Posted by: almerie Apr 25 2014, 02:59 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 25 2014, 01:48 AM) *
Whatever makes you think Dane has ever seen your questions...
and as he obviously hasn't, why not email him direct....
and ask?

Then tell us all the result of your great effort rolleyes.gif

M


The question was for you, since you have been making the claims on this forum.

Then I must assume that you have not seen these data?

How can you post your claims without knowing what kind of data, if any, lies behind them?

Posted by: MikeR Apr 25 2014, 10:46 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 25 2014, 06:59 PM) *
The question was for you, since you have been making the claims on this forum.

Then I must assume that you have not seen these data?

How can you post your claims without knowing what kind of data, if any, lies behind them?


My dear friend, of course I know all about the data...
but, as you have shown no faith whatsobloodyever in
chemtralia information and research links, and in the
interpretation of anything on this forum,
I fondly thought you would warmly appreciate
the opportunity you yourself create
to check the evidence direct from the source and then
tell any and all of us who need to know.

I already know about chemtrails... it is your
uninformed skeptics who can benefit from
your researches, and you are super-smart
to seek Dane's input.

I am sure he will be happy to fill you in.

MikeR

Posted by: almerie Apr 27 2014, 03:39 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Apr 25 2014, 10:46 PM) *
My dear friend, of course I know all about the data...
but, as you have shown no faith whatsobloodyever in
chemtralia information and research links, and in the
interpretation of anything on this forum,
I fondly thought you would warmly appreciate
the opportunity you yourself create
to check the evidence direct from the source and then
tell any and all of us who need to know.

I already know about chemtrails... it is your
uninformed skeptics who can benefit from
your researches, and you are super-smart
to seek Dane's input.

I am sure he will be happy to fill you in.

MikeR


Nonsense, you are dodging again.

I have been to Wigingtons website many times in search of hard data, but have found none so far.

If there is hard data as evidence of 'chemtrails' why is this not on the frontpage? Or at least a link from the FrontPage? Why has it not been published in a scientific journal?

Instead Wigington has placed a video of aircraft making contrails as 'proof' of chemtrails.

Is this really all you've got?


Posted by: MikeR Apr 29 2014, 04:00 AM

QUOTE (almerie @ Apr 27 2014, 07:39 PM) *
Is this really all you've got?



I am not your Minder.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/dane-wigington/

Posted by: kawika May 27 2014, 11:53 AM

A worker testifies that he installed systems into aircraft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnCaE_3hImY

Some links to documents (most in German) about 1/2 way down the comments.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/insider-speaks-out/

LOOK UP!

Do your eyes deceive you?

Posted by: almerie May 28 2014, 02:59 AM

QUOTE (kawika @ May 27 2014, 11:53 AM) *
A worker testifies that he installed systems into aircraft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnCaE_3hImY

Some links to documents (most in German) about 1/2 way down the comments.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/insider-speaks-out/

LOOK UP!

Do your eyes deceive you?


This guy has already been debunked as everything else about 'chemtrails':

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-german-aeronautics-engineer-chemtrail-whistleblower.3715/


Posted by: MikeR Jun 4 2014, 01:30 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ May 28 2014, 06:59 PM) *
This guy has already been debunked as everything else about 'chemtrails':

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-german-aeronautics-engineer-chemtrail-whistleblower.3715/


Surely you're not still in bed with that shill of a debunker?

The guy has no integrity: he couldn't even lie straight in the sack.

What in hell makes you think he'd know how to debunk?
laughing1.gif

Posted by: almerie Jun 4 2014, 02:39 PM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Jun 4 2014, 01:30 PM) *
Surely you're not still in bed with that shill of a debunker?

The guy has no integrity: he couldn't even lie straight in the sack.

What in hell makes you think he'd know how to debunk?
laughing1.gif


Well, ad hom attacks as usual, no surprise there.

Have you actually read the comments from Mike West?

If so, how about a valid counter-argument?

If not, you really should.

The essence is that this german guy lied to a bunch of people that did not even question his statements.
Who is the real sheep here?




Posted by: MikeR Jun 9 2014, 08:06 PM

QUOTE (almerie @ Jun 5 2014, 06:39 AM) *
Well, ad hom attacks as usual, no surprise there.

Have you actually read the comments from Mike West?

If so, how about a valid counter-argument?

If not, you really should.

The essence is that this german guy lied to a bunch of people that did not even question his statements.
Who is the real sheep here?



I have read way-y-y too many of Mick West's lies and innuendo...

Mick wouldn't even accept my registration on his site:
at least Rob Balsamo got through that hurdle even
if the stupid webmaster couldn't tolerate Rob's insights

No surprise your brand of myopia finds solace in the bottom bunk

Posted by: almerie Jun 10 2014, 02:07 AM

QUOTE (MikeR @ Jun 9 2014, 08:06 PM) *
I have read way-y-y too many of Mick West's lies and innuendo...

Mick wouldn't even accept my registration on his site:
at least Rob Balsamo got through that hurdle even
if the stupid webmaster couldn't tolerate Rob's insights

No surprise your brand of myopia finds solace in the bottom bunk


Again Ad Hom attacks and no real arguments.

Be constructive and point out where Mike West is lying about this particular subject?


Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)