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 _ The Sockpuppets Invading P4t

Posted by: JimMac Mar 3 2014, 01:29 AM

Have you noticed it? I've been posting on P4T since 2009, and been in a lot of battles here defending the truth. After awhile one becomes seasoned, developing a radar for the shills, dogs from hell. I want to announce to you, something is up. The paid liars are here, flapping their gums, pounding their keyboards. Be on alert.
Jim

Posted by: tonybird Mar 3 2014, 07:26 AM

Well, I'm recently returned to this forum because the chemtrails discussion is heating up, something I tried to get going when I first joined it four years ago. In the meantime, I was quite active in another forum, one for rockclimbers, but I dropped out of it about a year ago for the reason you mention. We'd have occasional quite heated discussions there about 9/11, chemtrails and related subjects, and there was one quite obviously professional disrupter in our midst, one who posed as a fellow climber but obviously had no real knowledge about rock climbing, one who dumped the forums full of garbage, usually pictorial garbage, just as certain important points were being made. He became more sophisticated over a couple of years, but he never went away. Eventually, I went away. Discussions could never be intelligent when he was around, and he succeeded in turning people against each other quite cleverly by making certain alliances. It wasn't a well-administered forum, so his tricks were easier to get away with, but I just had the feeling he was there because it was his job. Yes, be on alert.

Posted by: hanky Mar 3 2014, 04:09 PM

I thought it was so obvious these last few months, just from the sheer massive glut of off-topic posts. So what do you do?

Posted by: NP1Mike Mar 3 2014, 04:46 PM

Yes Jim I agree with you.
I mentioned this in another thread recently.

Since I haven't been here too long myself, I'm not familiar with many names.

However I do see quite a few regulars who I've quickly gotten to know.

The ones who I am most suspicious about are those who surface after an absence of several years, to make a few posts, which often add nothing new to the discussion.

Trolls/shills, call them what you like, these individuals are obviously up to no good.

Case in point; this thread.

We have 'tonybird' who shows up after an almost 6 year absence to make his second post!
And which topic does he choose to post to?

And we have 'hanky' who shows up after an almost 3 year absence to make his seventh post.
And which topic does he choose to post to?

I have started to make a list of these occasional posters.
I suspect many of them are simply socks that infested this site years ago and their keepers come back every once in a while to keep them alive and give the appearance of interest.
They need a strong contingency force in case an issue is raised where they need to snuff it out quickly.

If any of these likely socks are genuine, they will stick around, post more frequently and *contribute constructively* to the site.

My advice to all would be to stay vigilant, keep looking over your shoulder and trust only those who have earned it.

Posted by: paranoia Mar 4 2014, 03:14 AM

"...just from the sheer massive glut of off-topic posts. So what do you do?"

-you debate the issues of merit, ignore the off topic posts (i.e. dont feed would-be trolls), and leave the moderating to the moderators. i just said this in another thread, but it bears repeating here: rest assured, in the end most if not all of the pseudo-skeptics are transparent and expose themselves by way of (if nothing else) their intellectual dishonesty. even then we are not in the habit of censoring or squelching them; if needed we engage them in debate, but even if we dont, we trust in the ability of readers/members to discern what is and isnt bullshit. and unless someone is an outright disruptor, we give users a wide berth, but when its time to for the foot to come down, it will come down.

Posted by: JimMac Mar 4 2014, 05:05 AM

QUOTE (paranoia @ Mar 4 2014, 03:14 AM) *
"...just from the sheer massive glut of off-topic posts. So what do you do?"

-you debate the issues of merit, ignore the off topic posts (i.e. dont feed would-be trolls), and leave the moderating to the moderators. i just said this in another thread, but it bears repeating here: rest assured, in the end most if not all of the pseudo-skeptics are transparent and expose themselves by way of (if nothing else) their intellectual dishonesty. even then we are not in the habit of censoring or squelching them; if needed we engage them in debate, but even if we dont, we trust in the ability of readers/members to discern what is and isnt bullshit. and unless someone is an outright disruptor, we give users a wide berth, but when its time to for the foot to come down, it will come down.


When cockroaches invade your home, what do you do about it? You exterminate them. Cointel pro socks should be treated in the same way. Remember W.C. Field's famous quote, 'Never give a sucker an even break.' Puppet socks drain a forum's energy, as is their mission. They leach good energy, in exchange for bad. Here, lately, they appear to be winning that fight.
Jim

Posted by: JimMac Mar 4 2014, 08:00 PM

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

Posted by: WhisperingWnd Mar 4 2014, 10:04 PM

QUOTE (JimMac @ Mar 4 2014, 07:00 PM) *
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/



I guess you missed this thread that rob balsamo posted on February 28th... whistle.gif

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22622

Posted by: JimMac Mar 4 2014, 11:11 PM

QUOTE (WhisperingWnd @ Mar 4 2014, 10:04 PM) *
I guess you missed this thread that rob balsamo posted on February 28th... whistle.gif

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22622


I probably did see it, thanks for the reminder. No problem with a link to the article here though, as a supporting reference to the thread topic.

Jim

Posted by: poppyburner Mar 5 2014, 06:33 AM

QUOTE (The Guardian)
Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media

Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities to spread pro-American propaganda


~ http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks (2011).


"Nano-thermite my ass."

Posted by: Quest Mar 6 2014, 08:44 PM

What I'm curious of is this, if you knew a certain 'member' to be a 100% verifiable troll here just to cause trouble and intentionally disrupt the forum leaving the legit data here fragmented with valued members leaving, why would the site owner or admins not act? Rob? It's going to be difficult spreading truth without posting members and knowledge sharing.

Posted by: NP1Mike Mar 6 2014, 08:53 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 6 2014, 07:44 PM) *
What I'm curious of is this, if you knew a certain 'member' to be a 100% verifiable troll here just to cause trouble and intentionally disrupt the forum leaving the legit data here fragmented with valued members leaving, why would the site owner or admins not act? Rob? It's going to be difficult spreading truth without posting members and knowledge sharing.



It's good of you to join the thread Quest. The first thing I did was look at your history (join date, number of posts). I can feel quite assured that you are the real deal here. smile.gif

As far as what you were asking.. I'm actually surprised that you are asking this, given that you are a veteran here.

I would think it highly likely that if the admin/mods knew with 100% certainty that someone was a troll here they would ban them without hesitation.

