Added: 3 years ago
From: academianon
Views: 1,790
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (275)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • great video : you and your friends are invited to look at our hardcore chemtrail hating channel from the new york city area with video of the world trade center and chemtrails..

  • Thought you might like this document titled "United Nations' science body calls for halt on climate-hacking experiments." See it at etcgroup (dot) org

    It includes references to SRM (solar radiation management), aka CHEMTRAILS. Dated May 18, 2010. This United Nations document gives many details for those seeking proof of the truth including what, when, where, why, who, etc.

  • That's HR 3616 now. Can u read it or are u too far gone?

  • The section of the altitude chemtrails are used at was all that was changed. Google the new bill. The government still refers to chemtrails. Need some tinfoil?

  • Wow, how did I miss this? Great, eagles hunting here today then trails rolled in.

    5* watch out for that Univ of Calgary geoengineer David Keith he wants stuff like this to happen.

    geoengineeringwatch . org

  • Contrails. Period.

  • whatever. Even the national academy of sciences has mitagations including use of aircraft to maintain a cloud of dust in the low stratosphere to reflect sunlight. And you wonder why visability is dropping and the earth is becoming dimmer. Contrails my ass

  • Unfortunately for you, again, you've failed. Science doesnt rely on supposition and assumption. There is no evidence supporting the chemtrail theory.

    You are an Ignorant, paranoid alarmist.

    So...proof...got some?

  • @puppetdesign

    wrong. you fail. science is showing OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE... and I mean OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE that chemtrails are real and not contrails.

    I'm thinking you are a disinfo agent. Hope they pay you good for the shit that you do

  • Overwhelming evidence...yet you can't submit credible proof to back the existence of chemtrails? Kind of strange don't you think?

    It's so overwhelming that you can't produce a single peer reviewed, credible source to support your allegations.

    FAIL!

  • So where is this "overwhelming" evidence? Surely is "science" is showing "overwhelming" evidence then you shouldn't have to avoid providing something credible instead of continuing with your alarmist bullshit.

  • @puppetdesign

    Blocking our sun here 100 days of the year, that could be avoided if this was not a scientific systematic spray operation. Alarmist BS what like a US dollar sinking soon below Canada's? the fact China determines the US dollar if they want or that war Obama was going to end?

    what world do you live in with your blanket of ignorance to keep you warm? Even pilots on forums admit the commercial airline industry is sinking fast not increasing flights at all.

  • @STEVEDIGIBOYtv, firstly, you're speculating that this is a "scientific systematic spray operation" because you have no evidence. Secondly, what the hell does the US dollar have to do with anything?

    No pilot has admitted anything because all the alleged "pilots" have failed to represent themselves with credible credentials apart from "I'm a pilot".

    Go back to sleep

  • @puppetdesign

    Your the one cuddling the blanket of ignorance, plenty of days this crap has blocked the sun output for solar cell owners and that never used to happen 5-6 years ago. You obviously have no real education beyond you fixed denial.

    Alarmist? go back to watching fox news and Glenn beck. LOL!

  • @STEVEDIGIBOYtv, firstly it's YOU'RE not YOUR. Secondly, there is no credible evidence supporting chemtrals. All you morons put forward is speculation.

    Show me an ounce of credible, peer reviewed evidence that follows protocols that qualify it as such or fuck off you paranoid, delusional alarmist.

  • It's called geo-engineering, get over it. Do some research and stop trolling. <3

  • @academianon, geoengineering and contrails are two entirely different things. First you need to prove chemtrails exist, then we can talk about geoengineering.

    So...proof...got some?

  • @academianon, geoengineering and contrails are two entirely different things.

    You idiots are yet to even prove chemtrails actually exist.

  • @academianon Does puppetdesign troll all your vids, or just this one? Just curious where to post & get in legitimate conversation, instead of insults. They want answers, names, proof - You give it to them & they just blabber in another way. Sorry to have used this comment section to argue with a removed word (therefore nonexistent) like chemtrails. No more comments on this section from me - May 17, 2010.

  • @Cloudy2Clear It's ok, it's best disengage from unproductive discussions. I agree with your decision. Sometimes it's best just to agree to disagree :) I have a couple trolls on most of my chemtrail videos, but there are also some good debates and discussions too. I hope to be making a new video soon about how we can set up a movement to "test" for evidence regarding atmospheric modification. Thankfully, there are people who want more information and are legitimately interested. Take care.

