sno dome wrote:yikes, i guess i came on a little strong. i understand your reasons for moving the thread.
Sorry, me too. I'm thinking you have been suckered into something. It happens to everyone at some point. It will always happen to anyone who is into giving people or ideas the benefit of the doubt. I ended up doing so when I first joined the big time chemtrail posters. But then the ones who seemed the most normal were actually the most insidiously insane or perhaps even paid to post.
One cannot "study" or figure out chemtrails on the internet without having a firm grasp of the prevalent disinformation. It is simply everywhere. I've got no problem with folks being a bit eccentric. Heck, that ain't too shabby a thing in this conformist, militarised piece of shite social and erconomic structure. You don't have to convince anyone here that chemtrails are real and deliberate. For one thing, there are only a few of us. Most importantly, chemtrails have been proven to be real through science, common sense, and academic principles. I've woken up today to a cloud full of the stuff. This is going on quite often. There's no way this could continue unabated with virtually no media coverage without the disinformation. I had to go into overtime {not paid} trying to explain this to one reporter into covering the story. It's a racket. All the major chemtrail forums and websites are rigged.
i agree with you that circumhorizon arcs are and should be rare. i only included the les crowley quote because that is what he wrote to me in reply to an email that included these pictures. i guess i should have made that clear. i tend to get a good deal of pictures of these things. when i get them on my monitor i tend to pixel peep and find strange things. this is why i assumed it would be appropriate to post in a section called "frankensteinian atmospheric shenanigans." seemed like the perfect description for what i was seeing. nonetheless, as i said, i understand and agree with your reasons for moving it.
Man, I'm simply tired. In the old days, I would have rattled out a long post with excerpts from tons of links I found. My goal was to get to the bottom of this, one way or another. One website from the NOAA wrote how they are very rare. Then all of a sudden this dude is saying they are not. Then I googled his name a bit, even with NASA, and he's associated with them.
Barium has purplish/greenish qualities. I think those funky colours are the result of the stuff being used for the chemtrail stew. Do I think chemtrails are for depopulation, mind control, or making us sick? Heck, no. Do I think they can cause illness? Heck, yes. Do I believe in aliens and/or sylphs or the use of orgone to combat chemtrails? No fricken way.
The trails and resulting white-outs are too low to be for off-setting global warming. They are for two things. Perhaps a few more like hail suppression, hydrology, etc.. But they are mostly for blocking out uv-b rays and taming severe weather such as with hurricanes. I called the top section Frankensteinian Atmospheric Shenanigans, because that's what they are. These are military/science hybrids playing God with the weather. They are doing so, as if we were living in China. This is not the America I signed a contract to be a part of. Freedom of speech, freedom to determine our own destinies, freedom to lose one's train of thought, I think you know what I'm talking about. Crystal Rose, one of the few friends I have made through this mess of a journey into figuring out chemtrails, puts it best:
We have not been consulted.Unless you can zoom in on these so-called orbs, what is the point? How much would it cost to get such equipment? It might not even be possible. There was one bloke from England who had a really good video camera. He took the best chemtrail videos. One of them he got close-ups. You could see the concoction streaming right out of something attached to the tails. It wasn't as clear as one would hope, but it was clear enough. These were not contrails forming from engine exhaust. Unfortunately, the bugger seems to have chickened out and deleted all his stuff. I took screenshots. But those don't get the job done. Folks can say it only looks like the stuff is coming out of the tail areas and not the engines. A few other things should be mentioned. Aircraft can run dirty. There might not even be a need to add an apparatus to the tail or wings. Plus, the jet fuel specifications for miltary aircraft allow for a lot more gunk in it, and due to fascist ideology based on state secrets, such fockers needn't disclose what is in the jet fuel or of what they are doing to the skies.
It's like with these "orbs." Those could be anything. I saw something that looked like an orb. But when I got closer to it, it was obviously an airplane. We have these tall buildings in Boston, and one of them, The Prudential, pretty sure that one, we also have the Hancock Building, if you look at it a certain way it looks like a gigantic, one-sided panel of glass. This Les Crowley dude, that Patrick Minnis dude from NASA, they are playing off of wiggle rooms.
If I had a good camera, this is what I would try to capture. I would see if it were possible to zoom in on the actual aircraft. Hopefully, I would have enough time to take time-lapse photos, to show what the trails evolve into. I would also get the atmospheric soundings from the nearest weather station. Stuff like that.
There is plenty of proof that aircraft are creating white-outs. That is not the problem, what we need to prove. We needn't worry about newbies who are so lost in their mundane existences to get this across to them. Our job is to prove that these activities are deliberate and have nothing to do with commercial aircraft.
as for the pictures in the above thread, the url tag for the crops was input wrong and i have fixed that. it should be easier to see what i am talking about. everything i mentioned is there in the pictures, for example a crop from 61, 63:
what do you suspect this is going on in these images?
I don't know what to say. I haven't a clue about it. I wasn't there, and there isn't enough info to say anything, imho.
i hope you understand that i am not trying to say these lights are normal occurences. i do think they are involved with aerosols and perhaps some polymers or particulates maybe metal salts. i also think what i have photographed may be interactions with something on the ground like an ionospheric heater. in the end i came here to just get insight. imho "chemtrails" are odd and ridiculous observations come with the territory. if you are interested i have many more images which i would be glad to share. but if you see the content as ridiculous i do not mind posting elsewhere.
Yeah, I missed your point. I took it that you were saying the funky lights are normal. I responded how I did. I am not into walking on eggshells. I'm not into deleting stuff either. I try to retract or explain myself better, if I act the buffoon. I agree with you it is some kind of optical reaction with polymers, particulates, metal salts as you put it. It's actually all good. Now both of us know we can just say what we mean. The more real people post here, then the less I will feel the need to open my yapper so much. Lophofo is the expert on HAARP. Uhm, nearly all of his posts are inaccessible through his username. That's kind of a long, strange story. One that would blow your mind. One that makes us look like either disinfo, or that disinfo has gone out of their way to try to neutralise this forum's progress. It's a catch 22. It's like you say. With this topic, it's gonna be tough at times not to sound off the wall. But we try our best. You might want to check out his HAARP threads, there's the one in the top section. There's also one here I started, after he told me about a disinfo article put out by a science magazine.
Yes, I personally, a nobody from Massachusetts, have confronted the chemtrail disinfo monster and have exposed it for the nonsense dispensing bullshiter that it is. I hold no punches with what I think are efforts to make the obvious seem like a paranoid hoax. Hey, In a perfect world, we'd be getting into the specifics in the top section. The disinfo is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. I decided to confront it. I am not afraid to let the reader decide. And if they don't want to check out that part of it, they don't have to. It's not that this section is not important, as compared to the top one. There is some very good stuff here too. I think this is a decent place. One can skim through it or find chunks they like. There are lots of links and ideas and whatnot. I think it may pick up again at some point. CPellatt has said she can resume posting here but is usually busy for the summers. She takes really good pictures. Her website is called ISeeLines.
btw, i did not even know of chemtrail central and the situation with someone from nasa. i try to share this with people like les crowley and another nasa guy (spaceweather) but they are definitely not interested in discussion. so i understand your frustration.
There is a good thread in the top section in which Patrick Minnis of NASA is ripped apart. Rational chemmies need not apply. One can post on those major forums all they want to. They are just not allowed to disrupt the tinfoil applecart.
I've just checked the
upper atmospheric readings. It is neither cold enough nor is there enough relative humidity to account for what is taking place in the skies.
