ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

NASA Scientist Admits: Chemtrails Are Real

Updated on October 15, 2013
Source
Exhaust trails from two NASA sounding rockets, launched on July 4, 2013 from Wallops Island, VA.
Exhaust trails from two NASA sounding rockets, launched on July 4, 2013 from Wallops Island, VA. | Source

In the summer of 2013, proponents of the chemtrail conspiracy theory were handed an unprecedented piece of evidence for their claims. A NASA scientist admitted, in a recorded phone call, that the U.S. space agency was deliberately releasing a trail of chemicals into the atmosphere. He even used the term "chem trail" to refer to the trail of lithium that had been released by a sounding rocket into the atmosphere over the Mid-Atlantic region.

Chemtrail theorists were delighted - finally they had proof that the U.S. government was conducting secret chemical experiments in the atmosphere.

In fact, the lithium-releasing sounding rocket was part of the Daytime Dynamo project, studying the movement of charged particles in the ionosphere. This "secret experiment" had been promoted in NASA press releases for several months prior to the July 4 launch and was widely discussed in science-based media prior to the launch. But facts such as these are largely irrelevant to promoters of the chemtrail conspiracy theory.

Persistent contrails like these are produced under cold and humid conditions in the upper atmosphere.
Persistent contrails like these are produced under cold and humid conditions in the upper atmosphere. | Source

What Are Contrails?

Contrails are produced when airplanes at high altitude create mixing clouds of ice crystals in the upper troposphere. Atmospheric conditions such as temperature, pressure, and humidity determine whether these contrails are short lived or persistent. Learn more about contrails.

What Are Chemtrails?

Believers in the chemtrail conspiracy theory insist that the persistent contrails sometimes created by airplanes flying at cruising altitude are actually "chemtrails" - trails of dangerous chemicals deliberately sprayed by the government and/or UN and/or military and/or illuminati into the upper troposphere for nefarious purposes ranging from geoengineering to depopulation to mind control.

There is, of course, not a shred of evidence for this conspiracy theory. Persistent contrails are easily explained by basic physics and have been a feature of our skies since the dawn of the aviation age. All contrails are simply mixing clouds, similar to the puffy breath clouds we produce when exhaling on a cold day. In the -40 degree conditions near the stratosphere, the airplane's "breath cloud" of water vapor mixes with the water vapor in the atmosphere and freezes rapidly into clouds of ice crystals.

When the air at cruising altitude is cold and dry, contrails dissipate quickly. Under the right conditions of temperature, pressure, and relative humidity, the contrail can linger for hours, or even spread and combine with other contrails to cover the sky. There is no evidence that any of these lingering condensation trails contain geoengineering aerosols or mind-control drugs, but chemtrailers are not dissuaded by this lack of evidence, and the theory persists.

All of this has exactly nothing to do with NASA's Daytime Dynamo sounding rocket experiment.

Diagram of the electric-current pattern in the ionosphere driven by heating from the Sun.
Diagram of the electric-current pattern in the ionosphere driven by heating from the Sun. | Source
Lithium gas trail deployed from a January 2013 nighttime sounding rocket launch. The lithium tracer was used to measure movement of charged particles in the ionosphere.
Lithium gas trail deployed from a January 2013 nighttime sounding rocket launch. The lithium tracer was used to measure movement of charged particles in the ionosphere. | Source

The Daytime Dynamo Experiment

The sounding rockets that launched from Wallops Island, Virginia on July 4, 2013 were part of the Daytime Dynamo project, a joint research project conducted by NASA and the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) to study the electrical currents of the ionosphere.

The ionosphere is a region of the atmosphere stretching from about 30 miles (50km) to 620 miles (1000 km) above the Earth's surface. In this part of the atmosphere, atoms in air molecules are ionized by solar radiation - electrons are stripped from their nuclei and allowed to roam free until they are recaptured by another atom.

Scientists have long sought to understand the dynamics of the ionosphere, as this layer of charged particles in the atmosphere has important impacts for communication and navigation systems. The free electrons in the ionosphere reflect shortwave radio - allowing radio signals to travel long distances. However, they can also bend radio waves at frequencies used for satellite communication, causing errors in GPS and other navigation systems. Disturbances in the ionosphere can disrupt communications and pose a danger to air, land, and sea traffic that relies on satellite navigation.

The dynamics of the ionosphere are only partially understood. Interactions between the solar wind and the Earth's magnetic field whip both the charged and neutral particles of the ionosphere into circular wind patterns on the Sun-facing side of the planet. These winds in turn create electric currents in the ionosphere. Around the Equator these winds travel in a clockwise cycle. At mid-latitudes, the winds travel counter-clockwise in a complex looping pattern. Together, these wind and current cycles are known as the daytime dynamo.

One method scientists use to study this dynamo uses lithium gas as a tracer. NASA has launched several successful nighttime sounding rocket missions, during which the lithium gas lit up brightly as it passed through the electrically-charged ionosphere and allowed scientists on the ground to track the different wind movements at different altitudes. While these lithium tracers are easily used to track the movements of the ionosphere on the night side of the planet, they are much more difficult to observe on the day side of the planet, where the ionosphere's daytime dynamo is active.

The NASA/JAXA Daytime Dynamo experiment was designed to overcome this limitation. It was composed of three components:

  • A Black Brant V sounding rocket carrying sensors to collect data on charged and neutral particles as it passed through the ionosphere.
  • A Terrier Improved Orion sounding rocket that launched 15 seconds later, carrying a canister of lithium gas to be deployed as a tracer.
  • A King Air turboprop airplane equipped with cameras employing special filters that could record the lithium trail during the daytime.

The rockets launched at 10:31 am Eastern time on July 4, 2013. According to mission managers, the Daytime Dynamo mission was a resounding success.

The "Incriminating" Video

NASA's Chemtrail Admission

Despite the fact that NASA has been conducting sounding rocket experiments with lithium tracers in the ionosphere for many years now, this particular mission caught the attention of some believers in the chemtrail conspiracy theory. One conspiracy theorist was so enraged that she contacted heliophysicist Douglas Rowland at the Goddard Space Flight Center to complain.

During the conversation, which was recorded (perhaps illegally) and posted to YouTube, Rowland patiently explained the purpose of the Daytime Dynamo mission, and that the small amount of lithium released into the upper reaches of the atmosphere posed no threat to life on the ground.

Unfortunately, Rowland also used the term "chem trail" to refer to the trail of lithium gas released by the Terrier Improved Orion rocket during the experiment. The abbreviation is certainly not incorrect - a tracer of any kind is indeed a trail of chemicals. Rowland was probably unaware of the pseudoscientific context of the term, and had no idea that his words would be twisted by the chemtrail believers to further the chemtrail hoax.

Of course, the idea that NASA "admitted the existence of chemtrails" in this conversation is simply ludicrous. Anyone with even a modest sense of logic should be able to see that a sounding rocket deploying a tracer into the ionosphere has nothing whatsoever to do with the chemtrail conspiracy theory.

Lithium is the lightest metal, shown here floating in mineral oil.
Lithium is the lightest metal, shown here floating in mineral oil. | Source

But Isn't Lithium a Mind-Control Drug?

One of the frequent claims made by chemtrail conspiracy theorists about the NASA/JAXA Daytime Dynamo experiment was that it was a secret "mind control" operation to pacify the residents of the Mid-Atlantic. After all, lithium ions are used in medicine to treat bipolar disorder.

The third element on the periodic table, lithium is the lightest solid element. It is commonly found in many minerals that make up granite, and is found in seawater in concentrations up to .25 parts per million. Lithium is found in trace amounts in plant and animal tissue, particularly in sea life. A 2013 study published in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition suggested that lithium was an essential element for mammalian development and biological functioning, and recommended a daily allowance of 1mg of lithium per day.

With one electron in its outer shell, lithium is also highly reactive. Lithium is used in a number of industrial and commercial applications - from ceramic glazes to batteries to engine greases to rocket propellants. Combined with chlorine, lithium chloride is soluble in water and is used as a tracer liquid to test the flow of water in water-treatment systems.

Since lithium burns with a bright red color, it is also used in road flares and as the "rockets' red glare" of many fireworks. Those concerned with NASA's dispersal of a minute amount of lithium tracer into the upper atmosphere on July 4th likely received a far higher dose of lithium from the fireworks displays held that night.

As usual, the outlandish claims made by promoters of the chemtrail conspiracy theory are completely unsupported by facts. NASA's use of sounding rockets to create chemical tracers in no way prove that the "chemtrail conspiracy" is anything but a ridiculous hoax.

Poll: Are Chemtrails Real?

Do you believe that persistent contrails are actually deliberately-sprayed chemtrails designed to geoengineer and/or depopulate and/or mind-control the population?

See results

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      After reading about half of this dreck, I decided that like a bad TV show time to turn the channel.

      "Under the right conditions of temperature, pressure, and relative humidity, the contrail can linger for hours, or even spread and combine with other contrails to cover the sky."

      Evidently the right conditions exist everyday and do not have to take place at cruising altitude (35,000 feet) because chem trails are much lower than con trails and last for not just hours but days.

      Scott, thank you proving once and for all you're truly are delusional, bravo!

