By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
3 weeks ago I worked with a painter who had an interesting perspective on the world around us. He was a lovely fella but had taken way to much acid in the past which probably distorted his perception on reality. Or so I thought. He was really into conspiracy theories, truly believing in them. He talked at some length about the illuminati, Rothschilds etc, but then went on to say about the planes flying overhead. "You see that plane?" He said, looking out the window pointing to the sky. "Yeh?" Now looking out the window watching the plane overhead. "what do you think is coming out of the back of the plane?" " dunno,exhaust fumes,water vapor from the clouds??" "chemicals mate. They're are spraying deadly chemicals all over the world. Trying to cull the human race,and control them". I thought he's just lost the plot, bless him,but last night I was watching a Prince interview from a few years back and he started talking about chemtrails! I've never heard of this theory before 3 weeks ago. I then started watching other stuff on youtube, things about chemtrails,illuminati, symbols in corporate logos and its got me thinking,are things not as they seem? Are we being controlled by darker forces.? Am I on the internet too much? Should I have taken more acid? The truth is out there somewhere.
Occasional providers of half decent House music.
2
chemtrails (n/t) on 08:57 - Apr 27 with 3139 views
That article ends up being a good advert for the possibility of their existence!
Check out the first reply comment, throws masses of information about reports from organisations tasked with researching the viability of geo engineering. I notice that your man completely ignores it all and just comes back with a childish reply in response. Where's the logic and reason?
I'm not saying chemtrails definitely exist by the way, but let's just say that the article you posted (particularly in light of the first reply comment and the original article's author's subsequent outright refusal to engage with the information provided within it) is hardly a case closing piece of 'logic'.
And this was released in 2002 yet here we are 14 years later still debating whether our governments would do such a thing (or should that be ridiculing anyone who suggests governments would do such a thing).
What I don't get is that chemtrails would be fairly indiscriminate phenomena and those that perpetrate the poisoning would suffer themselves - rather like tainting a communal well?Unless of course the elite are privy to antidotes and other substances that are denied to the proles. Of course there have been biological experiments,Gruinard for example.Churchill was contemplating dropping Anthrax on Berlin.The RAF that is,not personally.
What I don't get is that chemtrails would be fairly indiscriminate phenomena and those that perpetrate the poisoning would suffer themselves - rather like tainting a communal well?Unless of course the elite are privy to antidotes and other substances that are denied to the proles. Of course there have been biological experiments,Gruinard for example.Churchill was contemplating dropping Anthrax on Berlin.The RAF that is,not personally.
You can bet your arse the elite are privy to medicines us mere peasants aren't allowed access to.
When was the last member of the royal family to get cancer?
And this was released in 2002 yet here we are 14 years later still debating whether our governments would do such a thing (or should that be ridiculing anyone who suggests governments would do such a thing).
chemtrails (n/t) on 08:57 - Apr 27 by 1BobbyHazell
That article ends up being a good advert for the possibility of their existence!
Check out the first reply comment, throws masses of information about reports from organisations tasked with researching the viability of geo engineering. I notice that your man completely ignores it all and just comes back with a childish reply in response. Where's the logic and reason?
I'm not saying chemtrails definitely exist by the way, but let's just say that the article you posted (particularly in light of the first reply comment and the original article's author's subsequent outright refusal to engage with the information provided within it) is hardly a case closing piece of 'logic'.
Umm, no it doesn't. That first comment really didn't really do anything viable at all. (Plus, he starts out with personal attacks and then you mention a childish reply?! Please!) Have scientists and governments been researching chemicals, weather, climates and the use of aircraft to do so? I bet they have. Can planes be fitted to use chemicals as a weapon. I bet they can. Are governments conspiring to use commercial aircraft to spray chemicals at high altitude in some vastly unspecified way to control or kill (which is it by the way? They never do say.) people in a highly visible way! Of course not. Oh, why do you think I posted that as a " case closing piece of 'logic'?
And this was released in 2002 yet here we are 14 years later still debating whether our governments would do such a thing (or should that be ridiculing anyone who suggests governments would do such a thing).
