ADDED: Folks, before you reply to this, do me a favour and read what I wrote fully. If you want to argue with me, do so in good faith and don't claim or infer I wrote something I did not write.
I think too many people confuse geo-engineering with "chemtrails". I am glad she said "Its a bit of conspiracy theory" and I do wish someone like Tucker handles this head on. Its not that hard to break it down.
[Cloud Seeding] - This is the most common thing that people claim is "chemtrails" but it happens at much lower altitude, and sprays Silver Iodide right into a forming storm system. No heavy metals in this. It does not explain the "chemtrails" as people claim the contrails
This seems to be the latest Research that concludes that this requires modification to civilian aircraft.
No one has been able to provide any evidence of this being deployed, or the modifications made to aircraft in large numbers to claim this explains the "chemtrails".
Alternate theories proposed by some theorists is that jet fuel is modified to add heavy metals that stays in the sky. Again, no one can provide any scientific foundation for this.
Final aspect is shooting mirrors into the sky. Again, I see a lot of talk about it, but cant seem to find anything concrete.
So ultimately folks, unless someone can provide either evidence for clandestine modifications of the planes, fuel etc, what you see in the sky is simply contrails.
That does not mean all these geo-engineering programs are benign. Who knows what happens if you inject SO2 into the stratosphere?
Does this mean they not poisoning us in a million ways? Of course they are.
BUT sadly all this is now encompassed under the term "chemtrails" which is like Flat Earth, is most probably a clown op to make us look stupid when we try to expose climate modification programs because anyone who does a bit of digging will realise there is no basis for claiming "chemtrails" exist.
Who are you and what did you do with bubble_bursts? LOL
"there is no basis for claiming "chemtrails" exist." ???
To the contrary.
I must ask who is that convinced you chemtrails do not exist?
Was it a government scientist? The same scientists trying to convince you that global warming is a threat to humanity? Harvard or Yale environmental professors? Same people who tried to convince you the vaccines were safe and effective? "Trust the science!"
Would there be a concerted effort by clandestine groups to convince the public that chemtrails are imaginary if it could be considered a crime against humanity and they were trying to avoid accountability? I would say yes.
We live with fact checkers like Snopes who have been shown to be bias, always pushing public attention away from the truth. Do you not think there are a group of upper level, government paid fact checkers with scientific backgrounds who could make a convincing argument that the white lines are normal contrails?
I am old enough to remember the times when white streaks across the sky did not exist. I have been following chemtrail theories since they started. Read many water sample reports analyzing the chemical compounds that are being found in remote pounds and lakes. Ya, the fact checkers always have an excuse as to why barium, strontium and aluminum is being found in concentrations that are hundreds of time normal levels and they are paid to make you question how it got there.
I think we have seen enough misdirection and lies in recent years from people who we were told to trust to come up with our own rational conclusions. If they are trying to poison us with a dozen different methods, why should we eliminate the air we breathe?
Can I just ask a couple questions as I’ve been confronted here on this hot topic a few times…
Why are you asking anons to prove without a shadow of a doubt that chemtrails are real?
This is a thread where an anon posted a video of Tucker Carlson. In fact this site is my only source of news, I wouldn’t have seen it elsewhere. I don’t follow people on YouTube or X etc.
Again, Tucker is posted here all the time, and it’s pretty obvious here he is being slick in his words and almost agreeing with what she says with questions.
For example the way he pauses her and says “wait so what are chemtrails?” In his questioning voice.
She says the whole “well that’s a little deep” and he chuckles “well hey most of these conspiracy’s turn out to be true!”
Then he completely throws away this act as he agrees with her. As she describes seeing the X and the clouds he says “YES!” not “huh? What?” Or “contrails you mean?”
Then the ultimate wink and nod that he knows exactly what she is talking about, and perhaps even knows to be true.
“I don’t think people look at the sky anymore…. I think people are looking at their iPhones so they don’t notice…” then laughs as he says people aren’t stargazing.
So reading in between the lines what is he implying? SHOULD people be looking at the sky? If so looking for WHAT? What does he think they are MISSING?