    • profile image

      mbuggieh 3 years ago

      Thank you for your reason and skepicism. Each are increasingly much-needed.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      Blue,

      Hey, thank you for the feedback! As you can imagine, the expert scientific opinion of someone who thinks a perfectly normal moonrise is a sign of impending Nibiru cataclysm is VERY important to me!

      How's that going, by the way? Been almost two years since I joined Hubpages - is that impending Nibiru doom gonna happen or what?

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Still going strong, Pole Shifts don't happen overnight, speaking of which . . . how come the conditions weren't right in the 60s, 70s and 80s when America had blue skies everyday?

      Let's see we have had jet airliners since the 50s no chem trails then?

      No chem trails in the 70s? Plenty of airline traffic back then . . . no chem trails in the 80s 0r even the 90s . . . were the conditions just not right?

      So let's review shall we no chem trails for fifty years, then all of a sudden the conditions are right, could it be they don't want us to see something in the sky?

      Could it be Underdog, Superman, the Tooth Fairy or here is a thought for you could it be they don't want us to see another planetary body that entered the solar system in 2003?

      Hmmm, scientific theory that just doesn't work for fifty years then when there is something to hide . . . like for instance the truth, suddenly the conditions are right, WOW!

      Please explain how chem trails didn't arrive in our skies until the last ten years or . . . just shut up cuz you got nothing!

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      Persistent contrails have been in the skies since the 1940s, if not earlier. They were of particular concern to military planners during WWII as they gave away the locations of planes conducting high-altitude surveillance or bombing missions - all enemy fighter planes needed to do to intercept Allied missions was follow the contrail until they found the source.

      The U.S. Army Air Corps/Air Force and NOAA studied contrails extensively in the 1940s and 50s, and in 1953 Herb Appleman, a meteorologist at the National Weather Service, created a chart that plotted the temperature, pressure, and humidity conditions for persistent contrail formation.

      You've seen them all your life. I've seen them all my life as well. They are more noticeable now for a few reasons: there are more airlines running more flights than ever before, improvements in air traffic control technology has reduced the required vertical separation between aircraft to just 1000 feet. It is also possible that there is more humidity in the upper troposphere now than in previous decades, but radiosonde humidity data is not always reliable so I cannot list this definitively.

      The main point is that contrails have been around for as long as planes have been able to fly at cruising altitude. The pushers of the chemtrail myth like to insist that this isn't the case, but they have yet to be correct about anything.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Yet I notice you switch back and forth between the term contrails, which I agree I have seen all my life having grown up on AF Bases all over the world and chem trails which are much lower than 35,000 feet and stay in the sky for days not hours.

      In the 60. 70s and 80s we did not have chem trails criss crossing the sky everyday as we do now. There is a big difference and simply ignoring the difference doesn't change the fact that there is a big difference.

      Contrails happen at a much higher altitude and dissipate quickly because of less oxygen, chem trails happen much lower and hang there for days. I can go take a picture of one tomorrow come back twelve hours later and it will still be there, that is not natural.

      Don't be naïve or try to claim ignorance as your article pretends to be, we both know the difference and defending it is absurd.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      What you're talking about in WWII was exhaust trails from turbine engines, which left trails behind, not the same thing as contrails. WWII bombers couldn't even reach 30,000 feet, it wasn't until the B-29 Super-Fortress came along that they had a bomber that could get beyond the 30,000 foot ceiling and climb high enough to make con trails an issue.

      The B-29 was designed to drop the A bomb and be high enough not to get vaporized, yes occasionally the B-17 would leave con trails but rarely. They did however leave plenty of exhaust trails, c'mon Scott remember who you're talking to, this ain't HS.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      The B-17, first flown in 1935, had a service ceiling of 35,500 feet.

      Mosquito Mk. II and IVs had a service ceiling of 34,500 feet. The Mk. IX had a service ceiling of 39,900 feet.

      Junker 88C-1s had a service ceiling of 32,480 feet.

      P-43 Lancers had a service ceiling of 35,990 feet.

      The list goes on - see for yourself at http://ww2db.com/aircraft.php. Or are the WWII historians in on the chemtrail conspiracy, too?

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      "Yet I notice you switch back and forth between the term contrails, which I agree I have seen all my life having grown up on AF Bases all over the world and chem trails which are much lower than 35,000 feet and stay in the sky for days not hours."

      The main difference between contrails and chemtrails is that contrails exist. Chemtrails don't.

      That is, if we're defining "chemtrails" in the conspiracy theory sense, which asserts that persistent contrails are deliberately sprayed chemtrails.

      If we expand the definition of "chem-trails" to mean cloud seeding or crop dusting or skywriting or smoke screens or sounding rockets with tracers, then yes, "chem-trails" are real. However, these are completely unrelated to the chemtrail conspiracy theory.

      The fact is that contrails do not always dissipate quickly. They can linger for hours if the weather conditions are right. This is the central misunderstanding of the chemtrail conspiracy theory. Persistent contrails existed in the 40s and 50s and 60s and 70s and 80s. There may not have been as many of them, but they were there. See this photo from 1943:

      http://ww2db.com/image.php?image_id=7197

      Contrails, persistent and dissipating, are easily explained by basic physics - and can be confirmed using the Appleman chart and radiosonde data. The chemtrail conspiracy theory defies logic and is unsupported by evidence.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 3 years ago from New Mexico

      Somethingblue is a know nothing conspiracy theorist nut job... Lithium is NOT a mind control drug, my dad is on it and he is certainly not in anyone's control, he's always been a rebel. You can ask any of the elderly and they will tell you planes left trails, that were not exhaust trails, I have had this conversation with them. I also knew a pilot for American Airlines and he's not as extreme as Somethingblue is but he believes in some pretty weird stuff, however, he doesn't believe in chem trails.

      Also going back to the pole shift, even though it's off topic, it will happen but it's a magnetic pole shift and we will only be aware it's happening when we see the aurora lights, but otherwise the only bad thing it will bring is a slightly higher risk of cancer.

      Scott, I thoroughly enjoyed reading this, lot's of info I wasn't fully aware of, and the hilarious conversation with SB adds more useful info, from you, and more hilarious nutjobbery from SB.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Scott, obviously we disagree, which is nothing new, regardless of what you may believe chem trails didn't become common until the last fifteen years. I personally believe they serve dual purposes of which creating cover is only one of the reasons and the other being for weather modification.

      Since proving their existence is much like finding the missing link, something that will be very difficult to do there isn't much point in arguing about them other than the fact they do exist.

      Since we are using the simple fact of knowing pilots for proof, having grown up on airbases all over the world I know many pilots and most of them are under what is known as the National Security Act oath and wouldn't tell the common man the truth if they had a gun to their head, which I believe is the whole point.

      It was like your laughable argument that your astrologer friend 'told' you there is no such thing as Nibiru, gee do reckon that is proof?

      Since I am the elderly I don't need to ask anyone, just observe! Growing up in the 50s and 60s the skies above America were NOT criss-crossed with contrails or chem trails but now there are, guess the conditions got just right in the nick of time.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 3 years ago from New Mexico

      "Growing up in the 50s and 60s the skies above America were NOT criss-crossed with contrails or chem trails but now there are" nor planes either. But imagine that, airflight has grown and so have the amount of trails.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      dear artblack01, the US, Chinese, Russian and United Kingdom governments have already admitted that they have participated in geo-engineering projects and even signed a weather weapons treaty in the 70s to prevent their countries from using this type of technology in times of war.

      Spraying chemicals into the atmosphere has been an ongoing process for decades to which they're only admitting to this now. You don't have to be a Rocket Surgeon to tell the difference between contrails and chem trails.

      If you wish to defend Scotts' absurd notion that there is no difference feel free as ignorance is truly bliss however the rest of the world is not so gullible. Hell India recently shot down two US planes that were spraying chemicals over their country, so while you blithely defend this absurd notion remember the rest of the world has already acknowledge it is real.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 3 years ago from New Mexico

      Only the conspiracy nut jobs such as yourself, I on the other hand actually do my research and make rational observations to decide whether or not something is true rather than repeating someone else's paranoid delusions.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      Blue,

      If you are talking about weather modification techniques such as cloud seeding, then yes these practices have been going on for decades. They are also not secret, nor are they illegal. So they are not part of a conspiracy.

      They are also not part of the chemtrail conspiracy theory, which is completely unproven. There is zero evidence that persistent contrails are chemtrails.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Scott you sad excuse for disinformationist, I never made the claim that contrails are chem trails and never will, the two are completely different.

    • profile image

      mbuggieh 3 years ago

      To somethgblue:

      You note: "Since I am the elderly I don't need to ask anyone, just observe! Growing up in the 50s and 60s the skies above America were NOT criss-crossed with contrails or chem trails but now there are, guess the conditions got just right in the nick of time."

      You are kidding right. I too grew up in the 1950s and 1960s and very near the US-Canadian border and near several military bases. We saw contrails every day (as well as heard the so-called "sound barrier" being broken every day).

      Contrails are just vapor trails that follow aircraft and are a function of exhaust. And since they are water vapors they lifespan depends on humidity and temperature and altitude at which the convectional trail (or "contrail) forms.

