Ronald_antly 2:56 Sun Aug 7
Chemtrails
|
|
Real or just the product of a far too vivid imagination?
|
|
|
Replies - Newest Posts First ( Show In Chronological Order)
White Pony
10:09 Thu Aug 11
Re: Chemtrails
|
You're all wasting valuable minutes of your lives arguing about this. Stop it now.
|
AfM
9:01 Thu Aug 11
Re: Chemtrails
|
Indeed, cholo.
Piston has effectively done this:
General position: Aliens haven't landed on earth
Piston: people go on holiday.
|
cholo
8:51 Thu Aug 11
Re: Chemtrails
|
This is what happens when the op fails to define what he means by the subject matter. It's easy to post-rationalise if you're suitably vague enough.
|
AfM
8:38 Thu Aug 11
Re: Chemtrails
|
Both those things are a million miles from
Chemtrails and an utter irrelevance.
Nice try though.
The rest of your post is just plain silly, piston.
|
PistonHammered
4:16 Thu Aug 11
Re: Chemtrails
|
AfM 11:20 Wed Aug 10
A little tetchy tonight aren't we AfM, you sound annoyed.
You are most definitely incorrect in your assumption that I am trying to muddy the waters. I was prompted to post because of ogn's ugly post about the OP and I didn't see the need for it. So my posts have not only established that our atmosphere is most certainly interfered with by government bodies, we have also shone light on the fact that said government bodies uses it own citizens as unknowing guinea pigs as they spray them with harmful substances, whether it be large or small quantities is of no consequence, we are supposed to be free men.
So moving forward, as I mentioned in a previous post, the argument surely becomes "are these experiments harmful to the population?"
Now you and others obviously say no, they are not but why oh why does it annoy you so much that there are others that show concern? I don't get it.
I suppose it's because Clinton or Trump gives you a warm, cuddly glow of security inside, as you lay and dream of the world we live in. There are others that have nightmares when they see these two being offered the job of leading the free world.
But chemtrails? I don't give a fuck, there's bigger fish to fry.
|
The Cult Of Bob
1:23 Thu Aug 11
Re: Chemtrails
|
Have lizard people been implicated in these shocking crimes against humankind yet? I hope so.
I fucking love lizards.
|
AfM
11:21 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
Yes, and the science there and the debates there are wholly different and utterly irrelevant.
|
AfM
11:20 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
It appears that you're trying to muddy the water by referring to utterly irrelevant things and pretending they are somehow relevant to the chemtrail nonsense.
Bit silly really.
|
PistonHammered
11:19 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
AfM 11:11 Wed Aug 10
It was never my intent to connect the two, my point was about science.
|
PistonHammered
11:16 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
See, here's the thing though AfM. I haven't actually given you my opinion on whether chemtrails exist or not, have I? I have only been trying to establish whether government organizations put chemicals into our atmosphere and I think I have done that with a little reluctant help from Lily.
I'll leave the chemtrail argument for others to squabble over. It;s not for me.
|
peroni
11:13 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
I cannot believe how many idiots believe all these ludicrous conspiracy theories. Maybe there really is something in the air.
|
AfM
11:11 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
And if you can't see that the debate about quantum mechanics are a universe away from chemtrail idiocy then you are plain wrong.
|
AfM
11:08 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
Wed Aug 10
If you can't see the difference between that and the chemtrail conspiracy nonsense then you are actually an idiot. You can though, can't you?
|
PistonHammered
11:04 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
AfM 10:41 Wed Aug 10
No, it is you that fails to get it and I don't understand why. It all becomes a simple interpretation of a scientific discovery, that's it. In it's simplest term it's a straight forward acceptance of the obvious truth that sit there before the scientist. It's when this becomes a battle between who is right out of two factions that we then pick our sides. In the end only one will be correct.
It's happens all the time and you know it.
BTW, who won the dispute between Albert Einstein and Neils Bohr?
|
PistonHammered
10:55 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
From Lily's link
"Not in dispute, though, is the fact that the Army exposed people around the country to a poorly studied and potentially harmful chemical, without their consent".
Many on here wouldn't have a problem with this but in principle alone I absolutely have a problem with this. I decide what I want to subject my body to, not some army cunt sitting at his desk.
|
riosleftsock
10:45 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
For you AfM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLvA-o9RV6M
|
AfM
10:41 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
No, piston. You don't get it.
You're falling into the trap of pointing out that scientists disagree ok things and making that read like science cannot be trusted.
That shows a very basic misunderstanding.
That's not an insult. It's very common and is exacerbated by the way the media represent things.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. The fact remains that for all that muddying of the water, there is no sense at all in this chemtrail conspiracy.
|
PistonHammered
9:52 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
And before you pipe up with your "science can't be wrong", yeah I get it. You know full well that I am referring to our understanding of the facts as we uncover them.
|
PistonHammered
9:44 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
AfM, now you of all people attacking ME with insults isn't very scientific now, is it? Instead of dealing with the facts you chose to bury your head in the sand and fail to admit that scientists can be political beings as well. Science can be pushed by a person when large money is deposited into their research fund. I don't know if you are being purposefully obtuse but from Einstein to Bohr there have been scientists that disagree with each other but eventually one is proven wrong and the other is proven right. It's a pretty simple fact that most in this world can grasp.......except you, maybe. It's not all far off spooky science is it?
Now I didn't want our conversation to go this way but oh well, your choice.
I understand science as well as you but maybe you know more facts, maybe not, but understand this, science can absolutely get it wrong! History has proven this over and over. You can't have it that all scientists get it a little right (I know some do) and others come along and improve on an incorrect hypothesis. The food industry is ripe with scientists in the 60s and 70s getting it wrong.
May I suggest that the scientists of this world are having a similar argument over the cause of global warming and Co2 and whether it's man made or not. Or whether it's the effect of the sun or not. Or whether Co2 will harm our oceans or not. One day someone will be proven right and someone will be wrong. We are mere bystanders as we watch this debate unfold.
|
Lily Hammer
9:14 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
http://www.livescience.com/23795-large-area-coverage-dangers.html
A bit about it here.
|
Lily Hammer
9:13 Wed Aug 10
Re: Chemtrails
|
All this chemtrail stuff is quite probably hysterical nonsense, but it won't die down because of the core of truth about the concept, which is the infamous Operation LAC.
This was when the US military sprayed Cadmium Sulfide over areas in the states in the 50s and 60s. They did it to measure and monitor how chemical attacks could spread with the weather. I don't think they meant harm in any sinister way, but the stuff may have caused some birth defects, but most opinions were it was a relatively harmless amount,the equivalent of a pack of cigarettes worth of it (it's found in cigarettes, along with all kinds of wonderful shit) over a period of 31 months.
So it was secret, and embarrassing when they had to apologise later, but not part of an evil plan, just a case of "Whoops, best not continue this study, hope nobody finds out, oh shit they found out, sorry." End of story.
|
| 
