posted 01-17-2004 01:06 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by JerseyBluEyz:
With SMT's mention of HR2977, this makes three times the bill was posted in this thread. Letxa, I think this means the document is an important disclosure - you might want to read the whole proposal.

---

I already did. I'll give you a preview that I do not see it (so far) as being as damning as some people seem to, especially taken in the context in which it was written. But I am trying to reserve all my comments until I've read everything I'm being presented with so as not to comment on one piece until I've read all the other pieces since other pieces may eventually modify my understanding of the original piece.

Everyone is so excited in me reading all this material, please keep the links coming and please let me read them. My lack of response or acknowledgement of any given link doesn't mean I'm ignoring it. It means I'm still reading it and/or all the other links. I'll surely have comments or questions when I've digested it all.

quote:

---

I also got to thinking - if you've done your research as stated, why aren’t you aware of the various lab results performed and posted on the net? You also should have had access to information on the fibrils and Morgellons skin disorder - right? If you are aware of all this, what exactly is it that you are not GETTING? Or better still, where do you think the fibrils, toxic compounds, etc. are coming from?

---

I have read some studies regarding alledged effects of chemtrails, both chemical and biological. I'm sure I will get to them all as I read the links you are all presenting to me.

I do not presume to know where any given chemical or bacteria found in the environment or our body comes from, but I know there is literally an infinite number of possible sources in nature or in our industrial society that does not require a chemtrail explanation. Studies that look at certain illnesses, molds, or objects under a microscope are all interesting--but, so far, it seems they all assume that I already believe they are coming from chemtrails. I haven't gotten to that point yet so many of these "studies" are premature (for me) and are working on an assumption I do not yet accept as reality.

posted 01-17-2004 02:32 AM            

On the link I gave you about chemtrails on educate yourself.com, the introduction given is for beginners and takes you through to the other documents related to it. I truly feel this will help you understand the technology and the reasoning behind the spraying as well as define the spraying itself. That's why I gave you these two links.

I asked you to please read as much as you can on those links and then post back, not asking individual questions and what do you do? You ask a simple question that could have easily been answered in the two links I gave you. I'm sorry if I offended you, but it's also frustrating from my end when I give you information, the links of where to find it, and you go ahead and ask the simplist of questions anyway. See?

Another point? Not everyone on this board expresses themselves in the same way and not everyone uses exaggeration in the same way nor are we all the same people, nor do we live in the same geographical areas.

You may or may not see spraying in your area, either. But obviously most of us do see chemtrails in our various locations. I see them about four days out of seven. And I've also seen jets at the same time that fly at a similar altitude and DO NOT leave trails. Their trails are contrails that simply dissipate and disappear behind them. Military aircraft are not the only ones involved, either. Many airliners are equipped with tanks and nozzles that spray as well. I've seen maps that show spraying in certain areas to control the weather patterns and on the carnicom link and the educate yourself link is a document from the US Air Force that explains their intentions to learn to control the weather. This is the most so-called benign reason behind the spraying. You can find a link to weather maps with highlighted chemtrail spraying and weather influences in Chemtrail Science.

After reading the intro and articles on educate yourself, you would then be ready to further your investigation at carnicom, which JBE gave you, but the carnicom link I gave you contains all the documents, testimonies, experiments, articles, and other evidence to prove the case that chemtrails are different than contrails and are laid down for various purposes and for various experimentations.

The main particles observed and on record in government documents are aluminum and barium. You will learn that. One company in Florida, producing a gel-like substance that has also been found on the ground and tested (called Dy-no-gel) has even announced that they produce a product used in cloud manipulation. Particulate matter, aluminum and barium, is also used in low frequency transmission through the air mass with applications for advanced communications as well as field and large-scale weaponry of the electro-magnetic wave variety (reference HAARP). All of this is explained in the various physics papers offered from Tesla through Eastlund, to patents -- all of which are documented as well on both sites. So there is quite a bit of information to absorb.

It must be difficult to accept, and I can relate because I couldn't accept the notion of my government spraying above populations, either. But my reading convinced me. It makes sense. There are also photographs of field spraying over military land sites and NASA photos of various sprayings over certain areas of the U.S. as well that I've seen. Once you start looking at the pics you'll see hundreds of pictures from various locales of grid pattern spraying, parallel line spraying, and up-close pics of the spray nozzles themselves separate from the exhaust jet systems, not to mention the chemtrail clouds themselves and their distinct behavior and shapes setting them apart from natural cloud formations. I'm telling you, the information on spraying is overwhelming.