      Chemtrails are fantasies conjured in the minds of conspiracy theorists who believe the government is dumping chemicals into the air at high altitudes as part of some nefarious conspiracy.

      Contrails are real.

      Chemtrails are, in a word, hooey.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 3 years ago from New Mexico

      There are many conspiracy nut jobs out there, many have access to media of their own, whether it be their own magazine or their own website it doesn't make what they say any more reliable than they guy on anti psychotic medication who doesn't consistently take his meds.... even worse are the people who actually know its nonsense and uses the paranoia and gullibility of people like somethngblue to make a buck. Somethng blue is just a victim of such scams and I feel sorry for him... or worse he perpetuates these bs stories so that he can make a buck off the gullible in which case he's just anotger skum sucking conman. Either way, he's arguing against the wrong people, those of us who will research the validity of his claim.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      How am I making a buck commenting on this article? Talk about some BS, you clowns are full of it. I feel sorry for the narrow minded gullible sad sacks that wouldn't know a ice crystal if it B-slapped them in the forehead.

      I'm not here to educate you morons, believe what you wish however before you go spewing garbage you might want to educate yourselves.

      http://educate-yourself.org/ct/

      The contrails you speak of happen at high altitudes, chem trails are much further down and closer to the ground. Your pathetic arguments don't explain how water vapor that forms ice crystals at high altitudes then slowly sink to the ground moving through denser and warmer air and yet Do Not melt but actually stay together.

      The chem trails stay in the sky four hours even days and yet contrails at higher altitudes dissipate much quicker in a matter of minutes.

      So by all means continue to use name calling where logic fails, blame your ignorance on others and point out that anyone with a different opinion must be on drugs but just so you know I laugh at your inane drivel.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 3 years ago from New Mexico

      Wow, man your ignorance as to how weather effects water vapor is hilarious. I suggest you take a class of some kind or do some actual research. Especially on the website you posted, which has absolutely zero credibility. You say we are gullible? What is it we are gullible about? Because is seems to me your the idiot believing every conspiracy nonsense thrown at you as if they were real. The claims made on your website site zero sources for actual scientific research by actual scientists. There is no public out cry that is backed by ACTUAL EVIDENCE to any of the BULLSHIT on this website. The gullible one seems to be you, not me, since every claim of something that would affect me, directly or indirectly, I have researched it's validity. I don't believe nonsense such as yours and I don't know who the hell you are trying to convince.

      "The chem trails stay in the sky four hours even days and yet contrails at higher altitudes dissipate much quicker in a matter of minutes." Is total bullshit. Have you ever seen clouds? Have you ever observed them for very long? Some can stay in the sky for a very long time while others move very quickly, this is due to the wind speed. Some can be very high in the sky or very low to the ground, some of the lowest clouds are called fog and if you have ever been in a plane you'll know these two things.

      And I have never seen a "chemtrail" or contrail stay in the sky for longer than a few hours, ever anywhere I have ever been and lived. so this claim is bullshit.... the more I listen to your nonsense the more I believe you are a lying sociopath who is delusional. You can't stand that we don't believe you. And the fact that no matter how much evidence we show you to the contrary of your lame stupid idea you still hold fast to your claim and get angrier and make up, yes make up, more excuses and fake characteristics, maybe someone else made them up for you. The fact of the matter is anyone who is ignorant of what a contrail or "chemtrail" is and reads both your and Scott's hub about them, and who is the kind of person to actually use their brain, will also call bullshit on your claims.

      I truly feel sorry for you somethgblue, I really do.

    • profile image

      mbuggieh 3 years ago

      Just went to the site: http://educate-yourself.org/ct/.

      The contents of the site and the fact that anyone would believe its contents have any credibility is appalling.

      I think the site speaks for itself. And, speaks for the need to focus on teaching critical thinking and science (as well as just about every other discipline) and skepticism in our schools.

      And yes, the volume of conspiracy-based websites is most alarming; alarming because many people cannot (apparently) understand that what they are reading is total nonsense.

    • profile image

      priyavrat kumar 3 years ago

      By the way i live in india and i never heard of to us planes being shot down

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

      "Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."

      "The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education."

      "Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

      "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

      Albert Einstein

      "By all means keep believing what you have been taught and allowing others to do your thinking for you, ignorance is bliss!"

      Somethgblue

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      "By all means keep believing what you have been taught and allowing others to do your thinking for you, ignorance is bliss!"

      ... Says the guy who does nothing but parrot pseudoscientific conspiracy theories without even the slightest understanding of the physics involved.

      There is ZERO evidence for Nibiru, pole shift, hollow earth, chemtrails, or any of the other ridiculous hoaxes you promote. Zero. Einstein would never have fallen for any of them, so to quote-mine him in your own defense is extremely disingenuous. Not that I would expect anything else from a writer as free of integrity as you, of course.

      I suggest you take your own advice for once and examine the evidence, rather than simply accepting the paranoid rantings of delusional conspiracy theorists as fact. You might learn something.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      That's because it didn't happen. If two US planes were shot down by India's military, it would be very big news.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Yeah just like all the other big news stories that get buried, for example Hurricane Erin (bigger than Katrina) 70 miles off the coast of Long Island on 9/11/2001 not one TV News station reported it or 2003 US Supreme Court ruling that TV News Stations do not have to tell the public the truth, not one TV 'News' Station reported, get real dude they report what they want when they are told to report it and suckers like you lap it up.

      Comet of the Century, 15 times brighter than the Moon, will be able to see it in broad daylight (comet ISON) . . . ooops, must have been too many contrails in the sky missed that one entirely.

      It is only big news if they want you to know it, if say for instance they are doing something illegal, then you don't get the story. BP, Transocean (owner of oil rig), Goldman Sachs, Wachovia Bank, Sanders, LLC and amny others sold over ten million (10,000,000) shares of BP stock options 2 weeks before Deepwater Horizon oil spill . . . did any news station report it?

      Hello anybody home?

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      I'm not going to participate in your Gish Gallop, sorry.

      Healthy skepticism is important - one should be able to evaluate news and information from any source and determine fact from fiction, whether the source is CNN or ZetaTalk.

      What you practice is unhealthy skepticism. You start from the conclusion that everything "mainstream" is a lie and everything "alternative" is the truth. Therefore you cannot accept mainstream physics and chemistry and astronomy since they're apparently "in on the conspiracy." That is simply idiotic.

    • profile image

      mbuggieh 3 years ago

      Excellent point scottgruber...excellent point!

      We need very much to educate people that skepticism is NOT simply believing that everything "mainstream" or academic is part of some conspiracy and that everything "alternative" is truth.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      I'm not going to participate in your Gish Gallop, very scientific. Of course as soon as I mentioned something that couldn't be refuted with 'your' inane drivel, you resort to name calling and Gish Gallop, as expected.

      What I do find amusing is that you imply with the 3 photos on this article that chem trails are a product of rocket exhaust, a unique example of Gish Gallop, just like NASA when confronted with the truth you simply ignore it and call it Gish Gallop.

      I question anything mainstream science and the news media claims as the truth, I see you have completely ignored ISON, how could 'science' be so utterly wrong on the Comet of the Century? Do tell?

      Too much rocket exhaust in the atmosphere blocking our view?

    • profile image

      mbuggieh 3 years ago

      Why, somethingblue, do you invest to much in what claims to be the "alternative"?

      Do you have proof that the "alternative" is, in fact, the not-the-establishment?

      Has it occurred to you that what posits itself as the "alternative" may, in fact, be the mainstream locus of the conspiracy itself?

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      A Gish Gallop is a creationist technique of changing the subject whenever one of their claims are refuted. Bringing up Hurricane Erin and Comet ISON in the comments of an article about the chemtrail conspiracy theory is a good example of this. Supporting an article with illustrative photos is not a Gish Gallop.

      But since you're fixated on Comet ISON, let's talk about it. The "Comet of the Century" label and the "bright as the full moon" prediction were invented by media, not astronomers. These labels were based on preliminary estimates of the size of the comet's nucleus. Later observations were able to measure the size more accurately, and the estimates were revised. The comet turned out to be much smaller than initially thought. Its increase in brightness also slowed down as it neared the sun - a phenomenon that astronomers have observed before in Oort Cloud objects but do not yet understand.

      That's how science works - predictions change as more information is gathered. It's not a conspiracy, just reality. The initial predictions that the comet would be as bright as the full moon were dismissed by astronomers long before the comet reached perihelion, but media reports failed to catch up to the new information.

      As it turns out, ISON may well be the "Comet of the Century" in terms of scientific observation. It was imaged by a dozen space-based observatories, multiple ground-based ones, and countless amateur astronomers, yielding tons of valuable information about comet composition and behavior.

      The real problem with ISON was the hype, not the science. And it was the pseudoscientific conspiracists in the "alternative" media community who did much of that hyping.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Yoage, CBS News is alternative, since when?

      All of the reports I read and saw were based on or came directly from the astronomers mouths as seen on the Mainstream Media of the day, including but not limited to, Fox, Discovery, National Geographic, NBC and others . . . when did they become alternative?