Posted by: JimMac Mar 6 2014, 09:34 PM

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Mar 6 2014, 08:53 PM) *
It's good of you to join the thread Quest. The first thing I did was look at your history (join date, number of posts). I can feel quite assured that you are the real deal here. smile.gif

As far as what you were asking.. I'm actually surprised that you are asking this, given that you are a veteran here.

I would think it highly likely that if the admin/mods knew with 100% certainty that someone was a troll here they would ban them without hesitation.


Quest is asking what is commonly referred to as a hypothetical question, to Rob. I'm not sure why you feel its your place to speculate an answer on his behalf.

Posted by: Quest Mar 6 2014, 10:43 PM

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Mar 7 2014, 01:53 AM) *
It's good of you to join the thread Quest. The first thing I did was look at your history (join date, number of posts). I can feel quite assured that you are the real deal here. smile.gif

As far as what you were asking.. I'm actually surprised that you are asking this, given that you are a veteran here.

I would think it highly likely that if the admin/mods knew with 100% certainty that someone was a troll here they would ban them without hesitation.


OK, that's good. So we agree that trolls are not good for the site. Now, do trolls make it a habit of announcing to forums, "I'm a troll, I'm a troll. Watch me wreck this joint!" The point is that trolls don't play by the rules, they are liars and hide their true intentions. Good standing forum members should have the right to ask questions to try and sniff them out. Another point, ignoring trolls does no good as they will spam the site as has already happened to several recent threads. They will also piss off members who debate in good faith. So, Rob, what are you thinking? Admins, mods Isn't it funny that they only people who are forever mired in verbal fisticuffs which result in productive, good-standing members being reprimanded by the site owner are members with low post counts who never actually proclaim 911 as being an inside job? Rob, admins, mods, let's get some feedback here. What are you thinking?

Posted by: NP1Mike Mar 6 2014, 10:49 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 6 2014, 09:43 PM) *
...So, Rob, what are you thinking? Admins, mods Issn't it funny that they only people who are forever mired in verbal fisticuffs which result in productive, good-standing members being reprimanded by the site owner are members with low post counts who never actually proclaim 911 as being an inside job? Rob, admins, mods, let's get some feedback here. What are you thinking?


+1
Hear hear!

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 6 2014, 11:55 PM

Sockpuppets are those who have 2 or more userID's registered at one forum. Those people you have accused of being sockpuppets only have one registered UserID at this forum, therefore by definition, they are not sockpuppets.

You have also accused Kozer1 of being a troll...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22626&st=40&p=10811887&#entry10811887

Kozer1 is a Core member and was invited here by me!

Jim, tone down your attacks on others or it will be you who is shown the door.

A reminder from the Forum Rules...
• Personal Attacks are discouraged and do nothing to advance your argument. Personal attacks will get your "Warn level" increased. If it reaches 100%, your posting privileges may be suspended or you may be banned outright depending upon the severity of the attack(s) and your responsiveness to warnings. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum Staff reserve the right to suspend/ban for any reason deemed necessary for preserving the integrity of the forum. Attack the argument, not the person.

Posted by: JimMac Mar 7 2014, 12:08 AM

I'm leaving this form in disgust. Rob has my rebuke.
Carry on the good fight, those of you who know.
Jim

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 7 2014, 12:27 AM

I guess this is what I get for creating a forum section for those who wish to discuss "chemtrails". rolleyes.gif

A reminder of the forum rules is above. They apply to everyone in order to maintain a civil discussion on this forum. Jim obviously would rather attack others with accusations, and apparently thinks the rules do not apply to him, not to mention the fact he has accused a Core Member who was invited here by me, as being a troll.

If a User has a problem with another user of this forum, do not accuse that person of being a troll, shill or otherwise. PM a mod with a link and we will look into it. If the staff determines that a User is a troll, shill, whatever... they will be placed into the troll user group and restricted access to only the debate forum. If you do not wish to bat around the confirmed trolls, ignore them. Making such accusations prior to staff review and confirmation do nothing to promote civil discussion and only prove to bait and inflame. It is a piss-poor debate tactic. Those who use such tactics will be warned, suspended, then banned if such violations persist. Attack the argument, not the person. The forum rules are clear.

Posted by: Quest Mar 7 2014, 07:44 AM

Rob, forget about "sock puppets". Trolls are trolls regardless of whatever form they come here. Almerie is a troll, plain and simple. Ask him if 911 was an inside job. Ask him if the towers were controlled demolitions in the forum, not in a PM. Let's see where that gets you.

Understand Rob, our only concern is the health of PFT.

Posted by: Quest Mar 7 2014, 07:53 AM

QUOTE
rob balsamo' date='Mar 7 2014, 05:27 AM' post='10811922']
I guess this is what I get for creating a forum section for those who wish to discuss "chemtrails". rolleyes.gif


And herein lies the problem. Of all people Rob, you sneer at this topic while actual scientists and meteorologists are claiming an active geoengineering operation is underway. The trolls and politically correct in the truth movement are following your lead. You show disdain for the topic, even belittling it. You should know better than this as a site owner. Rob, I am challenging YOU to a debate. Line up whatever resources you want and I will do the same. We will use the geoengineering forum here and have an open, productive discussion.

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 7 2014, 10:49 AM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 7 2014, 06:44 AM) *
Rob, forget about "sock puppets". Trolls are trolls regardless of whatever form they come here. Almerie is a troll, plain and simple. Ask him if 911 was an inside job. Ask him if the towers were controlled demolitions in the forum, not in a PM. Let's see where that gets you.

Understand Rob, our only concern is the health of PFT.



Quest,

Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not go around screaming "9/11 Was An Inside Job" with black shirts on.... do you know why?

This is our Mission Statement and has been on our front page since 2006. Pay close attention to the bolded and underlined statement.

Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe who have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time., However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day based on solid data and facts -- since 9/11/2001 is the catalyst for many of the events shaping our world today -- and the United States Government does not seem to be very forthcoming with answers or facts.

We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report -- a Commission admittedly "set up to fail" according to the Chairman himself, nor "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the continued gross violation(s) of the United States Constitution being committed by Government agencies, and the sacrifice every American has made and continue to make -- some more than others.

We stand with the numerous other growing organizations of Firefighters, Medical Professionals, Lawyers, Scholars, Military Officers, Veterans, Religious and Political Leaders, along side Survivors, family members of the victims -- family members of soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice -- including the many Ground Zero workers who are now ill or have passed away, when we ask for a true, new independent investigation into the events of 9/11.

