Chemtrails

[Vic C.]

Same here; I see them a lot at the train station and I usually have my camera with me.

 

[John]

I only get like 1-2 a day...

 

[heather]

I've never really noticed this. I'm going to have to start keeping my eyes pealed.

 

[MISFIT]

I've never really noticed this. I'm going to have to start keeping my eyes pealed.

Just look up, particularly in the day time.

 

[Caroline H]

These contrails, aren't they just caused by the many flights that occurr in this country? With 80 some odd thousand flights per day, shouldn't we expect that when we look up we are probably going to see a contrail? Check out these links...

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/12/earlier-this-ye.html
http://www.natca.org/mediacenter/bythenumbers.msp

 

[Boud2]

Thanks for the invite Misfit, good friend.
So....I am curious, what do you all use as a guideline in your conclusions of a conspiracy theory and a conspiracy fact?
Who or what would you trust? Would you say...trust an official government document, perhaps someone in the CIA as trustworthy?
What would make you discount the information?
That is "seemed too out there even if there was documented facts?"
I really would like to know.
How you determine whether it is true or not true.
Thanks!

 

[MISFIT]

Thanks for the invite Misfit, good friend.
So....I am curious, what do you all use as a guideline in your conclusions of a conspiracy theory and a conspiracy fact?
Who or what would you trust? Would you say...trust an official government document, perhaps someone in the CIA as trustworthy?
What would make you discount the information?
That is "seemed too out there even if there was documented facts?"
I really would like to know.
How you determine whether it is true or not true.
Thanks!

WOO HOO!! Glad your here Boud. I hope you like it as much as I do. Oh and Anna1334 if you see this, Boud2 if the friend I was talking to you about I think the two of you will get along well.

 

[A-Christian]

Look, it's a bird, it's a plane, it's a sprayer!

 

[Anna1334]

Here is a good video about this family who have this decease from Chemtrails.
I Love you tube for this and all the information it has about how they are killing us, no joke.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQR5z_omnhg

 

[Caroline H]

Anna, I could'nt find anything in that video that suggested chemtrails were the cause of their disease. Yes, it may be unknown as to why they have it, but no one on that video has linked chemtrails to those people.

 

[Anna1334]

Anna, I could'nt find anything in that video that suggested chemtrails were the cause of their disease. Yes, it may be unknown as to why they have it, but no one on that video has linked chemtrails to those people.

caromurp go to my post on the Chemtrails Song and listen to the song. In that song he mention all the symptoms these people have.
Thanks for playing it. Anna

Edited here it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5xIXu3tw0w

 

[Caroline H]

He's talented, I like it

But where is the documentation linking morgellans disease to Chemtrails?

 

[MISFIT]

Once again today the sky was clear and at approx. 12 noon the trails started to get thick, every weekday like clockwork.

 

[carbon]

1) What exactly are in these "chemtrails"?
2) If barium and aluminum are up there indeed, what concentration are they at and why can they stay up in the atmosphere like that? They're not exactly gasses.
3) You use aluminum for a good bunch of things. It hasn't killed you yet, has it?
4) Everything is a carcinogen. Well, nearly so. As long as you have high enough concentration and long enough time of exposure.
5) HOW did they detect the aluminum and barium? I want a scientific methods, results, and conclusion here.
6) Is there ANY scientific literature on this?
7) Jets go over the sky....like clockwork.

I particularly want answers to 5,6, and 1. But basically, I don't trust it...at all as in any way valid.

 

[Caroline H]

7) Jets go over the sky....like clockwork.

Yes they do. And around noon is when the day begins to get warmer, which means more moisture in the atmosphere....I also want more answers than just, "oh, well I saw it, so it must be full of harmful chemicals"

 

[Vic C.]

3) You use aluminum for a good bunch of things. It hasn't killed you yet, has it?

We need to look at this from all sides, not just from a skeptic's view. I use aluminum for a lot of things, but I don't digest it and avoid breathing in it's dust when I'm using it with tools. I don't think that most of you know aluminum cans are lined with a very thin layer of plastic. Why? The manufacturers of these cans know there may be reactions between the aluminum and the can's contents.

I no longer use bare aluminum pots and pans unless they are coated or cladded. Before I wrap food in aluminum, I first wrap it in plastic wrap or waxed paper. But don't take my word for how dangerous aluminum is to the body. See what the Alzheimer's Association has to say about it.

http://alzheimers.org.uk/site/scripts/d ... umentID=99

4) Everything is a carcinogen. Well, nearly so. As long as you have high enough concentration and long enough time of exposure.