Now, for me, the big question is, are they merely trying to control the weather and experimenting on the weather and in so doing inadvertently harming our breathing atmosphere? Anyone knows that barium and aluminum breathed into the lungs cannot be good for us, only another irritant and since much spraying is done at high altitudes where it has been conjectured and stated by meteorologists that various bacterias and molds reside. When the heavier particulate matter then descends into the lower levels and finally to the ground, these particulates can force the molds and bacterias to the breathable lower air levels. Now whether that is done purposefully or is merely a bi-product of the experimentation is anyone's guess. In these experiments I feel it's an unexpected consequence. However, in the case of actual fibers discovered in the fallen debris from spraying, which have been collected, examined in labs and found to be fibers not related to anything natural, not even spider's webs, one has to wonder -- what the hell is going on? Why fibers? In some of these fiber samples actual human blood cells were found! I know -- weird!

So you see, once you read enough and find that many are collecting samples, questioning, trying to pass bills, finding documentation as to the experiments, finding patents related to experiments, monitoring, taking pics and through these actions and observations do indeed know that the chemtrails differ from contrails, knowing the composition of both and knowing the difference -- you can see why people are questioning and wondering why all the secrecy?

Is the spraying used for weather manipulation, biochem warfare experimentation, communications and weaponry experimentation? Or all of the above -- at various times in various locations?

If you are confused from this, you'll realize how much more information you have yet to read and understand. I thought I was quite kind and clear on what you needed to do to learn about this subject. Your previous readings must not have made sense to you in any way, so I would just start at square one, which is why I offered the educate yourself site, as it presents a great introduction and classic documents and articles.

Of course, as Mech said, it's up to you whether you want to accept the evidence as it is so far on the chemtrail issue.

Happy reading! Take your time and we'll be standing bye!

bc

posted 01-17-2004 09:02 AM            

it is critical in more fully understanding the chemtrail program(s).
--------------------------------------------
lexta2000-"I need to believe they exist before I enter into the phase of analyzing their supposed effects. I hope this makes sense to everyone from a logical investigative standpoint."
--------------------------------------------

SmT- No, that doesn't make any sense at all to me, in a way you are working backwards and closing off an avenue to data that is critical to more fully understanding chemtrails. If one is attempting to understand the different types of "exhaust" coming from behind planes, there is NO better way than to experience it in person and as often as possible. If one wants to understand the mating habits of the Siberian nuthatch or Australian jackrabbit one can read about it all day, but nothing probably is as useful as a few days spent in the bush with a powerful pair of binocs, or perhaps a few years there.

You attempt to work to prove a negative asking something that you must realize is futile in this case.

You appear to be working so hard to disprove chemtrails argueing just along that fine line of thought, when all the while,
weather modification programs are well known to exist using chemicals to modify the weather and therefore by definition are "chemtrails". Yes, chemtrail programs exist it is a FACT. See with your OWN eyes.

posted 01-17-2004 12:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boomer Chick:
On the link I gave you about chemtrails on educate yourself.com, the introduction given is for beginners and takes you through to the other documents related to it. I truly feel this will help you understand the technology and the reasoning behind the spraying as well as define the spraying itself. That's why I gave you these two links.

---

I've read all the material on the educate-yourself link you gave me and, honestly, didn't find anything that helped me believe that chemtrails are different than contrails. I saw at least one link that wanted me to buy a $29 book from someone that seems to specialize in alternate medicine, I saw one link that explains how to build a fix-the-sky kit, another that talks about "current affairs" of Chemtrails, and another that seems to be a new age "prayer" that will solve the chemtrail problem if enough people recite it (something that sounds neither scientific nor compatible with my Christian beliefs).

The second link, carnicom, is huge. The problem is it is so huge I have yet to find the information I'm looking for. Can you tell me where on that site I can find compelling information that suggests that chemtrails are different than contrails, and how to distinguish them? I would think this information would be in bold-face print at the top of every chemtrail site since it's the most obvious question anyone is going to ask when they first start reading about the topic.

quote:

---

I'm sorry if I offended you, but it's also frustrating from my end when I give you information, the links of where to find it, and you go ahead and ask the simplist of questions anyway. See?