  • @puppetdesign - Try the vid playlist TOXIC SKIES. Backs up this info plus lots more proof.

    ps - we "paranoid delusional alarmists" who still use our brains spell them "chemtrails" as the govt does in house resolution HR2977. It says in part "chemtrails below 60km are officially classified as weapons,"  In other words, baaaaaa you sheeple. Open mind before mouth w/your disinfo, troll.

  • @Cloudy2Clear, go back to sleep tinfoiler. There is ZERO supporting evidence in regard to chemtrails. Zero.

    I can't believe you morons still mention HR2977 when it was retracted.

  • @puppetdesign Suuuuure, believe the "retraction". Then look at the skies & vids...mostly barium salts & aluminum. That's why your frying pan & drink cans & deoderant have aluminum. Research aluminum & alzheimers. Any thoughts on fluoride, or are u just as blind to that? U know on average, 8oz tapwater contains more fluoride in it than the "pea-sized' drop. Any excess of this drop, call poison control cntr. So u can drink a detrimental dose in 1 glass of water - per FDA. & u think "contrails

  • @puppetdesign They're poisoning us, dumbing us down. Well eff that, I won't go down silently. BTW, tin foil & insulation will protect electronic devices in event of CME or nuclear EMF pulse, so yes, I have my tin foil like a good boy scout. Be prepared, or be caught. U can sleep outside & drink plenty tapwater...enjoy.

  • @Cloudy2Clear, videos like this dumb you down. It seems you tinfoilers confuse internet bunk with genuine research.

    Enjoy the shallow gene pool moron.

  • @puppetdesign Coming from you, a self professed "professional asshole" per your own channel, go dip a finger in your profession. "Idiots, tinfoilers, morons," your vocabulary speaks for your IQ (of @ 52 pts) Ever read HR 3616 yet? Try the library if u can't handle the net. Your short school bus will take u there for some "genuine research".

  • @Cloudy2Clear, glad to see you moron tinfoilers aren't showing an ounce of intelligence. HR 3616 was revoked and the mention of "chemtrails" was removed after it was found to be bogus information.

    Do you fail this much in real life?

  • @puppetdesign Yes the word chemtrails was removed, along with the names of @ 7 other "space-based" weapons. Doesn't make them any less real. "Bogus information." lmao The censoring was just a bit slow, now even more coverup needed for informed ppl like myself. If KNOWING the difference between a CONtrail and a CHEMtrail makes me a tinfoiler, then I wear the title proudly. This is real life, just like my wife, 4 children, 4 grandchildren. I retired b4 age 50, have home & motorhome, travel a lot>

  • You're clutching at straws now. Now you're just making shit up after I pointed out the word "chemtrail" was removed.

    How amusing. You're now telling me you're rich? Oh...how sad. The relevance of which is what exactly?

    Are you this stupid in real life?

  • @puppetdesign You commented on my channel. The name was right there..."puppetdesign". I deleted your comment. Your name is no longer there. So by your logic, the name is gone, it doesn't exist...you no longer exist...you are a chemtrail...lmfao

  • Let me know when you're done sucking my dick.

  • @puppetdesign You must be looking in a mirror, talking to your non-existent self. If you're responding to me, click on my comment so I know u dissing me. Behind the back bs I should expect tho, esp from the likes of the non-existent you.

  • Uhhhh...I do reply to your ignorant posts. Maybe you're too focussed on your delusional ego tripping to notice.

    Yes, I'm non-existent. Which makes it even more hilarious that you post comment after comment with no substance after I indicated you were posting bogus bullshit. Now you opt for posting on my channel.

    Are you in love with me or something?

  • @puppetdesign Not in love, just wanted to see what kind of troll you were. I'm done with your nonsense & berating others.

    Talk trash all you want, you won't change my mind - I made it clear to you when I returned YOUR private message. Go bark somewhere else... you want attention.

    Your foul mouth & mind - phew, I want no more to do with bs like you. Bye.

  • ...and your banter continues.

    How about you just accept you were perpetuating false information and I caught you out instead of continuing with whatever the hell you're blabbering about now.

  • @puppetdesign You "caught out" nothing. What I speak of is the SAME DOCUMENT. So how is the Silver Lining Project going to cover 10,000 sq kilometers? Chemtrails...just like those we already deal with, that's how.

  • So, got proof chemtrails exist or are you going to subject people to all the speculative shit under the sun?

  • @puppetdesign We're working on it ;)

    Why not offer advice for gaining empirical proof rather than being such a troll all the time. For example, we're thinking about doing widespread testing of water or soil samples to determine if there are abnormal levels of barium or aluminium present. Would this help to appease your skepticism? Why not offer some other method of testing for us. Cheers.