      Even NASA jumped on the band wagon, are these now alternative 'news' sources?

      These terms were not invented by the media but came directly from the mouths of astronomers world wide.

      The reason I mentioned 'rocket exhaust' is that nowhere has it ever been mentioned in all of the conspiracy theories out there concerning 'chem trails' that they originated from rockets. Every chem-trail known to mankind is from airplanes, not rockets. Your logic once again is amusing and predictable and the reason I so much enjoy laughing at your meager attempts at explanations.

      Your the one that mentioned buried 'news' stories not me, I just listed some examples that you cannot refute.

      Mbuggeih, proof is for suckers that need others to do their thinking for them.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      Perhaps if you read the text instead of skimming the pictures you'd actually learn something for once. Rocket exhaust is irrelevant to both the chemtrail conspiracy idiocy AND the sounding rocket experiment this article is about. Nowhere in my article do I say it is.

      Perhaps this is why you didn't understand the coverage of Comet ISON, either. You didn't bother to read it.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      "Chemtrail theorists were delighted - finally they had proof that the U.S. government was conducting secret chemical experiments in the atmosphere."

      Oh I get it you were being facetious, you mistake delighted for amusement, we were laughing at the explanation, not delighted that yet another preposterous theory was being spread as disinformation for the sheep.

      I didn't bother to read it, because TV is actually seen and heard not read, as is video perhaps you would like some links to such notable astronomers such as government mouthpiece Neil Tyson and others spreading their Gish Gallop?

      Didn't think so, after all it ain't 'Rocket Surgery'!

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      What "preposterous theory" are you talking about? The idea that NASA conducted ionospheric research using sounding rockets? That's not a theory. It's fact. They were also not secretive about it. That's the point.

      The point of this article was to illustrate how conspiracy-minded pseudoscience pushers will eagerly seize on completely irrelevant information as "proof" of their conspiracy theories. In much the same way that you cite Hurricane Erin and Comet ISON as "proof" of Nibiru or aliens or whatever you're blabbering about.

      Your comments only help to illustrate my point. Thank you!

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Your welcome, since the unwritten rule is that the author is always correct on their own article, I will 'allow you' to have the last word even though I clearly 'owned you' in the comments section.

      The chemtrail conspiracy arrived on the scene long before the so-called above mentioned admission by NASA types and only 'proves' the feeble minded attempts at wannabe scientist to explain this obvious truth.

      What you fail to realize is believers don't need proof, because they believe, regardless of what you believe, we don't care what you believe, believe what ever you want. However when you use ridiculous claims as the above article to 'prove' a point, don't get offended when people laugh at you, it is not personal we enjoy humor just like the next guy.

      It was humor . . . wasn't it?

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      "I clearly 'owned you' in the comments section."

      No, actually you didn't. You made multiple statements that were verifiably untrue, made claims that you could not back up with evidence, and changed the subject when challenged. That is not "owning" by any definition of the word.

      What you fail to realize is that belief is irrelevant when discussing the real world. What matters is fact. Believing that there are fairies under your bed doesn't make fairies exist. Believing in Nibiru doesn't make it exist. Believing in the chemtrail conspiracy doesn't make chemtrails exist.

      "Proof is suckers" is what liars say when they cannot back up their claims with proof.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Uh . . yeah I did, it's OK to admit when you've been owned, it is a sign of humility, just admit it, learn from it and move on.

      v. owned, own·ing, owns

      1.

      a. To have or possess as property.

      b. To have control over.

      2. To admit as being in accordance with fact, truth, or a claim; acknowledge.

      In this case, anything you write from here on out will only 'acknowledge' and provide further testimony to my complete and utter ownership of you.

      Don't feel bad though, because far more intelligent humans have fallen before my supreme logic and acerbic wit, it is nothing to be ashamed of.

      However you did get something right 'belief is irrelevant' as the truth stands alone and needs no defense.

      The actually quote is 'proof is for suckers' are your cut and pasting skills getting rusty?

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      You are beyond delusional, blue. You are more than welcome to think you've won, but anyone reading this will see what a fool you've made of yourself.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 3 years ago from New Mexico

      Blue is definitely a delusional fool, you really can't win with sociopaths such as him. He will believe and preach whatever nonsense he thinks no matter how unresearched and stupid it might be. And if you show him proof to the contrary it'll just make him angry and put him even further in denial that he is wrong.... he is the very definition of a sociopath.

    • Insane Mundane profile image

      Insane Mundane 3 years ago from Earth

      This was fun to read! I got a good taste of both sides of this debate, as the comment field was more valuable than the Hub itself. I've never really got into a Chemtrail debate before, so I don't really have anything to add.

      Personally, I have more concerns about all the chemicals they put in the foods nowadays, although I have wondered before if they are dropping clouds of "stupid gas" on the majority of the population. LOL!

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      When I first heard about chemtrails (aerosol geoengineering) I was in denial, which is a normal human response to information that one doesn’t want to hear or believe.

      There is a tremendous amount of scientific data accessible via the internet at californiaskywatch.org, agriculture defense.org, thrive movement.com and environmentalvoices.org.

      Obviously you guys have no 'reason' to believe me however by providing these links from testimony by insiders, chem-trail pilots and scientist, you may actually get a clue.

      The thing about any good conspiracy is keeping the truth from the people, so they are not going to give you proof, you actually have to look for it and use critical thinking.

      Chemtrails and Depopulation – An Insider Speaks Out

      http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/environmen...

      Websites Reveal Shocking Truth about Chemtrails

      http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/websites-reveal...

      The Truth Denied Breaking News

      http://www.thetruthdenied.com/news/category/chemtr...

      You don't need to be a 'Rocket Surgeon' to know when you are being lied too!

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      "You don't need to be a 'Rocket Surgeon' to know when you are being lied too!"

      True. I know I'm being lied to every time you post a comment or write an article.

      Thanks for those three links. I checked them out and was thoroughly unsurprised to find them filled with unsubstantiated claims, anonymous "sources," and logical fallacies. Just what I expect from chemtrail believers.

      These chemtrail web sites are nothing but a pseudoscience circle-jerk. They repeat the same ridiculous and unsupported claims on a few dozen different sites and then cite each other as "sources." Nowhere do they provide any actual evidence for chemtrails - at least, none that hasn't been thoroughly debunked a dozen times already.

      Of course, if you're deluded enough to believe in chemtrails, you don't need evidence. Lack of evidence is just evidence of a conspiracy, right?

      The fact that there is zero evidence for chemtrails can ONLY be explained by a vast conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of people in the airline and biotech and chemical and other related industries all working hard every day to cover up their jobs poisoning the very same air that they and their families breathe. It can't possibly be that there is zero evidence for chemtrails because there is no such thing as chemtrails, right?

      I used to believe that creationists were the stupidest people on the planet. Now I know that I was wrong. Chemtrail believers have creationists beat by a huge margin.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 3 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Using the term 'circle jerk' denotes a familiarity that speaks louder than words and describes an image I fear you are all too comfortable with.

      Anyone that feels hanging out with his buddies while pleasing himself is a good way to describe a particular concept or idea, is to say the least disgusting.

      I gotta say you definitely bring a whole new meaning to the term Gish Gallop, perhaps we finally know for sure the true meaning of the phrase.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 3 years ago from New Mexico

      "Using the term 'circle jerk' denotes a familiarity that speaks louder than words and describes an image I fear you are all too comfortable with." Yet you are still the main character of such an image. And rather than defend your position you cherry pick a term you find nasty and attack with that, considering your position doesn't hold any water that's pretty much all you are capable of doing. You know if I were someone who truly believed these obviously stupid and unbelievable conspiracy theories I would do everything in my power to prove that they were true, employing a self taught investigative journalism strategy to show the world that these, obviously illogical and stupid, ideas were true. Yet, you lazily sit back and write parroting articles on ideas you are too stupid and lazy to investigate yourself. Maybe you are one of those people so scared of these invisible conspiracy government agents that don't exist that the mere thought of it makes you wet your pants.

      The simple issue is that you have an unbelievable and to us obviously ridiculous and false claim.... what are you going to do to prove that your claim is true? Or will you merely shy away from such a request because we ridicule you as a nut job with cries of "you're the fool" "No you are!" Rather than acting as an intelligent person and perhaps going to find evidence yourself.... it wouldn't be that hard, make friends with baggage handlers, or get a job at an airport, after that sneak a camera... not too hard with cell phones, and take pictures of this poisonous stuff, You could fly on the plane and take pictures of this stuff coming out of tubes on the wings rather than forming on the wings from condensation.... because you know, condensation doesn't happen.

    • sparkster profile image

      Marc Hubs 3 years ago from United Kingdom

      Those looking at the Contrails are looking in the wrong place. Many governments, universities, etc have spoken openly about the topic of "chemtrails" and published research papers on them.

      Scott, what's your take on Stratospheric Particle Injection?

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 3 years ago from USA

      There are many people researching the possibility of using stratospheric particle injection for solar radiation management. This doesn't mean there is an SRM program actively happening now.

      I think it's a dangerous and drastic measure with potential for some very bad unforseen consequences. If used, it should be a last resort if all other efforts to limit carbon emissions have failed. I hope we don't get to that point.