---

Please understand that I am reading the links I've been given. My "simplist of questions" are being asked because, in my mind, what I've read so far does NOT address these simplist of questions... hence my ongoing quest for a site or webpage that does.

Perhaps you are all so far into this topic that you've forgotten how you got there. I would expect someone somewhere would have a concise, scientific explanation of the difference between chemtrails and contrails and how to distinguish them. Once I have that, and if the explanation is convincing, then all this other information will be useful to me. I'm not there yet, though.

quote:

---

And I've also seen jets at the same time that fly at a similar altitude and DO NOT leave trails. Their trails are contrails that simply dissipate and disappear behind them.

---

But why would you believe that this is evidence of chemtrails rather than just changing atmospheric conditions? The atmosphere is not stable. We see clouds in the middle of a cloud-less sky, and those clouds move, form, and disappear. Likewise, the invisible conditions that may favor contrail conditions can move, form, and disappear. So why would you necessarily think this is evidence of chemtrails rather than simply changing atmospheric conditions?

quote:

---

Military aircraft are not the only ones involved, either. Many airliners are equipped with tanks and nozzles that spray as well.

---

Do we have someone that works at American or United airlines that has proven this? Or why do we think that airliners have such spraying equipment?

quote:

---

After reading the intro and articles on educate yourself, you would then be ready to further your investigation at carnicom, which JBE gave you, but the carnicom link I gave you contains all the documents, testimonies, experiments, articles, and other evidence to prove the case that chemtrails are different than contrails and are laid down for various purposes and for various experimentations.

---

As I've said, I don't doubt the evidence is there. But there are so many links I have not found it. Can you tell me specifically where on carnicom I can find information on the differences between chemtrails and contrails, and how to distinguish the two?

quote:

---

The main particles observed and on record in government documents are aluminum and barium. You will learn that.

---

I've seen that mentioned on numerous sites. I just haven't seen anything that convinces me that they come from chemtrails.

quote:

---

It must be difficult to accept, and I can relate because I couldn't accept the notion of my government spraying above populations, either.

---

It is not difficult for me to believe. That is to say, I'm under no illusion that the government is some honest, ethical entity that would never do something like this. However, I do need convincing proof to believe that such a secret "spraying program" actually exists and that what I'm seeing is anything different from contrails. In my mind I'm looking at contrails. I need something pretty darned compelling to convince me that what I'm seeing isn't contrails but rather some secret, worldwide spraying program.

[quoet]But my reading convinced me. It makes sense.[/quote]

My point is that, to me, contrails adequately explain everything I've seen. That is not to say it explains sicknesses, but I have yet to see anything that, to my satisfaction, links con/chemtrails to sicknesses. Such links do not adequately exclude other probable sources of sickness in the environment.

quote:

---

There are also photographs of field spraying over military land sites and NASA photos of various sprayings over certain areas of the U.S. as well that I've seen. Once you start looking at the pics you'll see hundreds of pictures from various locales of grid pattern spraying, parallel line spraying, and up-close pics of the spray nozzles themselves separate from the exhaust jet systems, not to mention the chemtrail clouds themselves and their distinct behavior and shapes setting them apart from natural cloud formations. I'm telling you, the information on spraying is overwhelming.

---

I will restate something here... If I see pictures of a plane obviously spraying something, great, I have nothing to argue there. My problem is with the belief that contrails that I see at thousands of feet of elevation are anything but contrails. My problem is with the belief that contrails can't appear in parallel lines or in grids under perfectly innocent conditions. My problem is with the belief that these "chemtrail clouds" are really behaving in a way that normal contrails could not.

These are the nagging questions I still have after having read dozens of pages on the topic. I am simply not able to take the "next step" and review the supposed effects of chemtrails when I honestly have doubts of the most basic claim: That some contrails are actually chemtrails.

quote:

---

However, in the case of actual fibers discovered in the fallen debris from spraying, which have been collected, examined in labs and found to be fibers not related to anything natural, not even spider's webs, one has to wonder -- what the hell is going on?

---

And I have to wonder.. how do they know these fibers fell from spraying? How do they know it didn't come with the wind blown from something upwind of the location?

quote:

---

Why fibers? In some of these fiber samples actual human blood cells were found! I know -- weird!