Thank you for taking the time to inform yourself.


We also do not endorse the WTC CD theory as we are not experts in Structural Engineering.

This has been explained many times on our main website and throughout this forum. You claim to have been a "member in good standing" here, but yet you are unaware of our position and work. All I have actually seen you do is push wild theories, start fights on this forum, and whine to me about someone being a troll or shill because they've asked you questions to support your theories. Why is that?



QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 7 2014, 06:53 AM) *
And herein lies the problem. Of all people Rob, you sneer at this topic while actual scientists and meteorologists are claiming an active geoengineering operation is underway. The trolls and politically correct in the truth movement are following your lead. You show disdain for the topic, even belittling it. You should know better than this as a site owner. Rob, I am challenging YOU to a debate. Line up whatever resources you want and I will do the same. We will use the geoengineering forum here and have an open, productive discussion.


Quest, as you well know I have allowed topics here in which many other forums have banned. I have provided my reasons for not believing in chemtrails 100% and why I am allowing discussion here on such a topic. I have no real interest in chemtrails because I know how pressurization systems work on aircraft and if your beliefs were true, people would be dying or dead in the thousands daily correlating to air travel. I have also shown that http://www.weathermodification.com/, but it is not proven if it is on a large scale nor for nefarious purpose. I have offered an opportunity to obtain conclusive proof, in fact JimMac was receptive to the idea in discussion via PM with me. After creating a forum section for the specific discussion, my proposal is hand waived, and people are accused of being trolls and shills.

This is the very reason you do not have more pilots interested in chemtrails. And in fact when people/pilots question your beliefs and/or ask for more evidence, you call them trolls and shills.

How about this Quest..... How about I ban all NPT and chemtrail discussion from this forum as many other forums have done? In fact, I have taken heat from some our Core members for some of the types of discussion I have allowed on this forum. I get it from both sides. And if it comes down to a Core member leaving or you... guess who is gonna lose.

You can either discuss it, or I can shut it down. Up to you.

I don't know your real full name, I don't know where you live.. I don't know what you do for a living... for someone I have "known" for years... I actually don't know anything about you, except from what I have seen on these forums. And I am not liking what I am seeing.

My main point, do not accuse people of being trolls or shills just because they require more evidence regarding a theory which can be easily proven by just getting an airplane and flying through some "chemtrails". And until that day happens, you will not get much support from the aviation community. If you have a problem with a user, PM the staff with a link. Do not inflame or bait others by continuing to accuse them of being trolls or shills without staff confirmation, or it is you who will be shown the door. And quite frankly, it won't be much of a loss as perhaps some of our members who have complained to me about the wild theories you push, might come back...

Posted by: Quest Mar 7 2014, 03:15 PM

Just great. JimMac quit the forum. This is what happens when trolls roam unchecked.

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 7 2014, 03:41 PM

QUOTE (Quest @ Mar 7 2014, 02:15 PM) *
Just great. JimMac quit the forum. This is what happens when trolls roam unchecked.


JimMac violated the forum rules. He was warned. He was not banned, nor suspended. His ego couldn't take it, he left.

So be it.

Keep in mind all of the above occurred after I created a forum section for people to discuss chemtrails who wish to discuss chemtrails.

It seems after I created such a section, people were more focused on attacking each other than actually discussing chemtrails.

Posted by: poppyburner Mar 7 2014, 07:01 PM

QUOTE (JimMac @ Mar 7 2014, 04:08 AM) *
I'm leaving this form in disgust. Rob has my rebuke.
Carry on the good fight, those of you who know.
Jim


"Jimmy, Jimmy, oh Jimmy Mack, when
are you coming back?"


Come on, don't be a drama queen.

Posted by: bill Mar 9 2014, 07:05 PM


Well, I haven't been here much lately but, reading what is happening over geo-engineering discussions I can see plainly that the trolls are winning --

I have to admit that they are very good at what they do

So, Rob, does that mean that you won't be debating Quest on geo engineering ?

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 9 2014, 08:43 PM

QUOTE (bill @ Mar 9 2014, 07:05 PM) *
So, Rob, does that mean that you won't be debating Quest on geo engineering ?


Bill, you are a pilot.

Are you familiar with pressurization systems?

If so, are you willing to debate me with regard to airliners who fly through higher concentrations of "chemtrails" at altitude daily with cabins full of passengers?

But to answer your question, sure, I am willing to "debate" Quest on such a topic. And I have told him what he needs to do to provide support for his argument, including the fact I have offered my services to obtain such proof.

From what I have seen so far, "Quest" gets very upset when others ask for actual evidence and chain of custody... and has attacked others calling them trolls and shills.

In short, debating "Quest" on such a topic is like debating a 15 year old on how to drive a car in which the 15 year old knowledge is derived mostly from playing GTA on a PS3.

Quest has absolutely zero aeronautical knowledge, and gets frustrated when put in a tight spot in which he cannot answer. The same goes for JimMac.

But you do have some aeronautical knowledge. So at least you know the language a bit....

So Bill, wanna debate me on "chemtrails"?

Posted by: Tamborine man Mar 10 2014, 05:12 AM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 7 2014, 11:43 PM) *
Bill, you are a pilot.

Are you familiar with pressurization systems?

If so, are you willing to debate me with regard to airliners who fly through higher concentrations of "chemtrails" at altitude daily with cabins full of passengers?


I'm one of those being deeply ignorant about any kind of "systems" on aircrafts.

Following the "chemtrail discussions", i was led to believe that aircrafts of any

size would carry their own air supply in smaller or much bigger containers,

according to the size of any particular 'aeroplane'!

Now i'm not too sure about this, so would 'happily' like to hear a discussion

about the "real state of affairs" of how the 'air' is supplied to the pilots, crews

and passengers! thumbsup.gif

Cheers

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 10 2014, 08:05 AM

QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Mar 10 2014, 05:12 AM) *
Now i'm not too sure about this, so would 'happily' like to hear a discussion

about the "real state of affairs" of how the 'air' is supplied to the pilots, crews

and passengers! thumbsup.gif

Cheers


http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=22626&view=findpost&p=10811789

Posted by: bill Mar 10 2014, 09:09 AM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 9 2014, 07:43 PM) *
Bill, you are a pilot.

Are you familiar with pressurization systems?

If so, are you willing to debate me with regard to airliners who fly through higher concentrations of "chemtrails" at altitude daily with cabins full of passengers?