An interesting and disturbing story, but what it details has nothing to do with the silly concept of chemtrails. Chemical and biological weapons have been in wars and other times used at least since WWI, and even longer. They have been delivered via military planes, rockets, bombs and many different ways. And governments will always do awful things, as described in that article. I don't know one person who would deny that. But one thing governments won't do is use a commercial airplane to spray chemicals to somehow achieve their goals. Where would the chemicals go in an airplane loaded with people, fuel and baggage? Why wouldn't the government use its military planes at night and kill (or whatever) us before we know it?
An interesting and disturbing story, but what it details has nothing to do with the silly concept of chemtrails. Chemical and biological weapons have been in wars and other times used at least since WWI, and even longer. They have been delivered via military planes, rockets, bombs and many different ways. And governments will always do awful things, as described in that article. I don't know one person who would deny that. But one thing governments won't do is use a commercial airplane to spray chemicals to somehow achieve their goals. Where would the chemicals go in an airplane loaded with people, fuel and baggage? Why wouldn't the government use its military planes at night and kill (or whatever) us before we know it?
Because it costs millions to fly military planes whereas commercial planes are flying all over the world anyway. Best way to utilise the aircraft. As you said yourself governments WILL do awful things. I haven't yet read any of the articles linked today though.
Occasional providers of half decent House music.
0
chemtrails (n/t) on 19:57 - Apr 27 with 2834 views
Umm, no it doesn't. That first comment really didn't really do anything viable at all. (Plus, he starts out with personal attacks and then you mention a childish reply?! Please!) Have scientists and governments been researching chemicals, weather, climates and the use of aircraft to do so? I bet they have. Can planes be fitted to use chemicals as a weapon. I bet they can. Are governments conspiring to use commercial aircraft to spray chemicals at high altitude in some vastly unspecified way to control or kill (which is it by the way? They never do say.) people in a highly visible way! Of course not. Oh, why do you think I posted that as a " case closing piece of 'logic'?
The whole childish, insulting nonsense begins with the very title his article. To say that the first reply 'doesn't do anything viable at all' when the article itself is basically just reporting a school boy like prank and then blanket-condemning anyone who might think that there is something in the chemtrail/geo engineering idea is rather rich. But hey ho, we're all in our preset positions here, which is fair do's.
I used the words 'case closing' because you have decided that the whole idea is a closed case of impossibility even though you know that governments always have and always will do things like spraying their own populations with chemicals. I don't know about commercial aircraft but frankly I'm not too bothered what type might be being used, that part is hardly the key point here.
I used 'logic' because that seemed to have been a bit of a thing between you and PunteR and I thought I'd jump on the bandwagon!!
Look I'm not saying that everything ever written about all this is true, there's bound to be a lot of nonsense written/speculated on/made up etc etc on top of any truth to aspects of it that may exist. I hope we don't get lost in a tit for tat, we obviously agree on the main point that governments are quite happy to secretly spray damaging, poisonous chemicals on their own (or others) populations. The aircraft they may or may not use is a moot point for me.
You can bet your arse the elite are privy to medicines us mere peasants aren't allowed access to.
When was the last member of the royal family to get cancer?
If there was such a thing as a cure for cancer it would generate untold billions for the patent holder, so unlikely it would be reserved just for the royal family.
If there was such a thing as a cure for cancer it would generate untold billions for the patent holder, so unlikely it would be reserved just for the royal family.
[Post edited 27 Apr 2016 21:15]
Not as many billions as they get from charities.There's been a cure for at least 30 years now.
Delusional thoughts of a known substance abuser. JFK was not shot by Oswald, that is the only conspiracy I believe in.
He was shot a couple of years after this speech. Probably just a coincidence.
I bumped into this video the other day so if anyone doesn't have the time to read up on it, just look at the pictures.
I'm sure there is a very good explanation why large aircraft and being fitted out with various sized containers and canisters, I don't recall hearing any though. I love the picture of a plane with a trail coming from one wing but not the other. Anyone who says "its just naturally occurring vapour" how do you explain that one then?