---

I don't know enough about human biology to know how weird that is or isn't. But I also know we are what we eat and breathe and what we eat and breathe comes from many places besides chemtrails.

quote:

---

If you are confused from this, you'll realize how much more information you have yet to read and understand. I thought I was quite kind and clear on what you needed to do to learn about this subject. Your previous readings must not have made sense to you in any way, so I would just start at square one, which is why I offered the educate yourself site, as it presents a great introduction and classic documents and articles.

---

And as I said above, unfortunately, none of the information at educate yourself seemed compelling to me. It struck me as commercial (selling books and chembuster kits), information for chemtrailers (those that already believe it, not those that are trying to), and esoteric/New Age (asking me to recite some new age prayer to somehow destroy chemtrails which strikes me as inherently unscientific). No offense to you intended, but the educate-yourself link honestly did as much to push me away from chemtrails as it did to make me understand them.

posted 01-17-2004 12:18 PM            

quote:

---

Me: I need to believe they exist before I enter into the phase of analyzing their supposed effects. I hope this makes sense to everyone from a logical investigative standpoint."

Show-Me Truth: SmT- No, that doesn't make any sense at all to me, in a way you are working backwards and closing off an avenue to data that is critical to more fully understanding chemtrails. If one is attempting to understand the different types of "exhaust" coming from behind planes, there is NO better way than to experience it in person and as often as possible.

---

Ok, granted, if I saw "spraying" then that would answer one question in my mind. But that's not what I was saying.

So much of the chemtrail documentation regards what is supposedly in the spray and the effects it has on people--but I'm not convinced there is any spraying yet so the analysis of what supposedly is in the spray or its effects is premature.

quote:

---

You attempt to work to prove a negative asking something that you must realize is futile in this case.

---

I don't think so. I'm simply looking for a scientific explanation of the difference between contrails and chemtrails and how one goes about distinguishing the two.

If it is scientific then I can research the scientific basis of the explanation and concldue whether the explanation makes sense. If it does, then I continue to read on the chemtrails topic. If it doesn't then I conclude that if not even the scientific explanation is correct, why should I believe the rest?

quote:

---

You appear to be working so hard to disprove chemtrails argueing just along that fine line of thought, when all the while, weather modification programs are well known to exist using chemicals to modify the eather and therefore by definition are "chemtrails". Yes, chemtrail programs exist it is a FACT. See with your OWN eyes.

---

I'm not saying that weather modification has not been attempted in the past or maybe still in the present. And if that's the extent of chemtrails then I see no reason for me to even continue--I believe that there may be attempts to modify the weather and would not find that to be particularly disturbing.

posted 01-17-2004 01:07 PM            

Well, lexta, if you refuse to use personal sky observation as a tool in discovering chemtrails then you will as I said before, only make your journey to learning about them virtually impossible. If you're not going to look up and see until you become convinced there is any spraying, and not going to be convinced of any spraying until you look up and see then you have quite a dilema, waiting only on observations made by others. But then I guess that's your choice.To me however, it reminds me of a dog chasing it's tail, the infamous catch 22.

lexta2000-"I'm not saying that weather modification has not been attempted in the past or maybe still in the present."

SmT- Well,then are you saying it has and is, or that you just don't know? Of course it has using chemtrails. Admit it. Chemtrails by definition are KNOWN to be real.Like the 12 step program you must admit this to yourself until you can proceed further. Surely if you have done your homework as you said, you would be very aware of the numerous experiments and weather modification efforts underway. Check out the WMO site among others. Check out private weather modification services. Ask yourself relevant questions such as how the military is implementing it's stated desire to own the weather. Ask yourself if mainstream science is funding geoengineering particulate scattering experiments what these look like. How much research have you done into geoengineering schemes? How much are you aware of the huge amounts of funding going into geoengineering research from companies such as Exxon and G.E. through univerities such as Stanford? What exactly do you think these hundreds of millions of dollars are physically being use for, when these very institutions are calling strongly for geoengineering as a solution to what THEY are calling 'global warming'?

Here's another related link to view from another scientist that posts here occasionally that clearly states info about Chemtrails NOT contrails:
http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/jimphelps.html

posted 01-17-2004 09:42 PM            

I just revisited the educate yourself site which, yes, has a book on it, but it's a book about chemtrails written by Len Horowitz. It is given, as all informational sites give, as a resource. There's another book on the subject called "Angels Don't Play That Harp" if I'm not mistaken. Check your library or better yet, skip that link and go on! There are so many links on that site including Barium Blues which offers more links. There are links to Thomas, links to Carnicom and I refuse to do your work for you, Letxa!