But to answer your question, sure, I am willing to "debate" Quest on such a topic. And I have told him what he needs to do to provide support for his argument, including the fact I have offered my services to obtain such proof.

From what I have seen so far, "Quest" gets very upset when others ask for actual evidence and chain of custody... and has attacked others calling them trolls and shills.

In short, debating "Quest" on such a topic is like debating a 15 year old on how to drive a car in which the 15 year old knowledge is derived mostly from playing GTA on a PS3.

Quest has absolutely zero aeronautical knowledge, and gets frustrated when put in a tight spot in which he cannot answer. The same goes for JimMac.

But you do have some aeronautical knowledge. So at least you know the language a bit....

So Bill, wanna debate me on "chemtrails"?




There is no debate about the facts presented clearly at many websites including Carnicom, and Geoengineeringwatch The DVD "Shade" is well done also

Kirsten Meghan has come forward with information from her time in the Airforce where she handled the environmental forms for the Air Force purchase of Aluminum and Barium materials

She has spoken with other mechanics and Airforce personnel that corroborate her information.

She also tested and found these materials in the environment.

there are clearly disinformation sites as well including metabunk

In at least one of Meghan's youtubes she mentions metabunk as a disinformation site

The fact that slick, well funded disinformation sites such as metabunk exist is a huge flag IMO.
It is worth spending major resources to run metabunk to 'somebody' -- why ?

Frankly, I think your 'argument' about passengers and pilots flying through this material is silly.

You may remember that thousands of innocent civilians were murdered and maimed on September 11, 2001 --Is your 'argument' that you think they may have qualms about poisoning a few pilots and passengers ?

Here is a paper written for the US Airforce back in the mid 90's, you may want to read before you attempt to debate anyone on weather modification or geoengineering

"Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025"

http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf

Finally, I think denigrating intelligent, long time contributors by comparing them to 15 year old GTA players makes you look quite puerile.



Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 10 2014, 09:21 AM

QUOTE (bill @ Mar 10 2014, 09:09 AM) *
Frankly, I think your 'argument' about passengers and pilots flying through this material is silly.


In other words, you don't know how aircraft pressurization systems operate.

Bill, as with 9/11 (linking parts recovered to the aircraft), anytime you get samples taken from an aircraft, please provide the tail numbers and crew names. Until then you have nothing but theories, and no chain of custody.

We already know https://www.google.com/#q=weather+modification is http://www.weathermodification.com/... but it has not been proven such operations are being performed on a large scale for nefarious purposes.

I have seen Kristen's presentation. It was interesting, but she didn't provide any evidence linking "chemtrails" to a specific aircraft, on a specific date, altitudes, origin airport, destination... names.... nothing.

Again, thousands of flights are airborne daily. If they are flying through high concentrations of "chemtrails" at altitude, there would be thousands of people dead or dying in correlation to air travel.

We have pilots with 25-30000 hours total flight time and in good health. How is that possible if they spend a good portion of their lives flying through chemicals sprayed in high concentrations at their altitudes?

Are the chemicals somehow benign and safe to breathe as they come out of the aircraft nozzles at altitude, while getting sucked into thousands of other aircraft engines flying through the materials, compressed, and pumped into cabins..... but somehow become more toxic when they hit the ground spread out over a wide area?



QUOTE
Finally, I think denigrating intelligent, long time contributors by comparing them to 15 year old GTA players makes you look quite puerile.


I think the fact that you completely dismiss the operation of pressurization systems containing thousands of people flying in and through allegedly high concentrations of chemicals at altitude daily makes you look ignorant.

Posted by: bill Mar 10 2014, 10:02 AM

"Again, thousands of flights are airborne daily. If they are flying through high concentrations of "chemtrails" at altitude, there would be thousands of people dead or dying in correlation to air travel."



your assertion of thousands of casualties is based on what ?

are you a physician, environmental engineer, chemist ?

here's a thought, rob

get off your butt, and use some of your airline contacts and get an air filter or sample from an aircraft pressurization system dust etc. (any amount even a few milligrams will be enough)

send it to me (I'll even pay the freight)

I will get it analyzed by ICP-MS and report the results here

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 10 2014, 10:06 AM

QUOTE (bill @ Mar 10 2014, 10:02 AM) *
here's a thought, rob

get off your butt,


Yeah... because I have not done anything in pursuit of the truth... and only like to sit on my butt... rolleyes.gif


Here's a thought bill, get off YOUR butt and do something to gather evidence for YOUR theories. Namely chain of custody, tail numbers.. etc. Until then, you won't get much support from the aviation community with regard to "chemtrails", as we know how pressurization systems operate.

Posted by: bill Mar 10 2014, 10:15 AM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 10 2014, 09:06 AM) *
Yeah... because I have not done anything in pursuit of the truth... and only like to sit on my butt... rolleyes.gif


Here's a thought bill, get off YOUR butt and do something to gather evidence for YOUR theories. Namely chain of custody, tail numbers.. etc. Until then, you won't get much support from the aviation community with regard to "chemtrails", as we know how pressurization systems operate.



duh.....

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34708785/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/airplane-air-not-bad-you-think/#.Ux3IG_ldVf0

On average, cabin air is completely refreshed 20 times per hour, compared with just 12 times per hour in an office building. On most aircraft, air is also circulated through hospital-grade HEPA filters, which remove 99.97 percent of bacteria, as well as the airborne particles that viruses use for transport (many regional jets lack these filters). Additionally, cabins are divided into separate ventilation sections about every seven rows of seats, which means that you share air only with those in your immediate environment and not with the guy who’s coughing up a lung ten rows back. When the plane is on the ground, however, air circulation in the cabin can be greatly reduced.




Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 10 2014, 10:32 AM

QUOTE (bill @ Mar 10 2014, 10:15 AM) *
duh.....

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34708785/ns/travel-travel_tips/t/airplane-air-not-bad-you-think/#.Ux3IG_ldVf0

On average, cabin air is completely refreshed 20 times per hour, compared with just 12 times per hour in an office building. On most aircraft, air is also circulated through hospital-grade HEPA filters, which remove 99.97 percent of bacteria, as well as the airborne particles that viruses use for transport (many regional jets lack these filters). Additionally, cabins are divided into separate ventilation sections about every seven rows of seats, which means that you share air only with those in your immediate environment and not with the guy who’s coughing up a lung ten rows back. When the plane is on the ground, however, air circulation in the cabin can be greatly reduced.