    • sparkster profile image

      Marc Hubs 2 years ago from United Kingdom

      Hmm, well that's unfortunate - many official sources have now reported that they do have an SRM program in place and have done so for a very long time. 20% of the sun's rays are being blocked out by stratospheric sulfate aerosols. The GAO, IPCC, etc have all come clean about spraying aerosols into Earth's atmosphere.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Yeah chemtrails are pretty much a for gone conclusion, having been outed by multiple sources, the least of which is the perpetrators of the crime itself.

      However what I find amusing is the lack of retraction from those claiming it was a false premise or conspiracy theory, just silence.

      It reminds me of a friend of mine whom upon hearing my claims that intelligence agencies were using spyware and other programs to eavesdrop on cell phone conversations and email, called me among other things crazy.

      Then upon learning the truth behind my claims made years in advance of Snowden's revelations to the world and subsequent outing of the NSA, she called me in a panic, wonder what else was I right about.

      At least she had the eggs to admit when she was wrong and apologize, unlike some folks . . . btw that was a direct stab at you Grubber.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 2 years ago from USA

      Contrary to the claims of believers in the chemtrail conspiracy theory, there have not been any legitimate admissions of a covert SRM or other chemical spraying program. There are a few people who have attempted to jump on the bandwagon and claim to have been part of a chemtrails program, but their claims fall apart when you actually examine their "evidence" - if they provide any at all.

      And the claim that 20% of solar radiation is being blocked is completely untrue. Global dimming was indeed happening from the 1960s to the 1990s, with total global irradiance declining by 4-6%. However, since about 1990 this trend has reversed and we have been in a period of global brightening, according to this study by Martin Wild, et al: http://88.167.97.19/albums/files/TMTisFree/Documen...

      The reason there has been no retraction from those of us who say chemtrails are a conspiracy theory is because this continues to be true. There is not one bit of evidence for chemtrails, after almost twenty years of claims by believers in the theory. That's not a very good track record.

      If you believers manage to find some actual evidence for chemtrails, rest assured that I will indeed retract my claim that it is a wild conspiracy theory. Fortunately, there's little chance of that actually happening.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Your right of course no proof or evidence is ever going to be 'found', by the very nature of what it is, we can argue all day long about what is being seen in the sky but that is not proof.

      I for one don't need any proof or evidence to accept the truth, I don't need any proof that 2+2 =4, I can accept the concept. Proof is for suckers incapable or unwilling to think for themselves.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      You can't find evidence for something that doesn't exist, hell, I could prove to you that chemtrails from planes are really condensation trails due to the way the plane travels through heavily humid parts of the air, but you would deny it. 2+2=4 yes, but we can prove that. It's self evident. So is the fact that planes moving through the air can create condensation. So are you saying condensation trails don't exist? And if not then how would you distinguish between them, because I know for a fact that condensation happens. I've watched it happen from inside a plane. Having much knowledge in how machines work I also know what I am looking at when I see something come out of an engine or off of a surface of a fast moving object.

      Let's take this from your end.... I have seen "chemtrails" form over areas where there are no people, and having some knowledge of the weather, knew that if these were chemtrails, what an expensive waste of money to spray over unpopulated parts of the desert. Even worse is that chemtrails have been around since most jet planes were invented.... what are the chemtrails for? Because they aren't really doing their job of population control. And if that is what it's for, wouldn't it be better to spray on a nation with more people than us? Every government wants more people so they can have more soldiers for wars, it was propaganda in WW2, so population control idea is not just idiotic.

      Somethingblue, if proof is for suckers incapable or unwilling to think for themselves....(I can't say that without cracking up about how stupid that statement is, brain dead in fact) then I have this warm glass of milk, that I promise has nothing poisonous in it, nor did I pee in it, and it's supposed to make you as strong as Hercules, but I don't need to prove it, proof is for suckers... ;)

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Then you should drink it, Chemtrails isn't for population control, where did you get that idea from?

      Chemtrails are multi-purposeful, they obscure our (the publics) view of the heavens, mostly seeing into space at night but also sunsets and sunrises.

      They are used to introduce metallic particles into the atmosphere, for weather control purposes, using HAARP and to trap green house gases in our atmosphere . . . and they help with broadcasting mind control frequencies from satellites and other installations here on the ground.

      However no one will ever be able to prove any of it, so I guess you could call it an educated guess based on research.

      Contrails and chemtrails are quite different, contrails come from the condensation due to humidity from the engines of the planes and chemtrails are sprayed like a crop duster. No one is disputing contrails, they have existed since planes were invented and don't require jet engines just any engine, such as propeller planes.

      Governments don't want more oxygen, food and resource wasters, such as yourself, modern warfare doesn't require more soldiers, because technology is doing away with them . . . you have heard of drones (no pilots), warfare is computerized nowadays.

      While you and the other sheep demand proof those of us that have awakened will leave you suckers behind . . . with your milk.

    • sparkster profile image

      Marc Hubs 2 years ago from United Kingdom

      Whilst there may not be a definitive program in place, anyone can go to the IPCC website themselves and read about the ongoing extensive research into spraying aerosols into the atmosphere - they have released several reports and the research is ongoing. The IPCC are also now claiming that this is absolutely necessary and is the only efficient way of cooling down the Earth.

      According to the Council on Foreign Relations:

      "One Kilogram of well-placed sulfur in the stratosphere can offset the warming effect of several hundred thousand kilograms of carbon dioxide."

      According to MIT Technology Review:

      "Side effects of geoengineering include noticeably affecting the appearance of the sky, O-zone layer depletion, lower levels of sunlight and tropopause warming and humidifaction."

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      thank you, Sparkster, finally a voice of reason.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      Voice of reason? Ha ha, you can jump to all the conclusions you want but you fail to look at the reality of it.

      Have you asked the questions?

      Why would automatically conclude contrails are chemtrails?

      What is the purpose of "chemtrails"?

      If it's for population control is this the best most efficient method for this? Is it expensive? Wouldn't the food and water supply be an easier, cheaper and more efficient way of doing this? Would this method effect everyone including those implementing the method because doesn't the atmosphere effect EVERYONE? If this method makes people sterile it would make everyone sterile, yet the population continues to increase not decrease.

      Is it really for atmospheric control? Would this method really work? Is this the best method available for the hypothesized outcome? What about fossil fuel emissions? Would this not counteract any attempt at using mere jet planes to control the weather? Not to mention the exhaust fro the jet planes themselves. Over 100 years of industrial exhaust vs however long this program has been supposedly established. What about keeping it a secret from the different companies, could they get all the airlines involved because they all emit contrails? Given the amount of contrail emitted by airplanes, if they were chemtrails, how much payload would be required to implement this method? The amount would cost the airlines more because they would have to lighten the load of passengers.

      You say the voice of reason, but it's confirmation bias from what I can see.

      You might site all sorts of atmospheric studies, patents for all sorts of strange devices for this (which doesn't mean they have been implemented), but what you can't do is connect all the dots logically. You are looking at this with a tin foil hat mentality. Paranoid delusions. You have failed to logically prove that these are chemtrails, what they would be for, how they would be implemented, why they would realistically use this method vs more efficient and accurate methods, etc. The difference between a sheep and a free thinker is that one believes whatever he hears no matter how crazy or sane and the other thinks about it logically and rationally and looks at al the possible outcomes and comes to the more rational conclusion (that conclusion could be that America is turning into Nazi Germany or is corrupt politically by corporations, or is just trying to improve life or study the weather or that planes naturally emit condensation trails). I would rather believe in reality good or bad, than a complete tin foil hat fantasy good or bad. And believe me, there is plenty of things to be paranoid about, this is not one of them. It's called a media smoke screen... or alt-media smoke screen.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      As I said it is a multi-purposeful program to obscure our ability to see into space, control the weather, which it is already doing and has been for the past forty years (see 1975 weather weapons treaty) and to introduce metallic particles for advance mind control and health affects.

      It really serves no purpose for population control or eradicating humans, that will always be done through economic hardship (starvation), wars (murder on a grand scale) and disease, plagues and viruses.

      Your lack of ability to see beyond your own misguided ascertains shows me that you're more interested in a ego driven desire to be right and less about exploring the truth, feel free to believe what you wish it doesn't change the fact that 2+2=4.

      The truth needs no defense and stands alone, it cannot be altered.

    • profile image

      Sparkster 2 years ago

      Confirmation bias? LMAO! Some people are clearly not willing to go and take a look at the official research, releases and announcements that have been made in relation to spraying chemical trails (which is what chemtrails are, nothing more) into the atmosphere - ignorance may be bliss but knowledge is power.

      * I never said a word about population control or biological contamination or any other 'conspiracy theory' associated with this topic. The official information is out there for those willing to look at it and not turn their noses up at it, pretending it doesn't exist because their too scared or can't bear being proven wrong.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Even the US Congress has looked into the chemtrail topic it is not a secret, it is not some conspiracy theory, just because folks aren't willing to accept it is real doesn't make it less so.