I warned you about your possible turn-offs like the spiritual things or other of your "pet" turn offs!

I'm done! Carnicom is also offered as a link on educate yourself and you're just plain lazy! Sorry, but that's how you're coming across, lazy and bigoted! Bigoted means holding closed minded views toward anything that to you smacks of "strange" or "unusual." A "turn-off." Why not just skip that stuff?

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink!

Let's put it this way. If you were given an assignment in college to do a research paper on chemtrails and carnicom, Thomas's site, Barium Blues, and other links were given or you found them to be the most informational and you were allowed and encouraged to do online research, would you go back to the instructor or professor and complain that people were posting books and weird spiritual mumbo-jumbo or would you just go for the articles to support your research?

Please! I will not hand feed you links from Carnicom's site! I read and read and read on that site and on both sites I gave you are the most informational when using the links as any online. There's also http://radarmatrix.com and a host of other links even listed on Carnicom's!

I truly don't care at this point! If you really want to know, you will do what it takes, otherwise, just face the fact that you don't want to know. Like any research project you must sift through some articles that aren't informational and only include the ones that are truly informational and not just theories.

Back in the early nineties the skies were often clear -- totally! Did jets and airliners change their jet fuel formulas? I see what I see in the skies and this confirms all the reading.

Please don't respond to this line by line -- your time would be better spent in research!

bc

posted 01-19-2004 03:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Show-Me Truth:
Well, lexta, if you refuse to use personal sky observation as a tool in discovering chemtrails then you will as I said before, only make your journey to learning about them virtually impossible. If you're not going to look up and see until you become convinced there is any spraying, and not going to be convinced of any spraying until you look up and see then you have quite a dilema, waiting only on observations made by others.

---

The reason I am asking for scientific information regarding the difference between chemtrails and contrails and how to distinguish the two is so that I can look up at the sky myself and observe it myself. But until I understand the difference between chemtrails and contrails and how to distinguish them, looking up at the sky isn't going to help me much, is it? I'm just going to see contrails. I need some information so I can tell if I'm supposedly looking at a contrail or a chemtrail.

quote:

---

SmT- Well,then are you saying it has and is, or that you just don't know? Of course it has using chemtrails. Admit it. Chemtrails by definition are KNOWN to be real.

---

If this whole topic is simply regarding "seeding operations," then sure, I'll admit that that has been tried. It is still tried in some places, and I wouldn't be surprised if someone (government or otherwise) is still trying to make other alternatives work. If that's what we're talking about then I feel it is a non-issue and not worth investigating further.

But I've got the impression reading sites that there are much more sinister explanations for chemtrails. Mind control, population control, etc. If this is what we're talking about then I'd group this kind of activity very differently than simple seeding operations... and getting me to admit that there have been seeding operations is not, to me, evidence of "chemtrails" in the sinister context of mind control, population control, etc.

quote:

---

Surely if you have done your homework as you said, you would be very aware of the numerous experiments and weather modification efforts underway.

---

Yes, and that doesn't bother me at all.

quote:

---

Ask yourself relevant questions such as how the military is implementing it's stated desire to own the weather.

---

These are rhetorical questions. I'm not looking for questions--I'm looking for answers. I'm not asking anyone to do "my homework" for me, but I would assume if these problems are as important as people suggest and assuming there is any interest in informing the masses, such simple questions such as the scientific justification that chemtrails are inherently different that contrails, and how we can distinguish them, would be posted somewhere without having to research a bunch of rhetorical questions posed by those that already believe in chemtrails.

I get the impression that people here are more interested in giving me "busy work" that ties me up reading a bunch of irrelevant material rather than giving me what I'm asking for: A scientific explanation of why "chemtrails" cannot be normal contrails, and how to distinguish them. If I found a decent page that could explain this to me I could be a believer in 5 minutes.

But as it stands, I've been reading links for weeks and have now been given "busy work" by you and BoomerChick and I still haven't got an answer to the above questions.

quote:

---

Ask yourself if mainstream science is funding geoengineering particulate scattering experiments what these look like. How much research have you done into geoengineering schemes? How much are you aware of the huge amounts of funding going into geoengineering research from companies such as Exxon and G.E. through univerities such as Stanford? What exactly do you think these hundreds of millions of dollars are physically being use for, when these very institutions are calling strongly for geoengineering as a solution to what THEY are calling 'global warming'?