NBC news? Really?

laughing1.gif

How often is the air "refreshed" on the ground while you are standing outside?

More or less than being inside a pressurized cabin?

Are the concentration levels of "chemtrails" more dangerous to humans when they reach the ground? Or are the concentration levels more dangerous if flying through something like this...



Are the "chemtrail" crews who fly such "criss-cross" patterns in the sky wearing O2 masks? Or do they just breath the air (and "chemicals") sucked into the engines, compressed, and then dumped into the cabin while waiting for it to "refresh"... with more "chemicals"?

lol

What about all the other airplanes flying through such high concentrations of "chemicals". Do the pilots drop the masks for passengers when they see such upcoming mayhem? And then ask the passengers to stow their masks after they pass through and a cabin "refresh"? What if they are stuck in a widespread "chemtrail" operation for more than an hour? 2 hours? 3? What then?


Please bill..... save it.

Again, this theory is very easily proven. All one needs to do is go up there and fly through the stuff. Come back and test the samples. Then we will all have conclusive proof either way. It seems proponents of "chemtrails" do not want make such an effort and would rather argue with people endlessly on the internet asking "Why aren't there more Pilots supporting Chemtrail Theories!?"

Well, I think you have your answer....

Get samples, get tail numbers, get crew names... origin airport... destination.... and then you may find more support for your theories. Until then, you are spinning your wheels.... but hey.. .feel free to discuss it here if you wish.. .that is why I created the forum section for "chemtrails". Please be familiar with the forum rules and have respect for this forum/organization... because as easily as I created it... I can also take it away... and show you the door.

Have fun!

Posted by: bill Mar 10 2014, 11:12 AM




Assuming I did go and get the HEPA filters and have them analyzed by ICP-MS

Based on your previous interaction about this subject I fully expect that you would just deny that I had any proof

I asked you get the samples since, as an airline pilot, you are at airports frequently and could get the samples and chain of custody etc easily (well a lot easier than us non- airline pilots)

I can get them analyzed with an ICP -MS that will find what elements are present and at what concentrations down to ppb

like this


Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 10 2014, 11:19 AM

QUOTE (bill @ Mar 10 2014, 11:12 AM) *
Based on your previous interaction about this subject I fully expect that you would just deny that I had any proof


Or how about this.....

I close the "Chemtrail" forum I created for those who wish to discuss "chemtrails". Ban all discussion of "Chemtrails", and ask you to take your theories elsewhere.....

Hey, I got an idea... how about you go create "Pilots For Chemtrail Truth"? Let me know if you need tips on how to create a website....

Would that be better?

This is Pilots For 9/11 Truth after all....

Bill, I have seen the filters from aircraft. If chemicals were being sprayed in high concentrations at altitude and an aircraft fly's through it, not only would the filters be caked with the stuff, but so would the airframe... similar to this....



Ever seen a crop duster after it gets done spraying a field? The airplane is filthy with particles caked all over... especially the empennage and tailwheel...

Posted by: bill Mar 10 2014, 12:40 PM

"Bill, I have seen the filters from aircraft. If chemicals were being sprayed in high concentrations at altitude and an aircraft fly's (sic) through it, not only would the filters be caked with the stuff, but so would the airframe... similar to this...."


Gee, rob, that picture looks like ice to me, but then I am not an airline captain so maybe
I don't know what ice looks like (it's a King Air isn't it ? but I digress)

what makes you think that you would see the particles on the filters at or the aircraft wings at all ?

the patents for geoengineering using particles seem to favor very small particles of Aluminum and Barium salts

comparing them to crop dusting is ridiculous unless you know of some dusters that fly at Mach .8


it is ironic that trying to engage a meaningful discussion about this topic seems to turn into some variation of things I heard more than once in grade school in various forms --it went something like this

"if you don't like it, then I will just take my ball and go home"



rolleyes.gif




Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 10 2014, 01:10 PM

QUOTE (bill @ Mar 10 2014, 12:40 PM) *
Gee, rob, that picture looks like ice to me, but then I am not an airline captain so maybe


It is Ice.... it is an example of what an airplane looks like when flying through solid visible particles.


QUOTE
what makes you think that you would see the particles on the filters at or the aircraft wings at all ?


For the same reason people like you claim to see them in the air.

Do you think these are chemicals?



And if so... Are those concentration levels of "chemtrails" more dangerous to humans who fly through the above.... Or are the concentration levels more dangerous if standing on the ground underneath them....? Second time asked....

Again...
Are the "chemtrail" crews who fly such "criss-cross" patterns in the sky wearing O2 masks? Or do they just breath the air (and "chemicals") sucked into the engines, compressed, and then dumped into the cabin while waiting for it to "refresh"... with more "chemicals"?

What about all the other airplanes flying through such high concentrations of "chemicals". Do the pilots drop the masks for passengers when they see such upcoming mayhem? And then ask the passengers to stow their masks after they pass through and a cabin "refresh"? What if they are stuck in a widespread "chemtrail" operation for more than an hour? 2 hours? 3? What then?

Why do you evade these questions?

How would they get airspeed readings? Do the pitot-tubes have HEPA filters as well? Or perhaps they just turn on the Pitot anti-ice and melt away the chemicals? lol

AOA vanes? TAT probes, FADEC probes? All have HEPA filters?



QUOTE
the patents for geoengineering using particles seem to favor very small particles of Aluminum and Barium salts


Are you now claiming that the particles/chemicals get through the HEPA filters and enter the cabin and the lungs of the passengers and crew? If so, why did you bring up the HEPA filters in the first place?


QUOTE
comparing them to crop dusting is ridiculous...


No, it isn't.

QUOTE
it is ironic that trying to engage a meaningful discussion about this topic


This discussion would not exist if I did not allow it. Again... this is Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Do you know how many of our Core members absolutely despise such a topic and think it is utterly ridiculous to even discuss?




QUOTE
"if you don't like it, then I will just take my ball and go home"


This is my "home". I am already here. Do you allow people to come into your home and shit on your floor? Maybe you do... but we have a higher standard on this forum and within our organization.

Again, let me know if you need tips in building your own "home"..


Bill, if you evade my questions again... on mod preview you go... until you answer...

Posted by: bill Mar 10 2014, 01:41 PM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 10 2014, 12:10 PM) *
It is Ice.... it is an example of what an airplane looks like when flying through solid visible particles.