THEN he says how did you get into that? “Like NOTICING THINGS AROUND YOU AND WONDERING WHAT THEY ARE?”
So my questions are, should we be discussing if Tucker is a shill? Should we be discussing why Tucker shouldn’t entertain this or is wrong because we can’t prove it here? Should we NOT post Tucker who seems to be hitting all types of fringe conspiracy ideas as of late?
When the Govt was going UFO crazy I believe TUCKER made some VERY FRINGE and intriguing episodes that circulated here heavily.
I don’t remember ever seeing a mod post and then arguing over wether or not it could be PROVEN, wether or not alien tech could be proven.
So why can’t we post and discuss Tucker on weather mods but we can talk anything else Tucker, aliens, religion, I believe he even touched on some nephilim stuff with Barr etc…..
If I had to guess, I would say I started noticing the lines aprox 20 years ago, perhaps 25.
As a child, neighborhood friends would lay in the grass, often, and try to make shapes out of the passing clouds. Skies were always a bright blue, bright white clouds. Today, the skies are never a bright blue, they always have a white haze, even on the days without the lines. If you look at your horizon, even on a clear day, you will see the haze in the air.
You point out photos of persistent contrails from 1950's. That my friend would be an example of a plane dropping fuel in a risky landing situation where the plane was having flight complications. Those did not happen on a daily basis. There may be photos from the 50's but those were rare situations and cannot be used to explain every day occurrences.
You point out photos of persistent contrails from 1950's
Oh boy. I didn't think you were one of these people fren. Really? You did not even bother to ask me to show you the picture before jumping in with "That my friend would be an example of a plane dropping fuel in a risky landing situation where the plane was having flight complications".
Does this look like a plane making a risky landing? How many times did it make a risky landing? Or rather how many planed did this risky landing ?
Because until someone provides some evidence to back up this claim, its simply a conspiracy theory. Note that this is not a fringe conspiracy site and thats why encourage anons to do a bit of digging and come up with some evidence before claiming all kind of things.
Until I have 9 sources from regime approved government funded scientists and MSM professional liars, I wont believe my eyes.
As a contractor, I spend 6 days a week outside from the crack of dawn until dusk. I watch as the planes fly overhead and their trails spread in a thin layer covering the sky turning what the forecast called sunny skies into a high overcast. I watch this happen day after day. I have been working outside like this since I was 16. I am 59 now. This is 43 years worth of direct and persistent observation.
This is a fairly new phenomena. Not long ago you would watch as the trails behind the planes disappeared. Now I rarely see a day that doesnt turn overcast in the summer. I rarely see a day with the puffy white summer clouds that I saw daily not all the long ago.
And I put 2 and 2 together. I take my observations with what comes directly from the horses mouth. I believe them when they tell me they want to block the suns radiation to lessen 'climate change' and I can identify the vehicle with which they enact this plan.
Ill believe what I see everyday over what the government wants me to believe.
[Cloud Seeding] This is the most common thing that people claim is "chemtrails"
I don't think I have ever seen cloud seeding in Michigan but I have seen persistent trails up to the hundreds almost every day during the bush/obama years. In the 45 era they were noticeably down.
Would love to see if you kept a journal of photos, videos, weather conditions etc. Otherwise, not very useful for the discussion since contrails can linger for a long time based on atmospheric conditions.
They can but persistent trails used to be rarer than non-persistent. Now they are much more common than non-persistent. I understand non-persistent to mean dissipates within 90 seconds and usually less.
Couldn't have said it better. Eyeroll is the proper response when someone says there never used to be contrails or that most days were clear and sunny. I saw contrails in the 80s behave just as they do today. Only difference is more planes.
ADDED: Folks, before you reply to this, do me a favour and read what I wrote fully. If you want to argue with me, do so in good faith and don't claim or infer I wrote something I did not write.
I think too many people confuse geo-engineering with "chemtrails". I am glad she said "Its a bit of conspiracy theory" and I do wish someone like Tucker handles this head on. Its not that hard to break it down.
[Cloud Seeding] - This is the most common thing that people claim is "chemtrails" but it happens at much lower altitude, and sprays Silver Iodide right into a forming storm system. No heavy metals in this. It does not explain the "chemtrails" as people claim the contrails
Stratospheric Aerosol Injection - by injecting aerosols into the stratosphere, mainly SO2. No heavy metals in this as well.