  • Ground level samples are contaminated so taking ground level samples for barium and aluminium is a joke because you haven't even established if chemtrails actually exist.

  • Get me data on environmental, atmospheric samples taken at the altitude of these contrails whilst they are fresh in the sky. Have those samples retrieved and analysed by a credible, unbias third party. Have their findings peer reviewed by credible authorities. Repeat the process and then show me some credible data instead of watching idiots playing the the water with jars and looking at the sky speculating.

  • @puppetdesign Am I rich? lmao - Was just answering your specific question "Do you fail this much in real life?" If you really think (lmao, I know better) I'm stupid, we could meet at the entrance where I went to college & I could show you my ACT & SAT scores. Top 15% to top1% in all areas tested. Lets meet, I'll show you the proof, then this old man will whip the hair plumb off you. Then we can have a beer at my house & discuss motorhome mileage & other real life stuff

  • ...and your ignorant banter continues along the dead end street of your delusions.

    No one fucking cares you insipid monkey. No one is interested in your fantasy and delusion of grandeur.

    You've already been shown as an ignorant tinfoiler who spouts incorrect information. Stop trying to impress people who simply don't give a fuck.

    Moron

  • @puppetdesign > & possess more silver bullion than u can shake a stick at. Only fail is unable to wake "professional assholes" like you up. I feel sorry for you, & keep you in my prayers, that you regain your eyesight. You're like a horse with blinders on, pick up the speed a bit when the reigns slap you on the ass...never able to look up...brainwashed, controlled - so sad. The evidence of chemtrails is overwhelming & you just keep trotting toward the glue factory. Now THAT'S A FAIL.

  • @coldhardfacts I would hope someone would pay him for countering your ignorance. And he is doing it while offering amusement as you lose your credibility and he keeps his calm. Disinfo agents... hahaha. Don't go trutherD1 here "hardfacts"

  • We used to be known as "Sunny Manitoba" (sunniest province in Canada). No longer since the chemtrailing has begun.

  • To Puppetspammer:

    Dude what kind of puppet are you?

    "Over the last 4 thousand million years, it (the sun) has gradually brightened. During this increase, Venuss surface water evaporated and entered the atmosphere. Water vapour is a powerful greenhouse gas and it caused the planet to heat-up even more. This is turn caused more water to evaporate and led to a powerful positive feedback response known as the runaway greenhouse effect, says Grinspoon.

  • Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

  • Here are some introductory sources for you to do some actual research on:

    - Owning the Weather in 2025

    - Geoengineering: Workshop on Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering

    - HAARP

    - Welsbach Patent

    - Eastlund Patent

    - Porton Down, UK

    - Zinc Cadmium Experiments

    - Direct, Semi-Direct and Indirect Aerosol Campaign

    There are many more from there, but it's a good place to start. Good luck.

  • I read HAARP and almost died laughing.

    Got anything credible?

  • Did you even attempt to look at any of those things I listed? It's very easy, it's called google. You might want to try it an inform yourself about what sort of technology is available out there ;)

  • Alright then, why do you find HAARP hilarious? I find atmospheric manipulation to be quite troubling.

    I find the USAF wishing to manipulate the weather very arrogant and dangerous. Same with the CFR plan to discuss global geo-engineering.. the Welsbach and Eastlund patents are related. Except the eastlund patent is atmospheric weaponry.

    How are these things funny? That is really only a list to get you started. So science has the ability to modify the weather, but they aren't using it? :O

  • I find it hilarious that you believe a facility like HAARP, which is OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, can manipulate the weather. Especially when it doesn't have the physical power to do so.

    THAT is hilarious.

    All I see is sheer speculation from paranoid idealists. Show me the proof that HAARP has the ability to manipulate the weather. If you can.

  • Please re-read.

    HAARP has the ability to manipulate the atmosphere. Which is related, but not specifically weather manipulation. I don't believe it is much of a stretch to suggest that HAARP is a test facility for technologies such as the Eastlund patent.

    Why wouldn't it be public? Weather modification is a routine practice. Why is it ridiculous?

    Global scale geo-engineering is the next logical step, something we need to be talking about. Numerous governments are openly talking about it.

  • Explain how HAARP has the ability to manipulate the atmosphere.

  • Right from the website:

    "The Ionospheric Research Instrument (IRI), a high power transmitter facility operating in the High Frequency (HF) range. The IRI will be used to temporarily excite a limited area of the ionosphere for scientific study."