"For the same reason people like you claim to see them in the air."


Well I do see the results of the particles as they appear to condense out in the upper atmosphere. I absolutely do not claim to see the Aluminum and Barium particles.





Do you think these are chemicals?

I think that they are artificially created persistent cloud formations induced by the chemical actions of Aluminum and Barium salts as proposed in several US patents.



And if so... Are those concentration levels of "chemtrails" more dangerous to humans who fly through the above.... Or are the concentration levels more dangerous if standing on the ground underneath them....? Second time asked....

I did not previously answer this because I assumed it was a rhetorical question

I would presume that the concentration is higher in the 'trails than at a lower level due to dilution effects through the atmosphere.

Again...
Are the "chemtrail" crews who fly such "criss-cross" patterns in the sky wearing O2 masks? Or do they just breath the air (and "chemicals") sucked into the engines, compressed, and then dumped into the cabin while waiting for it to "refresh"... with more "chemicals"?

I honestly do not know if they breathe separate air supplies. You have already confirmed that the cabin air is filtered. If they are military planes I would think it likely that they are breathing through masks but that is speculation only.

"What about all the other airplanes flying through such high concentrations of "chemicals". Do the pilots drop the masks for passengers when they see such upcoming mayhem? And then ask the passengers to stow their masks after they pass through and a cabin "refresh"? What if they are stuck in a widespread "chemtrail" operation for more than an hour? 2 hours? 3? What then?"

Well based on my several million miles flying commercial airlines I have never seen the emergency masks deployed. So based on my experience I would say no they don't deploy emergency masks.



"Why do you evade these questions?"

Because I did not think you were seriously asking these rather poorly worded and sarcastic questions and expecting an answer.





"Are you now claiming that the particles/chemicals get through the HEPA filters and enter the cabin and the lungs of the passengers and crew? If so, why did you bring up the HEPA filters in the first place?"

HEPA filters are what was listed in the article I posted as being used to filter the cabin air on commercial




No, it isn't.



"This discussion would not exist if I did not allow it. Again... this is Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Do you know how many of our Core members absolutely despise such a topic and think it is utterly ridiculous to even discuss?"

No I don't. How many ?



"This is my home. I am already here. Do you allow people to come into your home and shit on your floor? Maybe you do... but we have a higher standard on this forum and within our organization.

Again, let me know if you need tips in building your own "home"..


Bill, if you evade my questions again... on mod preview you go... until you answer...



Posted by: NP1Mike Mar 10 2014, 04:29 PM

(I am replying in this thread simply because it is easiest to do, but isn't the topic of chemtrails supposed to go in the new chemtrail forum?)

I am not going to come down on the side of either one of you, as I have not studied chemtrails to any degree yet.

However, is it not possible that both of you gentlemen are correct?

ie. most/all of the 'chemtrails' we see in the skies are simply harmless water-based particles and the more harmful chemtrails are limited to strategic areas that busy air traffic never flies through?

Posted by: bill Mar 10 2014, 06:57 PM

Wow

NP a real blast from the past -- another member that goes back to the first 150 that registered here


your point is well taken

here in Wisconsin the number of flights is rather small

interestingly enough there are frequently jets that have 'normal' contrails that evaporate within minutes right next to the persistent geo-engineering ones that last for hours

I have checked their altitudes frequently by observing a 45 or 60 degree azimuth to the trail and then getting into the car and calculating the altitude -- consistently it is 35,000 feet or about 7 miles by car

anyway good to 'hear' from you NP

Posted by: bill Mar 11 2014, 11:35 AM

I am going to edit the complete list a bit but the full 25 are here

http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/the-25-rules-of-disinformation/

25 Rules for Disinformation

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the “How dare you!” gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.

12. Enigmas have no solution.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can “argue” with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how “sensitive they are to criticism”.

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot.



Posted by: bill Mar 11 2014, 12:00 PM

quote from rob
Bill, you are a pilot.

Are you familiar with pressurization systems?

If so, are you willing to debate me with regard to airliners who fly through higher concentrations of "chemtrails" at altitude daily with cabins full of passengers?

But to answer your question, sure, I am willing to "debate" Quest on such a topic. And I have told him what he needs to do to provide support for his argument, including the fact I have offered my services to obtain such proof.

From what I have seen so far, "Quest" gets very upset when others ask for actual evidence and chain of custody... and has attacked others calling them trolls and shills.

In short, debating "Quest" on such a topic is like debating a 15 year old on how to drive a car in which the 15 year old knowledge is derived mostly from playing GTA on a PS3.

Quest has absolutely zero aeronautical knowledge, and gets frustrated when put in a tight spot in which he cannot answer. The same goes for JimMac.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated,

But you do have some aeronautical knowledge. So at least you know the language a bit....

So Bill, wanna debate me on "chemtrails"?

quote from rob

In other words, you don't know how aircraft pressurization systems operate.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated,

Bill, as with 9/11 (linking parts recovered to the aircraft), anytime you get samples taken from an aircraft, please provide the tail numbers and crew names. Until then you have nothing but theories, and no chain of custody.


We already know Weather modification is a fact... but it has not been proven such operations are being performed on a large scale for nefarious purposes.

I have seen Kristen's presentation. It was interesting, but she didn't provide any evidence linking "chemtrails" to a specific aircraft, on a specific date, altitudes, origin airport, destination... names.... nothing.

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon).

Again, thousands of flights are airborne daily. If they are flying through high concentrations of "chemtrails" at altitude, there would be thousands of people dead or dying in correlation to air travel.

We have pilots with 25-30000 hours total flight time and in good health. How is that possible if they spend a good portion of their lives flying through chemicals sprayed in high concentrations at their altitudes?

Are the chemicals somehow benign and safe to breathe as they come out of the aircraft nozzles at altitude, while getting sucked into thousands of other aircraft engines flying through the materials, compressed, and pumped into cabins..... but somehow become more toxic when they hit the ground spread out over a wide area?

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.



Posted by: bill Mar 11 2014, 12:08 PM

NBC news? Really?














laughing1.gif

How often is the air "refreshed" on the ground while you are standing outside?

More or less than being inside a pressurized cabin?

Are the concentration levels of "chemtrails" more dangerous to humans when they reach the ground? Or are the concentration levels more dangerous if flying through something like this...

