IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Are Chemtrails Intended To Act As Some Kind Of Control Rods?

paulmichael
post Aug 12 2014, 09:42 AM
Post #1





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 365
Joined: 6-July 12
Member No.: 6,923



While there is disagreement about this in scientific circles, it seems that there is the possibility of the ignition of the atmosphere in an uncontrolled chain-reaction as the result of some nuclear event.

So, is the stuff of chemtrails meant to serve as something like control rods in a nuclear reactor to halt or to, at least, somehow dampen the aforementioned chain-reaction?

P.M.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paulmichael
post Aug 24 2014, 06:14 PM
Post #2





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 365
Joined: 6-July 12
Member No.: 6,923



QUOTE (paulmichael @ Aug 12 2014, 08:42 AM) *
While there is disagreement about this in scientific circles, it seems that there is the possibility of the ignition of the atmosphere in an uncontrolled chain-reaction as the result of some nuclear event.

So, is the stuff of chemtrails meant to serve as something like control rods in a nuclear reactor to halt or to, at least, somehow dampen the aforementioned chain-reaction?

During Youtube video, starting at elapsed time of 26:42, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c34U0Pwz4_c, the lecturer, Dane Wigington, states:

"Geoengineering, on the shredding of the ozone layer we've been told that it was hairspray cans.

Now, I ask you: "what's more logical: is it hair spray cans or military tankers dumping a hundred tons at a shot up there flying 24/7?

They've been at this since, at least, the late 1940's.

We've been given a lot of red herrings for... as reasons for things that are happening."

Hmmm, "since, at least, the late 1940's." Hmmmm, "red herrings."

The first that I heard of warming climate patterns was a minor and isolated mention in the early 1970's.

The first that I heard the term, "greenhouse effect," was in the early 1980's.

Yet Dale Wigington mentioned flying tankers dumping things "up there" since the late 1940's.

The late 1940's roughly coincides with the inception of the nuclear age starting with nuclear bombs blasts... lots and lots of testing not to mention WWII and then, later, nuclear power plants.

Now, I will concede, the top-secret scientists for the government may have been aware and concerned about a greenhouse effect decades before such a thing was made known to the general public, and they may have contrived chemtrails to address their concerns, but...

What do you think: chemtrails to geoengineer climate or chemtrails to serve as control rods to prevent the atmosphere from igniting like the head of a sulfur match?

P.M.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Pablo
post Sep 7 2014, 08:01 PM
Post #3





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 29
Joined: 26-March 11
Member No.: 5,760



Hey PaulMichael,
At this time I don't have a strong, firm opinion about chemtrails (though I DO suspect that they do exist and are intentionally being dumped and massively for some USGov reason.

My question in response to your posts here:
Why assume that the chemtrails' purpose is to "put out" a nuclear fire? Could they not possibly be there to INCREASE the damage (some aspect of the damage). Again, why assume/restrict what ONE OF their purpose(s) might be?
Also, particularly after reading this thread:
http://letsrollforums.com/do-nuclear-weapo...Nuclear+Weapons

I'm beginning to seriously doubt that nuclear weapons even exist.

btw, does P4T forum have a thread about whether Nuclear Weapons actually exist?


QUOTE (paulmichael @ Aug 24 2014, 03:14 PM) *
During Youtube video, starting at elapsed time of 26:42, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c34U0Pwz4_c, the lecturer, Dane Wigington, states:

"Geoengineering, on the shredding of the ozone layer we've been told that it was hairspray cans.

Now, I ask you: "what's more logical: is it hair spray cans or military tankers dumping a hundred tons at a shot up there flying 24/7?

They've been at this since, at least, the late 1940's.

We've been given a lot of red herrings for... as reasons for things that are happening."

Hmmm, "since, at least, the late 1940's." Hmmmm, "red herrings."

The first that I heard of warming climate patterns was a minor and isolated mention in the early 1970's.

The first that I heard the term, "greenhouse effect," was in the early 1980's.

Yet Dale Wigington mentioned flying tankers dumping things "up there" since the late 1940's.

The late 1940's roughly coincides with the inception of the nuclear age starting with nuclear bombs blasts... lots and lots of testing not to mention WWII and then, later, nuclear power plants.

Now, I will concede, the top-secret scientists for the government may have been aware and concerned about a greenhouse effect decades before such a thing was made known to the general public, and they may have contrived chemtrails to address their concerns, but...

What do you think: chemtrails to geoengineer climate or chemtrails to serve as control rods to prevent the atmosphere from igniting like the head of a sulfur match?

P.M.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paulmichael
post Sep 8 2014, 08:26 PM
Post #4





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 365
Joined: 6-July 12
Member No.: 6,923



QUOTE (Pablo @ Sep 7 2014, 07:01 PM) *
Hey PaulMichael,
At this time I don't have a strong, firm opinion about chemtrails (though I DO suspect that they do exist and are intentionally being dumped and massively for some USGov reason.

My question in response to your posts here:
Why assume that the chemtrails' purpose is to "put out" a nuclear fire? Could they not possibly be there to INCREASE the damage (some aspect of the damage). Again, why assume/restrict what ONE OF their purpose(s) might be?
Also, particularly after reading this thread:
http://letsrollforums.com/do-nuclear-weapo...Nuclear+Weapons

I'm beginning to seriously doubt that nuclear weapons even exist.

btw, does P4T forum have a thread about whether Nuclear Weapons actually exist?


Wasn't yankee451, author of the original post at letsrollforums.com, the guy who posted a controversial video about the plane-shaped hole that was punched in the WTC North Tower?

When I viewed that video, there was supposed to be a follow-up video in the works to present what did, in fact, punch that hole.

I just did a quick Youtube search on "yankee451," and I did not find that follow-up video.

Anyway, when the government lies, eventually it wants to put the lie behind it and just let the whole matter fall down the memory hole.

The story of nuclear weaponry has lasted way too long, and the reports of the nuclear sabre rattling on the part of countries like North Korea would have to totally contrived.

It's just too involved to keep a lie going for as long as nuclear weapons have allegedly been around.

BTW, the 13th anniversary of 9/11 is just around the corner, and, so far, I have heard nothing about it in the media. The government wants 9/11 to go down the memory hole.

There's metal fatigue; there's battle fatigue; and there is lie fatigue.

P.M. (P.S. Dr. Phil once said to a guest on his show: "I'll tell you what's hard. Living a lie every day of your life is hard!")

This post has been edited by paulmichael: Sep 8 2014, 08:29 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 16th July 2019 - 10:58 PM