    Read the Eastlund Patent. If you're bored just read the last couple paragraphs where they discuss the potential applications of the technology.

  • The frequency of energy that HAARP transmits cannot be absorbed by the troposphere or the stratosphere, only by the ionosphere, many kilometers higher than the highest atmospheric weather systems.

    The ionosphere is created and replenished daily by solar radiation.

    HAARP has a maximum transmission power of 3600 kilowatts, about 75 times the power of a commercial radio station, but only a tiny fraction of the strength of the natural solar radiation striking the same part of the ionosphere.

  • So...again...explain how HAARP has the ability to manipulate the atmosphere.

  • already the gov. is talking of "geo-engineering" the weather of the planet. They have been doing it for years through the spraying of conductive elements such as aluminum sulfates and barium. (CHEMTRAILS) This is no joke puppet. No conspiracies here

  • Show me some credible evidence supporting anything you said.

    Speculation isn't evidence unfortunately.

  • common sense works better than "credible evidence" supported by mainstream media and NWO puppets like yourself

  • Mainstream media and allegations of a "NWO" is indicative of lack of common sense.

    You have zero credible evidence therefor you have nothing but speculation.

    FAIL!

  • mainstream media and allegations of a NWO indictive of lack of common sense? WTF? Where have you been? Either you're in complete denial or a complete moron yourself. And your puppet handle fit's you like a glove. Oh, I should just believe anything you say because you are "puppet" You fail

  • Unfortunately, the NWO is speculative and I've never read or heard anything from the media that denounces Chemtrails. So, assuming the NWO and media are behind the CONTRAILS is ignorant.

  • Since when did your so called "contrails" start spreading over time instead of fading? Since when did they start turning a blue sky into a dull hazey grey? You can't tell me it's always been that way, because it hasn't. Contrails and chemtrails are not the same, even if you decide that they are

  • @coldhardfacts contrails are cyrus clouds by definition. Do you see cyrus clouds "fading"?

    Contrails are supported by physics and free of assumptions. Chemtrails are speculative at best.

    So...proof...got some?

  • That's propoganda. Contrails last 20 minutes under even the best conditions. Chemtrails create ARTIFICIAL CLOUDS. So what you are describing as Cyrus "cirrus... this does not come from contrails. It comes from chemtrails. Artificial clouds. Chemtrails have nano particles to create these artificial clouds.

  • Propaganda from who? Meteorologists and pilots agree that contrails are cyrus clouds by definition.

    You found some proof yet because all this speculating is getting old.

  • @coldhardfacts so I assume all your "evidence" is based on what exactly? You have no genuine evidence to support your claims. All you have is speculation based on what you see in the sky with your own eyes. Unfortunately, that is not evidence. That's just highlighting your ignorance.

    Prove chemtrails exist. Prove that the contrails we see in the sky are actually "chemtrails". Show me an ounce of proof to support your claims.

  • I find it sad that people like yourself cannot tell the difference between a natural cloud and an artificial cloud. These clouds that form from what you call "persistant contrails" are artificial. And these don't come from normal contrails. So when did contrails start creating dense cloud cover? Not in the 70's or 80's. Has the law of physics suddenly shifted to allow "contrails" to fill the sky with clouds? No!!!!These clouds are artificial

  • Show me the proof that differentiates chemtrails and contrails. Show me one credible source. Don't just spout your ignorant bullshit. Show me the credible, peer reviewed evidence that follows the protocols that qualify it as such.

    It can't be that hard can it? Proof...got some?

  • ok, I want proof that contrails are the same as what people describe as chemtrails. Show me proof. Show me proof that this artificial cloud cover from chemtrails is just natural contrails. Prove it. Where's your proof?

  • The onus of proof is on you. You claim chemtrails exists, therefor, you must prove it.

    You can't prove contrails are chemtrails if you haven't established chemtrails exist now can you?

    So...proof....got some?

  • the proof is in your face, but you refuse to see it. There's no hope for the hopeless. Get off the damn puter and look up in the sky? Do you know a real cloud from artificial cloud covering? Read up on geo-engineering mitagation patents. The proof is everywhere, but you refuse to believe still? That's your problem, not mine. I'm done with this pointless argument

  • @coldhardfacts, if the proof is "in my face" then you won;t have a problem providing some genuine evidence to support your claims right? You're finding it difficult presenting "proof" for someone with a name like coldhardfacts.