      What has yet to be determined is the wide range of uses it has had over the years and its purpose which still seems to be mired in mystery. Its like UFOs everyone knows they exist but no one is willing to admit it to themselves for others for fear of ridicule.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      "Its like UFOs everyone knows they exist but no one is willing to admit it to themselves for others for fear of ridicule."

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSJElZwEI8o

      This is also how I feel about chemtrails. If you know what they are then you certainly know what they are NOT.

      And you didn't answer any of my questions, because you KNOW I am right.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      I didn't answer your question because I do not care what you believe or how you feel, that is your opinion and you're entitled to it. However opinions are only what you 'believe' are true, not what in reality is true.

      I don't watch YT videos, those are also what other people believe and think, I prefer to do my own thinking. The whole point of videos, TV and movies is to condition humanity to 'think' a certain way, to believe what they are told to believe, to think for you.

      This is the point I've been trying to emphasize and you seem to be missing, I do my own thinking, my own research and I only accept knowledge I 'feel' is correct.

      Science is a tool used by the Annunaki/Powers That Be/Cabal whatever you wish to call them to create a paradigm modeled around the need for evidence or proof to substantiate. Science is a data collection and recording device designed for those sheep that don't build their paradigm around religion, it means nothing to me.

      Feel free to accept what ever knowledge helps you sleep, you're opinion or how you 'feel' will not change my sleeping patterns in the least, 2+2 still equals 4 and no amount of YouTube videos will change that.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 2 years ago from USA

      Ah, more unsubstantiated lies from somethgblue. You state an amazing number of items as "fact" that are in fact completely false, ludicrous, and beyond all logic.

      There is no evidence that "chemtrails" contain metallic particles, let alone that these are somehow used by satellites and the currently-decommissioned HAARP to control weather or minds. If this

      The idea that Congress and the IPCC have somehow admitted to "chemtrails" is also false. They've talked about geoengineering, yes, but this does not mean that it's actually happening. And the only mention of "chemtrails" in Congress was in a bit of legislation written by a whack-a-doodle ufologist and introduced by Dennis Kucinich. This is not an admission that chemtrails exist any more than the other "exotic extraterrestrial weapons" cited in HR2977.

      The basic fact is that you are spreading false information - in other words, lying. Your hand-waving dismissal of the need for evidence makes your position even more ridiculous. It's ironic that someone so concerned about brain conditioning cannot tell when they themselves have been brainwashed by woo.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      2+2=4 why, because those are the facts, and hat are facts based on evidence, we can prove 2+2=4. How does science work? Evidence. Science states what the evidence has given it. What was the video I posted, a scientist stating why he doesn't believe that UFOs are alien visitors.

      None of what I stated in my comments are opinions. Including the FACT that you are a total NUT JOB.

      You want to be taken seriously then you are going to have to address the questions I gave you because they are things that TOTALLY debunk your chemtrail idea. Chemtrails are not a fact, they are a nut jobs paranoid delusion. If you know what something is you can say what it is not. UFOs means Unidentified Flying Objects.... if you don't know what it is you can't all of a sudden say it must be Aliens or anything.

      However, the funny thing is, many of us who know are amateur astronomers know exactly what we are looking at when we look up.

      Why is it that Alien Visitors or UFOs is not on the top of any astronomers list of things they are looking for when they look up? It's not even on the list at all or at the very bottom of some who hope such things exist. Because when we look up we know what we are looking at.

      I have NEVER seen a UFO and I live in New Mexico, land of UFOs ha ha.

      SomethgBlue, if you cannot address the questions given to you by people who think you are a nut job, if you can't address the questions of people who deny you, if you can't counter the arguments given to you against what you believe then what you believe IS BULLSHIT and you will NEVER be taken seriously.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Woo+Woo= whatever flips your switch, baby. I said Congress has talked about chemtrails, never said anything about confirmation. Now who's doing the lying Captain Cut 'n' Paste?

      Neither did I say anything about HAARP or satellites controlling minds however I can see that you feel a need to defend those two topics, which speaks volumes.

      While certainly satellites are capable of multi-tasking and sending out electronic frequencies designed to dull the senses, there are far easier ways to get the job done, do you really believe TVs are not sending more than just the images you see and hear, paleease.

      Our entire society is based on electronics from cell phones to refrigerators to microwaves to computers all in every home, any number of these devices could have signals emitting from them and the public would never know the difference. This not too mention cell phone towers and radar installations all over the USA and just because someone tells you they have shut down HAARP doesn't mean they have, get real.

      Next thing you will be telling me is the CIA no longer runs drugs because they said they don't or the NSA no longer eavesdrops on emails and phone conversations because Snowden outed them, make me laugh dude. I thought you were at least intelligent enough to understand that 'they' lie to us all the time, even when we catch them, they still lie.

      Wow, man, how the mighty have fallen, you need to get a grip on reality, I'm not asking you to believe anything I have to say, your mind doesn't work that way and that is OK but get real dude.

      I have my own proof and feel no need to provide it for others, I found it and so can you and others, that is up to you and not for me to provide, the answers are out there but to believe them and accept them they MUST be found on your own.

      You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink, meaning a closed mind is not going to accept anything you tell it but they might if they find it themselves.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Tsk, Tsk, Artofnoise, you are really worked up about something I could careless about . . . your opinion, it means nothing to me, you're not important.

      I don't care if you don't take me seriously, it won't change my sleeping patterns.

      To me 'science' was created as a means to an end, to convince folks they need to collect data and record 'evidence' for them to believe anything. The entire human language is designed to deceive the user, take the word believe for instance.

      BE describes a person or thing that exists, LIE describes a falsehood or deception, VE is a suffix meaning 'state of' or 'action'. So when humans believe something, they are in essence telling themselves to accept the existence of a falsehood or deception.

      If you say to yourself I believe chemtrails aren't real, what you are really telling yourself is that you accept the falsehood or deception of chemtrails and vise-versa. Look at the word EVIL, now spell it backwards LIVE, are you beginning to understand . . . you're getting played and the folks doing the playing are really good at it.

      I don't care if you don't take me seriously, I don't exist for you, I did not incarnate on this planet for your approval, I came here to plant a seed. Whether or not the seed grows is not my concern, nor is it my job to nurture it and make it grow.

      What I would like to emphasize is that about fifteen years ago I had the exact same opinion as Scott and you and 'believed' in science and evidence and proof but along the way as I accumulated knowledge, I had an epiphany that allowed me to see through the deception, I took the blue pill and now I listen and think with my heart.

      My seed began to sprout and hopefully someday yours will too.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 2 years ago from USA

      Believe actually comes to English from Proto-Indo-European by way of the Old High German "gelaubh." Ge- is an intensifying prefix and "laubh" means "to desire" or "to care for" - and is the root of our word "love."

      Before you start playing word games and making up conspiracies about the words we use, you should really do a bit of research on their history.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      and so 'to desire' or 'care for' would be the definition of the word believe, is that what you believe?

      Interesting that you would accept that premise however I don't see how that would negate my premise but only reinforce it.

      Again I was defining the word and you're describing its origin, two different concepts, this is how disinformation works.

      A desire to accept a false premise or care for the existence of a falsehood, I like it, it works for me, thank you.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      somethgblue, you have a really biased view of reality, that is not science works, science find evidence for what is true it doesn't look for evidence for what it believes is true or should be true. It is unbiased search for reality and how reality works. If you don't believe science works to those ends then you should stop using the things scientific discoveries have given you. Like... Everything we have.

      You want to believe that what I am stating is an opinion and not facts, fine, not my problem. You however have gone on to A-hole status here and I am pretty much done with your nut job conspiracy fantasy ideas which have ZERO evidence NONE. Just making connections where there are NONE. Believe what you like, I would rather believe what is true and what is real.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      and I quote "and I am pretty much done with your nut job conspiracy fantasy ideas" and yet you keep coming back to tell me this, Hmmm?!

      'Science' postulates theories and then goes out and creates evidence to support these theories by recording only the 'evidence' and 'data' that back up these ascertains.

      This is the time honored tradition of 'science' and because the sheep, such as yourself, 'believes' science is an honorable enterprise full of folks with high moral standards and integrity and would never lie to the sheep, you accept their word as the gospel, never recognizing that scientist are paid by Corporations and Government Grants and will create any evidence needed as long as the mortgage gets paid.

      Science routinely falsifies data to create and convince the sheep that their theories are indeed facts.

      "It is unbiased search for reality and how reality works." That is a good one, and I'm still smiling five minutes after I read it. I'm going to quote you on that one.

      The Brontosaurus was discovered in 1894 and is displayed in the Smithsonian Institute for millions to see, ten years later it was discovered to be hoax. Did 'science' correct their mistake, take down the display and remove it from our children's text books. NO THEY DID NOT, they merely ignored it, swept it under the rug and refuse to talk about it publicly. This ruse has persisted for over 100 years and this is such an inconsequential and minor aspect of science.

      Consider something really important, like I don't know . . . let's say poisoning the atmosphere with chemtrails. If scientist would lie about a big lizard to the public for over a century, do ya reckon they might just lie about something that could land them all in jail . . . Hmmm, let me think about that?

      and you call me a nut job, WOW!

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      The biggest problem with somthingblue is that he doesn't understand the concept of evidence, opinion, subjective or objective, or science.