This seems to be the latest Research that concludes that this requires modification to civilian aircraft.
No one has been able to provide any evidence of this being deployed, or the modifications made to aircraft in large numbers to claim this explains the "chemtrails".
Alternate theories proposed by some theorists is that jet fuel is modified to add heavy metals that stays in the sky. Again, no one can provide any scientific foundation for this.
Final aspect is shooting mirrors into the sky. Again, I see a lot of talk about it, but cant seem to find anything concrete.
So ultimately folks, unless someone can provide either evidence for clandestine modifications of the planes, fuel etc, what you see in the sky is simply contrails.
That does not mean all these geo-engineering programs are benign. Who knows what happens if you inject SO2 into the stratosphere?
Does this mean they not poisoning us in a million ways? Of course they are.
BUT sadly all this is now encompassed under the term "chemtrails" which is like Flat Earth, is most probably a clown op to make us look stupid when we try to expose climate modification programs because anyone who does a bit of digging will realise there is no basis for claiming "chemtrails" exist.
Who are you and what did you do with bubble_bursts? LOL
"there is no basis for claiming "chemtrails" exist." ???
To the contrary.
I must ask who is that convinced you chemtrails do not exist?
Was it a government scientist? The same scientists trying to convince you that global warming is a threat to humanity? Harvard or Yale environmental professors? Same people who tried to convince you the vaccines were safe and effective? "Trust the science!"
Would there be a concerted effort by clandestine groups to convince the public that chemtrails are imaginary if it could be considered a crime against humanity and they were trying to avoid accountability? I would say yes.
We live with fact checkers like Snopes who have been shown to be bias, always pushing public attention away from the truth. Do you not think there are a group of upper level, government paid fact checkers with scientific backgrounds who could make a convincing argument that the white lines are normal contrails?
I am old enough to remember the times when white streaks across the sky did not exist. I have been following chemtrail theories since they started. Read many water sample reports analyzing the chemical compounds that are being found in remote pounds and lakes. Ya, the fact checkers always have an excuse as to why barium, strontium and aluminum is being found in concentrations that are hundreds of time normal levels and they are paid to make you question how it got there.
I think we have seen enough misdirection and lies in recent years from people who we were told to trust to come up with our own rational conclusions. If they are trying to poison us with a dozen different methods, why should we eliminate the air we breathe?
Tell me, in your mind in which decade did these white streaks across the sky started?
Can I just ask a couple questions as I’ve been confronted here on this hot topic a few times…
Why are you asking anons to prove without a shadow of a doubt that chemtrails are real?
This is a thread where an anon posted a video of Tucker Carlson. In fact this site is my only source of news, I wouldn’t have seen it elsewhere. I don’t follow people on YouTube or X etc.
Again, Tucker is posted here all the time, and it’s pretty obvious here he is being slick in his words and almost agreeing with what she says with questions.
For example the way he pauses her and says “wait so what are chemtrails?” In his questioning voice.
She says the whole “well that’s a little deep” and he chuckles “well hey most of these conspiracy’s turn out to be true!”
Then he completely throws away this act as he agrees with her. As she describes seeing the X and the clouds he says “YES!” not “huh? What?” Or “contrails you mean?”
Then the ultimate wink and nod that he knows exactly what she is talking about, and perhaps even knows to be true.
“I don’t think people look at the sky anymore…. I think people are looking at their iPhones so they don’t notice…” then laughs as he says people aren’t stargazing.
So reading in between the lines what is he implying? SHOULD people be looking at the sky? If so looking for WHAT? What does he think they are MISSING?
THEN he says how did you get into that? “Like NOTICING THINGS AROUND YOU AND WONDERING WHAT THEY ARE?”
So my questions are, should we be discussing if Tucker is a shill? Should we be discussing why Tucker shouldn’t entertain this or is wrong because we can’t prove it here? Should we NOT post Tucker who seems to be hitting all types of fringe conspiracy ideas as of late?