    Amusing

  • @puppetdesign

    Please refute the patents and documents that we've provided for you then. The UK committee on geoengineering for example. You've said you have read the Eastlund patent, but you obviously have not assimilated that information. Particularly the final paragraph about application. Perhaps you should take a read through the USAF "owning the weather in 2025".

    You probably would've denied the existence of MK ULTRA as well until the documents were released.

  • ...and still no credible proof.

    Prove chemtrails exist. It's not that difficult is it?

    Meanwhile I must put up with cherry picking and submission of speculation, assumptions or totally irrelevant information. Sigh.

  • would air samples be proof enough? Air samples from Az show barium at 278X the toxic limit, and aluminum at a 6400X the toxic limit for human health. Other heavy metals as well over the toxic limit. But of course, that's not proof enough for you, is it?

  • ...and you got that information from?

    Oh please god don't say abovetopsecret or rense because I'll die laughing.

  • You fail. Those experiments have been shown to be totally flawed.

  • If you were like me in the 70's and 80's and you observed the sky, you would know that back then a contrail was a pin-stripe that faded within minutes. Perhaps you were not alive at that time? Well, now days many of these "contrails" spread rather than fade, and can engulf a perfect blue sky and turn it into a grey haze. It's no experiment. It's called "observation"

  • I was alive in the 80's. I'm not exactly too convinced of your memory on the matter. I don't exactly just take your word that contrails persist/flight more often than back then.

  • I don't blame you that you are not convinced of my memory on the matter. But I myself... being the witness of the 70's and 80's... I have no doubt in my mind that I speak the truth. I don't care if you don't believe me. It sure as hell won't change my belief upon my own eyes through the decades. If I had a time machine, I would take you back & show you exactly what I mean, but I can't.

  • I don't think that you are lying. I just think that memory is not suitable for proof from decades ago as you might filter out memories that you think are insignificant. I remember back in early 90's seeing both trails up in the sky. Even in domestic flights during a time when my home country was still relatively "isolated" In addition there are pictures from the 80's 70's and the 60's where you can see persisting contrails.

  • Actually if you look at pictures from the 70's or 80's you will see lasting trails as well. Just use google before making claims you ignoramus.

  • were you alive and looking in the sky in the 70's and 80's? If you were, you would know full and well that the contrails back then did not spread over time, but rather faded within minutes. Now much of the time these "contrails" somehow expand and fill an entire blue sky with artificial clouds. Explain that ontop of current air samples showing way above toxic levels of barium and aluminum and other heavy metals

  • Yes, I was actually. Guess what? Contrails have been around since WW1. So your point is what exactly?

    So...are you going to present some credible proof or are you just going to spout your endless supply of speculative bullshit?

  • Firstly I recall reading a book from the 70's that says that contrails do exactly what you describe occasionally. So this is not a new phenomena. I would bet you didn't pay any attention to contrails in the 70's or 80's or even 90's. In addition I've never seen any proof for "toxic levels of barium and aluminium and other heavy metals"

  • "says that contrails do exactly what you describe occasionally"

    This is what I take issue with. I documented the sky for over a year and it was far from rare.

    What I take issue with is the absolute denial that people who claim skepticism take. I enjoy skepticism, it raises meaningful debate and discussion.

    However, with the years of research I've put into this. I have no choice but to conclude that it is VERY PROBABLE that geo-engineering experiments or programs are occurring.

  • Occasional is not the same as rare.

    What you do not get is that I do not take an absolute stand in this. The thing is that so far in all the discussions I've had on the matter, the evidence provided is actually evidence for something else or then besides the point and that's supposed to be somehow convincing.

  • Your last comment is the only wise comment I've seen so far on these videos and discussions. geo-engineering experiments being probable is a lot more feasible than that there is a worldwide program happening.

    I'm willing to admit that it is possible that geo-engineering experiments are happening. What I'm not willing to agree on is that the contrails behind airplanes have anything to do with the matter. So far I've only been proven that planes leave white trails that occasionally persist.

  • What is my evidence? It's not concrete, but we're working on forming empirical methodology that will be "taken seriously".

    My current evidence includes the usage of geo-engineering in other countries (such as China). NASA experiments of releasing aluminium into the atmosphere (and their other cloud-related experiments). Patents that clearly show the CAPABILITY to engineer the clouds/atmosphere. Government documents and debates. Observation.

    I provide these sources for all skeptics.