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by

Are the "chemtrail" crews who fly such "criss-cross" patterns in the sky wearing O2 masks? Or do they just breath the air (and "chemicals") sucked into the engines, compressed, and then dumped into the cabin while waiting for it to "refresh"... with more "chemicals"?

lol

What about all the other airplanes flying through such high concentrations of "chemicals". Do the pilots drop the masks for passengers when they see such upcoming mayhem? And then ask the passengers to stow their masks after they pass through and a cabin "refresh"? What if they are stuck in a widespread "chemtrail" operation for more than an hour? 2 hours? 3? What then?

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad.


Please bill..... save it.

Again, this theory is very easily proven. All one needs to do is go up there and fly through the stuff. Come back and test the samples. Then we will all have conclusive proof either way. It seems proponents of "chemtrails" do not want make such an effort and would rather argue with people endlessly on the internet asking "Why aren't there more Pilots supporting Chemtrail Theories!?"

Well, I think you have your answer....

Get samples, get tail numbers, get crew names... origin airport... destination.... and then you may find more support for your theories. Until then, you are spinning your wheels.... but hey.. .feel free to discuss it here if you wish.. .that is why I created the forum section for "chemtrails". Please be familiar with the forum rules and have respect for this forum/organization... because as easily as I created it... I can also take it away... and show you the door.

Have fun!

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely.

Posted by: bill Mar 11 2014, 12:21 PM

QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 10 2014, 12:10 PM) *
It is Ice.... it is an example of what an airplane looks like when flying through solid visible particles.




For the same reason people like you claim to see them in the air.



Do you think these are chemicals?



And if so... Are those concentration levels of "chemtrails" more dangerous to humans who fly through the above.... Or are the concentration levels more dangerous if standing on the ground underneath them....? Second time asked....

Again...
Are the "chemtrail" crews who fly such "criss-cross" patterns in the sky wearing O2 masks? Or do they just breath the air (and "chemicals") sucked into the engines, compressed, and then dumped into the cabin while waiting for it to "refresh"... with more "chemicals"?

What about all the other airplanes flying through such high concentrations of "chemicals". Do the pilots drop the masks for passengers when they see such upcoming mayhem? And then ask the passengers to stow their masks after they pass through and a cabin "refresh"? What if they are stuck in a widespread "chemtrail" operation for more than an hour? 2 hours? 3? What then?

Why do you evade these questions?

How would they get airspeed readings? Do the pitot-tubes have HEPA filters as well? Or perhaps they just turn on the Pitot anti-ice and melt away the chemicals? lol

AOA vanes? TAT probes, FADEC probes? All have HEPA filters?

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation,





Are you now claiming that the particles/chemicals get through the HEPA filters and enter the cabin and the lungs of the passengers and crew? If so, why did you bring up the HEPA filters in the first place?


13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.


"comparing them to crop dusters is ridiculous"

No, it isn't.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.


This discussion would not exist if I did not allow it. Again... this is Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Do you know how many of our Core members absolutely despise such a topic and think it is utterly ridiculous to even discuss?


5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach.



This is my "home". I am already here. Do you allow people to come into your home and shit on your floor? Maybe you do... but we have a higher standard on this forum and within our organization.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach.

Again, let me know if you need tips in building your own "home"..


Bill, if you evade my questions again... on mod preview you go... until you answer...



24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely.

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 11 2014, 01:49 PM

QUOTE (bill @ Mar 10 2014, 06:57 PM) *
Wow

NP a real blast from the past -- another member that goes back to the first 150 that registered here



anyway good to 'hear' from you NP



Pssst.. Bill... NP1Mike joined this forum a little less than 4 months ago.... (25 Nov 2013), it is under his userID in his posts, just like yours.... (23 Oct 2006).

He is not a member who registered here within the "first 150".

Attention to details is not your strong suit huh, Bill?

When you get done learning that, maybe I'll teach you how to actually use the quote function/tags of this forum, since it is clear you still don't know how after 7 years on this forum. Most people can figure it out themselves, but clearly you need a lesson or two.... Let me know and we can set up a time...

After that... perhaps I will take some time and discuss how wrong you are in your claims that we are trying to suppress the truth. In short, why would I recently create a forum section dedicated to discussing chemtrails if I want to suppress the truth? In fact, anyone who actually reads my comments on "chemtrails", will understand I have offered my services in pursuit of the truth, with any one of you riding shotgun... and how to go about obtaining conclusive proof.

For example... the proofs are not "impossible". Anyone can go up there and gather samples of the alleged visible "chemicals" providing a conclusive chain of custody, unlike 9/11 where much of the evidence is classified due to "National Security". In other words, we don't need an Act Of Congress to go fly at FL350 where you claim "artificially created persistent cloud formations induced by the chemical actions of Aluminum and Barium salts" are being sprayed.

The proponents of "chemtrails" make excuses and would rather argue on the internet instead of funding a research project/mission which would provide conclusive proof either way. I wonder why that is....



@NP1Mike

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Mar 10 2014, 04:29 PM) *
(I am replying in this thread simply because it is easiest to do, but isn't the topic of chemtrails supposed to go in the new chemtrail forum?)


Good point... I will move this to the "chemtrail" forum.

QUOTE
I am not going to come down on the side of either one of you, as I have not studied chemtrails to any degree yet.

However, is it not possible that both of you gentlemen are correct?

ie. most/all of the 'chemtrails' we see in the skies are simply harmless water-based particles and the more harmful chemtrails are limited to strategic areas that busy air traffic never flies through?



Look at this radar in real time...

http://flightradar24.com/

Zoom out to the entire USA. And then contemplate your theory that "the more harmful chemtrails are limited to strategic areas that busy air traffic never flies through...."

In case you are unable to view the above linked radar tracking, the entire USA is saturated with air traffic at all different types of altitudes at any given time of the day. Also keep in mind "chemicals" sprayed in the atmosphere do not stay in one exclusive region. Just watch a Monday Weather map compared to a Friday weather map for such proof...lol.... And according to people like Bill, all those passengers/crew are flying through such chemicals, being sucked into the engines, then compressed and pumped into the cabin.

Enjoy your next flight! smile.gif

Posted by: hanky Mar 11 2014, 07:00 PM

It seems that I am accused of being a lying troll. Apparently this is because I don't post frequently. I don't post frequently, but I do look at every post that comes into my inbox. When I have something to add that can either halt the stupid trajectory we, as a nation, are all being railroaded into, or something to help put the perps in the hot seat, I will share.
I am here to learn and spread good info. I am a core member of North Texans For 9/11 Truth, and thanks to me, many people have at least heard of your work, which I consider quite worthwhile, although unfairly marginalized by so many Truther luminaries.