LOL, now you are being sensational. ;)

5) HOW did they detect the aluminum and barium? I want a scientific methods, results, and conclusion here.

Well look on page two of this thread, first post, and read the link I posted there.

7) Jets go over the sky....like clockwork.

Yes they do and some of them leave regular contrails and some leave... something else.

I particularly want answers to 5,6, and 1. But basically, I don't trust it...at all as in any way valid.

I'm SO glad we didn't have such skepticism when there was a push to remove the lead from gasoline. Maybe we should bring back the lead?

I'm not trying to be a wiseguy, but even if there is a trace of evidence that this is going on and even if they believe they are doing it for beneficial reasons, shouldn't possible health concerns be addressed?

 

[Veritas]

The proliferation of chembusters around the country led to another dramatic development in early 2004: legions of huge air elemental beings called "Sylphs" by ancient Greeks made their presence known by assuming cloud shapes that often look like wispy winged angels or animal forms (there are dozens of photos of Sylphs posted on the Sylph /Chemtrail page) who set about "cleaning up" the skies

The statement above really makes me doubt the veracity of the site's other claims.

Chemtrail spraying seems to be heaviest and most constant over North America and most countries of western Europe. Some countries in Asia are being sprayed (Japan and Korea), but the greatest exception to any chemtrail activity whatsover is China. The Chinese are being spared completely because China is being groomed by the NWO to replace the United States as the leading nation of the world, both economically and militarily.

They must be grooming Montana to lead the world as well! Yay! :D Not much in the sky here but clouds. ;)

 

[smos]

We need to look at this from all sides, not just from a skeptic's view.

A skeptic's view automatically looks from all sides - that's often what leads to being skeptical in the first place.

I'm SO glad we didn't have such skepticism when there was a push to remove the lead from gasoline. Maybe we should bring back the lead? :

If something is scientifically documented to do damage, like the lead in gasoline, then it's verified and the default position for skeptics is to accept it based on the real evidence. What is being touted as evidence here isn't scientific at all - just a website with pictures of funky looking contrails. I'm with carbon - where's the scientific evidence?

As for the link on page two, it's an article with no references whatsoever, and basically just says, "we found barium and aluminum in soil and snow, and some people are having respiratory problems. Therefore, chemtrails are to blame." But there's only one aircraft mentioned to apparently spray - a USAF KC-135, which, according to the article, might be spraying something in the atmosphere to enhance radio communications. That last part seems somewhat believable - the problem lies in its applicability to any other aircraft and location.

So are we talking about KC-135s, or commercial jets? And again, where's the categorical, scientific evidence that suggests that this is in fact what is happening whenever you see a funny-looking vapor trail?

 

[Vic C.]

It's ok smos. I know the world leans hard on empirical evidence. I just pray that if it's true, we find out and do something about it before it's effects are irreversible.

You see, I err on the side of caution sometimes and I don't always look for science and technology to be the cure-all.

 

[smos]

It's ok smos. I know the world leans hard on empirical evidence. I just pray that if it's true, we find out and do something about it before it's effects are irreversible.

We agree! It would be unfortunate if chemicals in the air, put there by government/company/crazy person, were to have adverse effects on people, and I would certainly hope that it doesn't cause any harm.

You see, I err on the side of caution sometimes and I don't always look for science and technology to be the cure-all.

I don't know if we're using the same definition of science and technology. Science refers to the advancement of knowledge through testing and examination of evidence, and technology refers to the tools developed by people to do things. If you don't look to science and technology to solve problems like this, what's left?

Also, it seems to me that people who support the idea of chemtrails causing diseases and general ailments would try to use every possible means to convince people of the validity of the hypothesis. Yet there haven't been any pages, articles, or videos linked to which provide any evidence, referenced material, or data, needless to say they haven't been in any peer-reviewed journals. So if proponents of the chemtrail hypothesis are trying so hard to convince people, it's unbelievable that they wouldn't write some sort of a scientific paper.

I think the explanation for there being nothing in the way of this material isn't that they just didn't try; I think they tried very hard. The absence of that material is due to proponents not finding any verifiable data to support those claims. All they have is anecdotal evidence, which doesn't hold water.

That's the basic reason why my default position for conspiracy theories (let's call them hypotheses) is that of skepticism. For the vast majority of time, it turns out that the claims of those hypotheses just aren't evidentially supported enough to hold enough credence in the scientific world (meaning the claims have enough basis in fact to be supported by evidence).