  • I live in China at the moment. Cloud seeding is not the same as "chemtrails" and has nothing to do with it. A lot of China relies on cloud seeding to avoid drought in certain areas. In addition neither of the patents or haarp have anything to do with these supposed chemtrails so why do you bring them up constantly. Do you realize that you and many others are basically accusing all persistent trails on the sky to be aerosol spraying, but you don't provide any proof that it is so?

  • I suggest you come to your own conclusions but keep an open mind. If this technology exists (which it CLEARLY does), why wouldn't it be utilized? Finally, it is part of a scientists job to speculate, that leads to evidence.. which is where we are at the moment.

    So again, I will post a list of keyterms that might be of interest to people wishing to do further research. Cheers.

  • - Owning the Weather in 2025 - Geoengineering: Workshop on Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering - HAARP (Eastlund Patent) - Welsbach Patent - Porton Down, UK - Zinc Cadmium Experiments - Direct, Semi-Direct and Indirect Aerosol Campaign - Stratospheric Aerosols - UK Government Committee on Geoengineering (you can this to this on my channel) - Charged Aerosol Release Experiment There are so many more I could provide, but I'd like people to look for themselves.
  • You loose the bet. I constantly looked up in the sky as a kid. Were you even born yet? I doubt it. If you want proof of heavy metals in air samples... Google it and see how many sites are on this subject. But still, I'm sure you would be in denial

  • It's a bit like googling proof of god. I would score probably millions of hits, but in reality is there any proof? It's just like you now think that you know what you saw as a kid even though you probably didn't pay any attention to the sky in that sense. That's what I'd argue.

  • Let me tell you this kid. If a Jet spraying heavy metals(chemtrails) crashed, and the evidence was on the ground... the CIA and gov agencies would have the shit cleaned up faster than you could wipe your ass. That's their job, to keep us in the dark. I was a kid in the 70's and adult in 80's and I know that back then a contrail faded within seconds or minutes. Guess you would have to be there to know it. It's all a lost cause anyways. Fuck it

  • But you still don't offer any evidence for anything. Just because you didn't pay attention to the skies as a kid does not prove that there is a government conspiracy. Why is it that when I ask for evidence, all people come up with is "it was not like this 20 years ago" or that "it's there, you're not looking"

  • Ignoring the observable evidence of what is occuring in our skies.

    You can look at the government discussions, patents, scientific debates and clearly come to the conclusion that there are existing programs, both experimental and actual systems in place.

    It's a fact. You need to acknowledge this upon entering the debate.

    We are working on ways to empirically prove this, if you are a reasonable skeptic, you will help advise us as to how we could best prove this methodologically.

  • Misinterpreting the "evidence" is what you are doing. You somehow twist that videos of trails are something more than videos of trails. You don't offer any proof that there is absolutely anything out of the ordinary.

    You forget that the claim that most chemtrail conspirators have is that there is a worldwide conspiracy behind these white trails and that they are spraying something to the air.

  • Reasonable skeptic? Who are you to state what is a reasonable skeptic? I can not think of a reason to help people who can not provide me of a shred of evidence to support their claims. All I've gotten so far is memories and videos of white trails behind planes. How convincing.

  • I did pay attention. Not didn't. So did countless others. Why waste my time on young punks like you? You were not even around and yet you know it all somehow? Go figure, and with all all the air/rain samples... and geo-engineering involving spraying of aluminum and heavy metals... You are not worth another minute of my time. Was just trying to help

  • I haven't taken an absolute position in anything. All I've done is say that I don't think so and I've asked for evidence for your claims from you and from others, but all the evidence is kinda besides the point and actually evidence for something else. air/rain samples that you are talking about probably refer to the barium tests that were shown on that one news broadcast. A person who knows basic maths can calculate how the reporter made a dumb mistake in the order of magnitude.

  • And wow... How mature of you to start caling me names or referring to me as "punk" when you can not provide any evidence to back up your claims.

  • Still toting your snake oil?

    How about you front with some "cold hard facts" for a change instead of basing your argument on speculation and false assumptions.

    So...proof....got some?

  • I love the fact your name is coldhardfacts and you make an idiotic statement that common sense is better than credible evidence.

    Oh man. You're either a complete fucking moron or a comic genius.

  • what do you have for credible source that chemtrails are fiction? Fox News? CNN? The gov.? You go on believing in what ever makes you feel good. I wish to God chemtrails were fiction as you believe, but I refuse to believe in Lies!!!

  • I'm sorry, but the onus of proof is on you. You say they're real. Prove it.

  • This is very true comment, in fact, anyone who doubts that geoengineering is not going on should look on my channel and listen to the UK Committee on Geoengineering.