      Science looks to evidence to discover what is true and REAL about everything in our universe. It uses evidence to construct models that can demonstrate and be tested and verified by ANYONE. If it doesn't work it is abandoned. There is nothing rational or realistic about chemtrails, it cannot be proven to be real or rational view of why planes have contrails. It cannot give a rational explanation and it cannot be demonstrated to be true. IT IS PARANOID DELUSION.

      And for the record smthngblue, I don't give a crap whether you think I am important or your opinion of me and nothing you say ad hominem will affect my opinion, point of view or feelings one way or the other.

      What angers me is how idiots like yourself can spread stupidity to others. Thoughtless, paranoid delusions... you are nothing better than a gossip monger, a rumor spreading nut bag.

      My challenge to you is answer those questions (you are not smart enough for that) provide evidence that shows chemtrails are real and their purpose is what you claim it is and that the results are evident. You will lose. You have nothing.

      Scott, feel free to delete this comment if you think it's too inflammatory, I apologize if it is.

    • lone77star profile image

      Rod Martin Jr 2 years ago from Cebu, Philippines

      A ludicrous poll. Highly biased. There is already too much "science" by ridicule in this world. That's the childish way to approach a topic.

      Some researchers have tested the water or rain after "chemtrails" and found massive increases in aluminum, barium and strontium. Soil chemistry has been changing, including pH from the increases in aluminum.

      One former military officer reported these same chemicals in vast quantities on base (in Oklahoma) for unstated purposes (highly suspicious). She found unnaturally high levels of these chemicals in the soil surrounding the base.

      Monsanto has apparently genetically modified some of its crops to withstand increases in aluminum in the soil. They also now have government protection against lawsuits from people damaged by their GMO crops. The Seralini study showed that mice overwhelmingly suffered from GMO's with high rates of massive cancers (20-30% of body weight), extreme allergies, sterility and early death. And the Seralini paper and one other critical of Monsanto were pulled by the peer-reviewed journal not long after a former Monsanto exec came to work as editor. Conspiracy? Perhaps.

      You seem to treat the topic of conspiracies as if they were "nutty." But conspiracies happen every minute. In my own college where I teach, 12 groups of students in one semester were caught by me cheating on exams, quizzes and projects. It's possible I caught all cheaters, but not likely. That's only one small college here in Cebu, Philippines. An NBC report a few years ago stated that 63% of American kids admitted to cheating in college, many of them conspiring with others. What about those who did not admit to cheating? And this is just in academia.

      There are some people who would kill to make a few extra dollars. Don't you think there are others who would kill for a few extra Billion dollars? Don't be an idiot. Your article seems to be based on an argument to ignorance type logical fallacy. You don't have evidence, so no evidence exists? That's very unscientific.

      From the early 50's, through the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's, I never, ever saw these persistent trails behind jets. And as an avid sky watcher and amateur astronomer, I notice such things. When these persistent trails started appearing in the early 2000s, I noticed. This was something new. I hated the fact that anything persisted in the sky besides natural clouds. As a former career artist, it ruined my sense of openness.

      You can buy the hype of the Corporate mainstream media -- the same ones who own the government (through lobbyists), and the military industrial complex waging illegal wars around the world. Bills are being passed through Congress that members don't even have time to read. Senator Rand Paul belabored this point in one of his speeches about the low approval rating of government. If you have even one gray cell, you would be outraged by this fact. The blind country being led by the blind Congress. But by whom?

      I have studied science most of my life.

      Yes, I believe in the nefarious chemtrail activities of our military, government and corporations, but contrary to your one poll answer, I am very knowledgeable about physics, fairly knowledgeable about chemistry, and highly knowledgeable about climatology. I was studying planetary climate in the early 70's and have followed the topic ever since.

      On physics, the perfect free fall of WTC7 on 9/11 proved that there was something else going on besides office fires. The NIST scientists committed scientific fraud (conspiracy!). Why? I can only guess. They were helping to cover up a crime, perhaps, just like Mayor Giuliani when he destroyed crime scene evidence more than 400 days before the official investigation began. And like the rewarding of the top military officers responsible for the massive security failures on 9/11 -- rewarding them with promotions instead of courts martial.

      Perhaps you like listening only to the Corporate Mainstream Media and their puppets. Perhaps you like getting your information only from the paid scientists who are afraid to lose their jobs. That's your fantasy.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Thank you Lone77star, I grew up on AF bases all over the world during the 60s and 70s and never saw persistent chem-trails in the sky from so-called jet exhaust, this is a recent phenomenon.

      However even Hub Pages has its debunker squad that gets paid to spread their sad rhetoric, so it matters very little what the truth is to these clowns, they wouldn't recognize it if b-slapped them.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      Do you have evidence to provide that states that chemtrails are real? Why do you nit site your sources? Do you have references to actual scientific studies that prove chemtrails are real or responsible for what you are pointing out? It seems that the people who believe chemtrails are real have no proof except a bunch of hearsay and paranoid delusions. We believe you are all nut jobs because you can state something is true, you can claim that this person or this person said that it was true, but NONE of you can provide any real evidence that chemtrails are real or responsible for what you claim they are responsible for.

      That is why we think chemtrails are the product of delusional nut jobs imaginations.

      "Hub Pages has its debunker squad that gets paid to spread their sad rhetoric" Evidence that chemtrails are a product of paranoid delusional nut jobs.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Yes, I have evidence, do you have evidence that there aren't real?

      I do 'nit' list my sources because if I can find them so can you, I do 'nit' think for you, that is your job.

      Someday, when I'm bored, maybe I will write a Hub article about it, until then you will just have to continue to wallow in your ignorance, it suits you well.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      Do you even see the ridiculousness of your statement? I asked you for evidence for something that you believe that I don't. If something is not real then the evidence for it does not exist. You asked me for evidence that something doesn't exist. Are you that stupid? You don't list your sources because you don't have any.

      The fact that you failed to provide any requested evidence for something proves there is none or maybe you are afraid I can and will debunk your sources as conspiracy nut jobs who also have no evidence

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      No, I have plenty of sources, however they're free for anyone with internet service and half a brain. Since we both know you have internet service that means you are either unwilling to find them for yourself or prefer others to do your thinking for you, which would put you in the half a brain category . . . why should I do your thinking for you?

      Believe what ever you want, it won't change my sleeping patterns at all.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      Or maybe I have looked at all available information on the internet, find them unconvincing, and find anyon who believes these "sources" to be gullible fools. These sites provide no convincing evidence supporting their claims other than the same old pictures and the same unbelievable conclusions. As for doing my thinking for me, why would I expect or want someone without a brain to even be able to do my thinking for me.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      It's really sad that you would think I haven't looked up these dubious claims of chemtrails, it's pathetic that you are totally UNABLE to provide any evidence for a claim YOU are making. Your statement is akin to a child with his imaginary friend "I can see him, it's not my problem that you can't."

      If you expect ANYONE to take you seriously or to take chemtrails or anything else you might claim as true then it is YOUR duty to provide evidence.

      It's not my problem you don't have any. AND NEVER WILL.

    • scottcgruber profile image
      Author

      scottcgruber 2 years ago from USA

      Lone Star: thank you for your feedback - I'm glad you liked the poll!

      As for the evidence you cited in your reply, I'm afraid none of it is conclusive proof of the chemtrail conspiracy. The presence of barium, strontium, and aluminum in rainwater, for example is evidence of barium, strontium, and aluminum in rainwater. It does not logically follow that these elements were sprayed out of airplanes - you are making this leap yourself with no justification.

      As for the alleged whistleblowers and GMO crops, these claims also fall apart upon closer examination. Not one chemtrail "whistleblower" has provided any documentation to prove that they were actually involved in chemtrail operations.

      The "aluminum resistant" GMO crops being developed are intended for use in acidic soils that produce aluminum ions from aluminum-containing minerals naturally present in soil. It is not possible to spray aluminum 3+ ions at cruising altitude - it would quickly combine with oxygen to produce aluminum oxide.

      Your claims that GMOs cause cancer are a subject for another hub entirely, as there's too much misinformation there to debunk in one comment. The short answer is that the study is horribly flawed which is why it was pulled from journals.

      Now I don't deny that conspiracies exist. They happen all the time, usually involving very small numbers of people. The chemtrail conspiracy would involve thousands of people in multiple industries and would require a massive paper trail, yet no whistleblower in 20 years has produced one conclusive bit of evidence.

      Now it's true that the lack of evidence for chemtrails doesn't prove that they don't exist. However, the existence of deliberately false evidence for chemtrails is a good indication that it is a hoax.

      There is no other explanation as to why someone would grab a photo of a ballast test plane or a firefighting plane or a cloud seeding operation and deliberately mislabel it as evidence of chemtrails. This is deliberate deception to promote a hoax, and you are contributing to this deception with your comment that cites false evidence for chemtrails.

      I have to wonder who is paying you to promote the chemtrail hoax and why. Care to name names?