There could be many reasons why this is going on, weather control, population control, agricultural control, reducing the Earth's temperature....whatever it is, just because we don't know why they are doing it doesn't detract from the fact that 'they' are doing it.
I think those are 'ballast barrels' - just barrels of water, used to model distribution of passenger weight throughout the plane. They're connected with tubes so the water can be redistributed to model different distributions of passengers.
As entertaining as all this is, shouldn't we be alarmed and outraged by things that are been done right in front of our noses, like running down the NHS so it can be sold off--to companies with prominent previous Tory ministers on their boards?
I see some water containers and other chemical containers for firefighting purposes,there's maybe a couple of shots of our old friend Agent Orange.... I would expect there were nerve gas diffusion tests with inert materials... as for Kennedy well that's been put to bed.
I think those are 'ballast barrels' - just barrels of water, used to model distribution of passenger weight throughout the plane. They're connected with tubes so the water can be redistributed to model different distributions of passengers.
Sure, but what about the 90% of the picture that has no barrels in it! Are they testing for flights that are pretty much empty with just a few passengers huddled together in a couple of rows by the window?
Caveat, as always, that I'm not supporting the veracity of all chemtrail claims. Just showing immediate potential flaws in the explanations given, by either side, can be easy to ridicule or cast doubt upon.
Sure, but what about the 90% of the picture that has no barrels in it! Are they testing for flights that are pretty much empty with just a few passengers huddled together in a couple of rows by the window?
Caveat, as always, that I'm not supporting the veracity of all chemtrail claims. Just showing immediate potential flaws in the explanations given, by either side, can be easy to ridicule or cast doubt upon.
Hmm... Given that we know aviation companies do this, does the fact there is a bit of space on the plane for which the purpose is not immediately obvious mean we continue pursuing admittedly sexy conspiracy theories about barrels on a plane being for brainwashing? Where does that approach lead us?!
Maybe we should amend Occam's razor:
"Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Unless it's entertaining, in which case carry on, but, if you can, try to keep you eye on what's concretely going on too"
Sorry to sound glib, but having spent a fair amount of time being involved in the effort to organise political activity to intervene in things in the here and now, I find people being on the one hand cynical about activism but on the other willing to solemnly discuss theories about lizards and car crashes in Paris quite annoying! Not aiming this at you by the way -- just shaking a fist in the general direction of the internet. As you were everyone.
PS The space is for the Crop Circle Generator, obviously. ;-)
Hmm... Given that we know aviation companies do this, does the fact there is a bit of space on the plane for which the purpose is not immediately obvious mean we continue pursuing admittedly sexy conspiracy theories about barrels on a plane being for brainwashing? Where does that approach lead us?!
Maybe we should amend Occam's razor:
"Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Unless it's entertaining, in which case carry on, but, if you can, try to keep you eye on what's concretely going on too"
Sorry to sound glib, but having spent a fair amount of time being involved in the effort to organise political activity to intervene in things in the here and now, I find people being on the one hand cynical about activism but on the other willing to solemnly discuss theories about lizards and car crashes in Paris quite annoying! Not aiming this at you by the way -- just shaking a fist in the general direction of the internet. As you were everyone.
PS The space is for the Crop Circle Generator, obviously. ;-)
Edit: Dreadful spelling and grammar
[Post edited 28 Apr 2016 17:14]
In answer to your first paragraph. I'm well aware that picture in and of itself means nor proves absolutely anything. I was merely pointing out that your explanation made no sense at all as there are only 8 barrels on a massive plane. That's all. Like all these things when people are only discussing or looking at one small particular element it's easy to make it mean what you want.
I fully appreciate your points re more salient, immediate issues and attempts to raise awareness and organise real action around them. I've lived that struggle too.
I've always thought Occam's razor to be wholly inapplicable to the endlessly complex arenas of social, political and economic power.
1bobbyhazell's razor " Among competing hypotheses, the one that assumes that the Elite of this world are up to no good for the persual of their own benefit should always be selected"
As early as the 1950's my West Cork Grandmother would tell anyone who wanted to know, and quite a few who didn't, that 'the weather's all shagged up since Aer Lingus started flying over here'.
That's all I have.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