When the Govt was going UFO crazy I believe TUCKER made some VERY FRINGE and intriguing episodes that circulated here heavily.
I don’t remember ever seeing a mod post and then arguing over wether or not it could be PROVEN, wether or not alien tech could be proven.
So why can’t we post and discuss Tucker on weather mods but we can talk anything else Tucker, aliens, religion, I believe he even touched on some nephilim stuff with Barr etc…..
Where did I say this? Did you read my full post? Did you read the very first line? What did I say about making claims that I said what I did not say?
And where did I say you should not post Tucker ? The fact that it is up and being discussed should already answer the question.
If I had to guess, I would say I started noticing the lines aprox 20 years ago, perhaps 25.
As a child, neighborhood friends would lay in the grass, often, and try to make shapes out of the passing clouds. Skies were always a bright blue, bright white clouds. Today, the skies are never a bright blue, they always have a white haze, even on the days without the lines. If you look at your horizon, even on a clear day, you will see the haze in the air.
You point out photos of persistent contrails from 1950's. That my friend would be an example of a plane dropping fuel in a risky landing situation where the plane was having flight complications. Those did not happen on a daily basis. There may be photos from the 50's but those were rare situations and cannot be used to explain every day occurrences.
Oh boy. I didn't think you were one of these people fren. Really? You did not even bother to ask me to show you the picture before jumping in with "That my friend would be an example of a plane dropping fuel in a risky landing situation where the plane was having flight complications".
Does this look like a plane making a risky landing? How many times did it make a risky landing? Or rather how many planed did this risky landing ?
https://imgur.com/a/tY6NuTK
From the book Cloud studies in colour
If you call them chemTrails it’s debunked. It’s 1984 and words matter. Cloud seeding is an approved name.
But "geoengineers" have proposed spraying 'aerosols' high in the atmosphere to reflect sunlight, counteracting global warming.
Did you read what I wrote? All covered in there.
You say there are no heavy metals in what they spray. How do you know that?
They are full of aluminum.
Because until someone provides some evidence to back up this claim, its simply a conspiracy theory. Note that this is not a fringe conspiracy site and thats why encourage anons to do a bit of digging and come up with some evidence before claiming all kind of things.
Until I have 9 sources from regime approved government funded scientists and MSM professional liars, I wont believe my eyes.
As a contractor, I spend 6 days a week outside from the crack of dawn until dusk. I watch as the planes fly overhead and their trails spread in a thin layer covering the sky turning what the forecast called sunny skies into a high overcast. I watch this happen day after day. I have been working outside like this since I was 16. I am 59 now. This is 43 years worth of direct and persistent observation.
This is a fairly new phenomena. Not long ago you would watch as the trails behind the planes disappeared. Now I rarely see a day that doesnt turn overcast in the summer. I rarely see a day with the puffy white summer clouds that I saw daily not all the long ago.
And I put 2 and 2 together. I take my observations with what comes directly from the horses mouth. I believe them when they tell me they want to block the suns radiation to lessen 'climate change' and I can identify the vehicle with which they enact this plan.
Ill believe what I see everyday over what the government wants me to believe.
We have already discussed all of this in this thread. Please take a look first, dont want to repeat the same arguments again and again.
I don't think I have ever seen cloud seeding in Michigan but I have seen persistent trails up to the hundreds almost every day during the bush/obama years. In the 45 era they were noticeably down.
NOTICEABLY down…. Exactly.
The thick clean air on nights after a REAL storm passed with the round blooming natural clouds…. SURREAL….
Would love to see if you kept a journal of photos, videos, weather conditions etc. Otherwise, not very useful for the discussion since contrails can linger for a long time based on atmospheric conditions.
They can but persistent trails used to be rarer than non-persistent. Now they are much more common than non-persistent. I understand non-persistent to mean dissipates within 90 seconds and usually less.
That understanding is wrong, even according to cloud books from as long back as 1957. They can last for hours and sometimes even become clouds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8D0kX3O0anY
Couldn't have said it better. Eyeroll is the proper response when someone says there never used to be contrails or that most days were clear and sunny. I saw contrails in the 80s behave just as they do today. Only difference is more planes.