    It's a very real concept, and it's been used by many nations to a varying degree. To deny such facts is to be in complete denial, or you have not reviewed the relevent information.

  • @academianon Geoengineering and contrails are two entirely different things.

    The facts are that chemtrail advocates have no supportive evidence to put forward. Everything they have is speculative.

  • @puppetdesign

    Actually, no they are not. Geo-engineering is the intentional or non-intentional modification of the global climate by humans. Look at the definition. Contrails impact the climate, therefore, they are part of geoengineering.

    However, as we've disagreed in the past.. I go further to state that not all of these are normal contrails, and rather, they are particulate aerosols utilized to modify the atmosphere.

    But we've been through this before ;)

  • Yes, through it before and an no stage has anyone ever bothered to submit credible proof.

  • nice video very good open discussion,

    Cant beleive they drove around norwich spraying from a vehicle. Now thats a reason to be concerned.

  • (...) I will try to come up with a reasonable explanation for the spreading nature of those trails, whose existence is undeniably real. But the conspiratory political architecture needed to deploy them is almost unconcievable. What if they are a result of our own pollution? What if global warming is causing a change in humidity and conditions at those troposphere altitudes? Well, yeah, i gave no answers, just more questions, steps on the only way through i guess :) Thnxx

  • (...), its height goes from 6 km on the poles to 20 km on the equator. Surface of the Earth is 510,072,000 km² and the troposhpere has an average of (lets say) 11 km height..., how many years and gallons of chemtrailing would be required to alter it? I dont know. I've heard about that link between chemtrails and Haarp, but never heard why and how are they linked. Ionosphere is 300 km (and several layers) away from the region in which supposed chemtrails are being sprayed. (...)

  • Hi Academianon. Very interesting video and nice purpose (debates are great!!)

    I've seen those trails and stripes on a crossing pattern many times here in BCN & mediterranean coastal Spain. I began noticing because of YT. They remain, slowly expanding, and then the sky goes overcast, for instance without rain. Lately I'm beggining to think there's nothing to worry about. Our atmosphere goes 120 km / 75 ml up from our roofs. All planes fly through the troposhpere which is the first layer (...)

  • Very good commentary. Thank you.

  • That last time-lapse certainly had a lot of contrails or "chemtrails", depending on what you think. Certainly more than what you see here, usually. I suspect, most are due to commercial air traffic; but you never know, perhaps there is something to this idea of secret geo-engineering and perhaps some are not typical jet exhaust. The only way to be sure would be to fly through them to get some samples for analysis.

  • It's just contrails. I'm not sure why, but it seems like when they run together they can form more clouds and the sky can get hazy.

    But "chemtrails" are physically impossible in the way that people describe them as. If you need me to explain I can but it will take me several 500-word comment posts, haha.

  • So why is "the trails formed by airplanes is just water/ice crystals" so hard to believe? I don't get it.

  • Very good. WHEN you learn the truth, be sure to let me know.

  • No, you "believe" you are right about there being a problem with all the trails you see in the sky. You assume that there is a problem because you don't understand the way the atmosphere reacts with jet exhaust. No matter what anyone says, you won't believe them UNLESS they say they ARE spraying, even if they aren't.

    Get out there and protest! get some answers. DEMAND THEM! Posting videos on yourube to misinform others with assumptions is counterproductive. You are getting NO WHERE!

  • DOES ANY ONE

    think the goverment will publish docoments

    stating that they sre spraying populations?

    Forget the freedom of information act,

    if the documents exist they will be classified

    end of.

  • To assume that a trail from a jet aicraft is always a con trail is obsurd. On a cold day you can see trails from car exhausts you could presume the vehicle is petrol, it may be diesel, it may be liquid petroleum gas if you took samples you could analyse the car vapour trail and find out its chemical elements There is no evidence to suggest that all contrails you see are infact just ice chrystals/water droplets you cannot tell what has been added to the fuel by observation.
  • so for the time being i will highlight trails as chem trails

    until we no otherwise

  • if you read the comment correctly.

    i said that there is no evidence to suggest that all contrails you see are ice cystals/water droplets.

    The comparison with a car was to highlight

    just because you see a contrail

    or car exhaust trail it would be un scientific to guess what its contents are

    so your suggestioning that all contrails are just contrails

    and that you couldnt add chemicals to fuel.