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      I can only feel sorry for those who would fall for these paranoid delusional conspiracy theories without checking their validity. We do live in a world where the entire industry is destroying the environment, and killing it's residence. However, it is more an unintentional result caused by greed and stupidity and recklessness than an intended one. More damage is caused by the exhaust from transportation, the toxic waste washed into our rivers and oceans from these cities and factory farms, and our throw away society creating major landfills and nuclear power plants waste disposal and falling victim to natural disasters and human error. Not to mention most people's inability to take responsibility for the problems they help to cause. Let's blame someone else, the government, conspiracy theories, evil corporations for whom most regular people work for and unintentionally help cause the problems of this world because, hey, a paycheck is more important... or is it better to be unemployed and collecting food stamps and social security?

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      I can't seem to find the compassion to feel sorry for those truly deluded folks incapable of thinking for themselves and require others to do their thinking for them.

      When other more organic means exist to raise crops without polluting the environment with pesticides, creating non-polluting transportation systems and using biodegradable material instead of plastics and metal have existed for more than 100 years, then these things are obviously done on purpose.

      The sad pathetic fools that actually believe that our government and corporations have our best interests at heart as they engage in War after War, prevent new inventions from seeing the light of day and affect the health of every man, woman and child on the planet by creating unhealthy environments so they can reap the rewards from our Wealth Care System should be considered oxygen wasters and be prevented from breeding.

      Artblack01 you fit this bill perfectly and I can only say that hopefully one day you will awaken from your slumber of stupidity, you're truly a moron.

      Your Welcome.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      In the early 1900s Henry Ford constructed his first Model T completely from synthesized Hemp, the uses he invented, clean burning fuel, high viscosity oil, synthesized Hemp -glass for the body (10 times stronger than steel) threatened Big Steel, Big Oil and the paper empire run Hearst.

      The Powers That Be when learning of this CONSPIRED to make Hemp illegal (1937). Think about it, Hemp would of replace plastics and metal containers used from everything from food to every product out there. No big landfills would have been needed as Hemp is biodegradable and it only takes6 months to grow where trees need 20 years.

      When you pull your head out of your backside and recognize that you're being lied to, do your own research, turn the TV off and stop allowing others to condition you, then you have a chance of uncovering the truth.

      That is why I don't feel sorry for you the truth is out there for anyone to find with half a brain.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      Ha ha! I don't know where you get that I fit that bill at all. I can only conclude that it has to do with your inability to connect the real dots, your paranoid delusional conspiracy theory nut job mentality. I never said that the government wasn't corrupt, which it is, or that companies that help perpetuate our trash society, I think I made it clear that it does. You tend to blow things so out of proportion though it turns into an idiotic conspiracy theory that it isn't. It's about human greed. It's not about a conspiracy to make something purposefully bad. You'd have to be an idiot to think that.

      In some ways we are all here on the same page, that humanity is causing it's own demise. However hypocritical you are about it, you are just as responsible. The only difference between me and you is this inability to take responsibility for yourself. You live in this world too, yet what are you doing about it? Do you have your own garden that you cultivate your own produce? Do you use only recycled materials, do you recycle, do you take part in any sort of DIY culture? Do you take any steps to find real change and are you proactive in making the changes to you community? Do you take part in any sort of community action to make this world a better place?

      Also, being one that doesn't watch TV, who actually makes things without buying into mass media culture including the conspiracy theory mentality of paranoid delusional sheep, and being totally self reliant I can tell that you are not one of those people. You are all talk, when someone contradicts you you immediately play the blame game rather than do the research to actually do something to change things.

      You talk of hemp being readily available and cheap to use and better for the environment.... that may be so, but then you don't understand the history of why it isn't being used and chalk it up to some sort of stupid conspiracy theory.... corporations aren't known for starting to do something because it's expensive and bad they are in it to make a profit.... so the better question is, why isn't hemp profitable for companies to use? You ask all the wrong questions and why you don't get the answer you like you resort again to the childish blame game and jump to the conclusions conspiracy theory nuttery.

      You can't feel sorry for me, do you know why? Because you don't know me, you don't know what I believe in or how I live my life, or how I am nothing like you can imagine me to be.

      Yes the truth is out there, and you do need more than half a brain to find it, you have to be able to do the research, you have to be in love with the truth and reality.... none of which you are in touch with, That is why I feel sorry for you, you don't have half a brain, you are not capable of finding truth and you are an irresponsible child.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Yes, I have my own garden and am still eating vegetables from it, as it creates 80% of what I eat. I don't throw trash away as most people do and recycle 75% of it, my compost heaps will be used in this years garden. I give most of my produce to the homeless in my area and am part of a coop for local produce for the homeless.

      This country was started through hemp farmers, when this country began you could pay your taxes in hemp. Farmers were subsidized by the Government to grow hemp as it was used in everything from making clothes to paper and rope. The Declaration of Independence, the first American Flag and the Constitution were all made from hemp.

      Corporations don't use it because, The Powers That Be made it illegal to use in 1937, you're the one that needs to do some research. The University of Virginia actually got a Government Grant to research the health benefits of Hemp in the 70s and found that it could CURE most forms of Cancer, President Ford shut the project down.

      I know that you are a tool, unwilling to do any research, you're contemptible and false, a wannabe no brain slacker with a big mouth. However one day the seed I have planted in your feeble mind may grow and that is all I can hope for . . .

    • Insane Mundane profile image

      Insane Mundane 2 years ago from Earth

      My gawd!

      The comment field within this particular Hub about chemtrails has definitely became hilarious.

      How we went from a naughty conspiracy theory featuring massive clouds of stupid gas down to an eco-friendly Home Depot commercial that features hippie-like fugitives trying to solely survive on marijuana, sure beats the hell out of me; ha-ha!

      ...Just by sporadically signing into this site, it's almost a guaranteed good laugh for me, every time. Thanks, guys; keep up the good work. LOL!

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      Obviously the stupid gas is working.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      Wow, you are completely delusional. You need to seek professional mental help.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      and you just need to grow a brain

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      When the best you can do to convince someone that what you believe is true is tell them that they are either part of the conspiracy or brainless then you have nothing. Any insults and accusations from you are actually kind of laughable. Have a great time trying to convince people you are not a nut job.

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      . . . "is tell them that they are either part of the conspiracy or brainless . . . " or of course tell them they need to seek professional mental help, so by your own standards you have nothing, agreed.

      The entire profession of psychiatry was designed to institutionalize people, create mental diseases based on theory and speculation and promote the pharmaceutical industry, it has no basis in fact.

      Anyone that has grown up on military bases all over the world can tell the difference between chem-trails that hang in the sky for hours, if not days and con-trails that dissipate quickly.

      As Lone77star, alluded to in an earlier comment when we grew up in the 60s and 70s the skies were blue on cloudless days not criss-crossed with chem-trails, as they are now. It does not require you to use your Rocket Surgeon skills to figure out that this chem-trail program is not in the publics best interest.

      I have no need to prove anything as all have to do is look up in the sky, if you wish to live in denial that is your God given right, so by all means continue to wallow in your ignorance, don't wait for some one else to do your thinking for you.

    • artblack01 profile image

      artblack01 2 years ago from New Mexico

      I look up at the sky all the time, I am very interested in science, airplanes, space flight, astronomy, psychology, and physics... often when people make absolutely ridiculous claims like tou are making I will research them for their validity. Your claim has no basis in reality. As proven by your ad hominem attacks, your delusional claims that we are being paid to deny it, or that we are living in denial, all contradictory claims against us who have debunked your delusion. You attack or denial of your delusional claims but you have yet to prove them at all. This article we are commenting on goes into detail showing these chemtrails claims to be delusional and baseless. You have still provided zero evidence, just baseless claims... I have never seen a contrails last days, that is not even physically possible real or not.... delusional on your part. I have spent nice warm days in the sun watching planes for which I am fully familiar with their workings and not seen one contrail that could be considered a chemtrail. I know my science. I know how they form, I would know a chemical if it came from a plane's cargo, or sprayer, or exhaust. You can cry conspiracy all you like but you don't have evidence. You have nothing but ignorance of reality and ignorance of science. I feel sorry for you and I am done with your idiotic delusion. So either write and article that sites sources that have indisputable evidence that cannot be debunked or get a life and seek professional mental help (but since you don't believe in that based on your paranoid ignorance of the field I suggest you crawl back into your fantasy world and don't come out to bother those of us who are actually willing to investigate dubious and delusional claims because all you are is a pest)

    • Buildreps profile image

      Buildreps 2 years ago from Europe

      Interesting Hub about this rather emotional subject. Your article is written in a neutral tone, which I like. There is not a shred of evidence for it, like you state. People who believe in chemtrails are in most cases illiterate in physics. Impossible to argue with them.

      If chemtrails really would exist, the people responsible for them would be morons, unable to make an economic consideration. Flying around with planes full of chemicals is many times more expensive and much less effective then putting it in car gasoline. Why would anyone do such stupid things?

      "Chemtrails" exist already for decades in the form of very toxic fine dust exhausted by 1 billion cars every day, operated by ignorant people, happily driving around in their vehicle. This are the real "chemtrails".

      And the ignorance of people is responsible for this...

    • somethgblue profile image

      somethgblue 2 years ago from Shelbyville, Tennessee

      It is truly amazing how you remain so unbiased.

    Click to Rate This Article