The reason I made my short, misunderstood comment recently is because I had been thinking about commenting on all the distracting garbage that suddenly heated up this site. I sincerely don't know how you can deal with it. Sometimes strange people come to our meetings, but they always disappear quickly, maybe because we are so small and they are just checking on us.
http://www.meetup.com/9-11-249/
http://northtexansfor911truth.blogspot.com/

I am very interested in getting this chemtrail thing cleared up. I have been watching this for about 5 yrs here. They blast us horribly right here in the urban area of Dallas. Not every day, but in a time pattern that I can't figure out. Usually we will get a morning show, but sometimes it is worse at dusk. The weather can be hot or cold, and they may, or may not, appear. Although it looks outrageous and obvious to me, I still have niggling doubts about the deliberate nature of this mess, only because of the sheer volume of material, number of flights, and people that would need to be secretive. Even this one spot, which must be a fraction of 1% of the worldwide activity, it seems impossible.

So for now, I look to people with more aviation expertise than me to clear it up. The only idea I had was to get a log of suspicious flights and trace their origin. Can multiple cameras triangulate, and determine altitude, which would also help with temp, humidity, speed? I am ready to challenge them head on, by name, but I have few skills to lead the charge.

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 11 2014, 07:21 PM

QUOTE (hanky @ Mar 11 2014, 07:00 PM) *
It seems that I am accused of being a lying troll.



hanky,

Don't sweat it... people like JimMac, Quest.. .and apparently now "bill", have a stick up their ass because we are asking for conclusive proof of their claims.

Again, none of the people accused as "sockpuppets" by "JimMac" in the original post... are sockpuppets. None of the people accused, including "Kozer1" are "trolls". In fact, it was offensive that "JimMac" made such an accusation.

JimMac did not come to me first, in which I can conclusively prove whether or not a user is a sockpuppet. Instead, he made frivolous accusations. When "JimMac" was told they are not sockpuppets, his ego couldn't take it and he left..... oh well...

Posted by: marklookingup Mar 12 2014, 03:31 AM

Well, I guess this is as good a place as any to make my first post.

About ten years ago, my neighbor and I were watching a full moon rising up over the Cascade mountains. We had a horizon to horizon view and it was a clear night as far as clouds go.

We looked to the north and there was a brilliant white trail coming from the back of a large jet. When the jet reached the center of the moon, the
trail ended. I joked to my neighbor that he must have ran out of spray. The jet continued flying due south.

We looked north again and there was another jet flying directly underneath the trail. His flashing red light was reflecting off the trail and when he was approaching the moon, he climbed up to the same altitude as the previous jet. As he came to the end of the trail, he started laying his own brilliant white trail, making a perfect splice, and continued on the same path as the other jet. Then we watched him fly across the horizon until he was out of sight.

That was proof enough for me that there is something more than normal contrails happening up there.

Posted by: hanky Mar 12 2014, 11:50 PM

Rob? What happened to the post I made yesterday?

Posted by: hanky Mar 13 2014, 12:26 AM

By the way, I mentioned I have been observing these chemtrail patterns here in Dallas for 5 years now. I might add that I have lived in this neighborhood for 40 years, and the sky was not like this until recently. I am not a pilot, but I am a professional artist and an avid sky viewer and rainbow studier. The sickly looking odd rainbows are definitely a recent phenomenon in my life*. The last 2 days have been pristine blue, like we used to get for a whole week at a time in the old days. It was wonderful. We never get more than 2 or 3 in a row anymore. I am keenly aware of this, as we never had the cloudless clear blue where I was raised. Ironically, I find the lack of chemtrails to be good evidence that something nefarious is afoot. Same weather, as far as I can tell, but no chemtrails. We get them in summer and winter, so I doubt relatively minor variation in temperature and humidity would have such a drastic effect on accidental contrails. We have major airports here with full schedules, so the traffic is consistent, but on rare days like today it leaves no mark.

Anyway, I am glad you are looking into this chemtrail subject. Our 9/11 group has to curb off-topic discussions but we allow this subject as relevant. The secrecy and lies are what we oppose. As you said, this topic should be easier to do original research on, as it is on-going and so widespread and vast. Perhaps a well-meaning culprit will leak info as the Global Warming narrative continues to break down. But we shouldn't require that, as these planes and their alleged chemical loads must take off and land and be stored somewhere. Also, I am all for direct collection of trail samples by another plane, with a strong evidence chain.

* I want to attach some recent pics I took in my driveway. Cheap camera, no photoshop, but very clear anomalous rainbows. I don't know how to do that here.

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 13 2014, 07:04 AM

QUOTE (hanky @ Mar 12 2014, 11:50 PM) *
Rob? What happened to the post I made yesterday?



This one?
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=22629&view=findpost&p=10811998

Posted by: hanky Mar 13 2014, 06:53 PM

Hah! I figured out the multi-page thing, but I guess not before I sent off my "where is my post?" post. How embarrassing. In a similar vein, I have no shame, how do I post the pics of the sky I took from my driveway? Insert image seems to require a place I can't use.
I got another one today, and it really doesn't look like pure ice, but maybe others can look too. Also the trails were low as judged by their movement against the trees and their apparent size and clarity and nearness to the horizon.

Posted by: rob balsamo Mar 13 2014, 07:34 PM

QUOTE (hanky @ Mar 13 2014, 06:53 PM) *
Hah! I figured out the multi-page thing, but I guess not before I sent off my "where is my post?" post. How embarrassing. In a similar vein, I have no shame, how do I post the pics of the sky I took from my driveway? Insert image seems to require a place I can't use.
I got another one today, and it really doesn't look like pure ice, but maybe others can look too. Also the trails were low as judged by their movement against the trees and their apparent size and clarity and nearness to the horizon.


In order to insert an image, it must be in the form of an image url extension... for example .jpg, .bmp... etc.

Which means you need to upload it to something like imageshack or photobucket.

After you get done with that, you need to wrap the image url in image [img] tags....

For example....

(just a quick search i did...)
CODE
[img]http://www.scenicreflections.com/ithumbs/hot%20lady%20Wallpaper__yvt2.jpg[/img]


Which turns out to be this....



Enjoy! smile.gif

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