  • Nice video, I was wondering what those were; today I was just kinda watching the planes go bye leaving comtrails and for 1. after the first plane a second plane went bye alost in the same spot, the planes were legally to close together to be a commercial airline so...! 2. we are under low pressure sky's and wan very hot out and the plane was low not high up where its cold.

    So I'm convinced their is tampering going on and I'd like to know WHAT before it's too late!!!

    thanks for the info.

  • good vid . people wake up and smell the tims . shit is happening take the blind fold offf

  • DiSiNf0aGeNt ^

  • I had to Google DiSiNfOaGeNt to find where to comment to him because he BLOCKED me! My, my, doesn't that say a lot about his confidence in being able to defend his retarded, uneducated opinions?

    Didn't he just say here that he didn't block? Liar, liar panties on fire! You twit!

    You foolishly replied to someone else on my channel page, then called me a dumbass because of your mistake. You're such a ridiculous asshole nobody should believe a word you say. I'll post this on other videos.

  • Great work, academianon. I like your analisistic approach.

    5*

  • Yeah, analisistic...

    LOL

  • Analytic, even! lol.

    You haven't let anybody in to your secret as to how you would be privy to any information with regards to contrails/ chemtrails, or in fact what this information might be. Do you want to do that at all, or just keep on trolling?.

  • Well, if you would read some of my posts instead of just whining about me being a "troll" you would know that I went to school for aviation science, my private pilots lisence and was going for my commercial lisence. The contrails are just the same as they were then but there are more of them. I took 4 years of college meteorology and understand the conditions that all contrails are formed. I have mentioned this many times. It's no secret.

    But, I think I'll keep trolling.

  • Shit, I'm having a shillbasher moment!

    License = lisence

    Time for bed.

  • Lets keep this short and simple here. Claim what you will about youself, it makes no difference to me, this is the inernet!. I will judge your comments alone and nothing else, ok.

    If you can briefly explain why contrails have, within the past decade, started to resemble thick fluffy cloud like streaks across our skies, that do not fully evaporate... I'm all ears.

    Yours sincerely,

    The King of Spain xx

  • Oh, I forgot to mention:

    Keep your insulting offensive emails to yourself if I were you.. you may discredit yourself before you've even started trying to explain whatever point it is you think you have.

  • Oh, where I wrote

    "You

    Are stupid. If you don't understand the science, and you don't, please don't insult those of us who actually do. I am trying to help you f#cking morons.

    Try not to be ignorant your whole life."

    After you wrote:

    "You're a known troll, take a long walk off a short bridge!."

    Yeah, I think we are actually even. No need to crap on my character the first time we converse. Like I said, I am actually trying to help you. Sometimes you people frustrate me.

  • Wait a moment here, you want me to explain something, AND you want me to "keep it short and simple"?!? This isn't as simple as all that or EVERYONE would understand meteorology by walking out their front door and looking up. I know MANY people on youtube feel that they can do just that, they cannot. They are very confused. If you aren't going to believe that I have the education and knowledge beforehand, why should I try?!

    But, I will try! You are mistaken. YOU started LOOKING 10 years ago.

  • I ran out of room, so much for short and simple, huh? Long lasting (persistent) contrails have been around since airplanes have been able to fly at an altitude where the conditions are right for such a phenomenon. I have heard the claim from others that it's only been the last decade and I laugh every time. As a child, I used to watch the persistent contrails that were over my house. This was in the 70s. Just because you didn't notice, doesn't mean they weren't there. That is fact.

  • DiSiNf0aGeNt: A "fact" is provable with evidence, if you can't prove your points they remain your simple opinion.

    I'm sure there are many things that exist that you do not believe in. I'd wager that most of them are linked to secret operations. I'd even hazzard a wild guess that you're the sort of person who accepsts the official JFK story, and you're obviosly free to do so but you'd be in the minority.

    Please keep your comments on this page rather than emailing me from now on.

  • Let's stick to the subject at hand. No need to bring JFK into this, is there?

    Of course I can't prove that you didn't look into the sky as a younger person. But I know I did and I know what I saw. If you won't take my word, please check you mail and learn about the applemen chart. It was developed during WWII to help pilots avoid creating persistent contrails that gave away their positions.

    Please try to stay on subject and avoid trying to insult me about other unrelated issues.

  • I have to email links that back up my position. If you won't allow that, I guess I won't bother TRYING to help you. You sure like to make the ground rules, don't you?! I am trying to help YOU. Your strange demands are kind of silly. If you want to remain ignorant, fine by me. I will just go back to mocking. It's much more fun doing that than trying to help those who obviously don't appreciate the help.