---

Again, this sounds like more "busy work" to me. I'll be happy to read any amount of material if I feel it's justified. I'll do it myself, I won't need prodding. But I'm getting link after link, site after site, topic after topic of things I should "investigate" and yet no-one has provided me a specific link to the information I'm looking for: The scientific explanation of why chemtrails cannot be contrails, and how to distinguish them myself.

quote:

---

Here's another related link to view from another scientist that posts here occasionally that clearly states info about Chemtrails NOT contrails: http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/jimphelps.html

---

posted 01-19-2004 04:27 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boomer Chick:
There are links to Thomas, links to Carnicom and I refuse to do your work for you, Letxa!

---

You're certainly welcome to refuse to do anything. I'm just asking for help locating information I have been unable to find, including at the sites you have listed. I've now clicked on almost every link on the main carnicom page and I've seen pictures of contrails, satellite images, discussions about the earth's rotational velocity changing, discussions on time, blaming the lack of visible stars on chemtrails (rather than just simple pollution caused by 6 billion inhabitants), a sample impeachment resolution against George Bush, and somehow using aerosol operations as a common theme.

Yet my question (a scientific explanation of the why "chemtrails" are different than contrails and how to distinguish them) was never answered. The closest I've found on Carnicom was http://www.carnicom.com/model1.htm, but their conclusion that "If "contrails" by appearance transform into "clouds", it can be concluded that the
material of composition is not water vapor." is just plain wrong. It suggests that water vapor in contrails is somehow different than water vapor that forms clouds--but it's all water vapor, so the conclusion that a contrail can't transform into a cloud just doesn't make sense and requires more explanation before being accepted as fact. But no further explanation is provided. That page was on its way to answer my question, but just didn't get there.

quote:

---

I'm done! Carnicom is also offered as a link on educate yourself and you're just plain lazy!

---

Whatever. I'm pleased to see you are so anxious to help someone accept your beliefs. But if you don't care, that's fine. Maybe someone else here will be willing to help me.

Or perhaps everyone here lives in a little box and is unwilling to help those that are currently outside the box. But, heck, even Jehovah's Witnesses--that live in their own little world--go out and try to get the masses to listen to them. They don't just say "Go read the Bible, do your homework" and expect people to come around to their point of view. They make an effort to provide proof of their beliefs and try to provide Biblical citations to support them.

quote:

---

Sorry, but that's how you're coming across, lazy and bigoted! Bigoted means holding closed minded views toward anything that to you smacks of "strange" or "unusual." A "turn-off." Why not just skip that stuff?

---

I did skip that stuff. But out of curiosity... I believe you said in another thread that you are a Christian. Do you believe in that new-age solution to chemtrails? Reciting some chemtrail declaration to make them go away? Do you believe that works?

quote:

---

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink!

---

So far you've lead me to a mirage. I've read many links you've provided and am still no closer to answering my underlying question. The carnicom link above was on its way, but just fell flat and missed the boat.

quote:

---

Let's put it this way. If you were given an assignment in college to do a research paper on chemtrails and carnicom, Thomas's site, Barium Blues, and other links were given or you found them to be the most informational and you were allowed and encouraged to do online research, would you go back to the instructor or professor and complain that people were posting books and weird spiritual mumbo-jumbo or would you just go for the articles to support your research?

---

That would depends on whether or not I was doing research on the general belief of chemtrails or whether or not I was actually trying to believe them myself. I could certainly write a whole ton of stuff about the belief in chemtrails based on the links you've provided, but I haven't found anything that convinces me they are right--nor could I convince anyone else they were right based on what I've seen so far.

One can research anything, even if they don't believe in it. One can write a paper on any subject, even if they don't believe it. But actually believing something doesn't just require information, it requires compelling information. And that's what I've found to be lacking, so far.

quote:

---

Please! I will not hand feed you links from Carnicom's site! I read and read and read on that site and on both sites I gave you are the most informational when using the links as any online. There's also http://radarmatrix.com and a host of other links even listed on Carnicom's!

I truly don't care at this point! If you really want to know, you will do what it takes, otherwise, just face the fact that you don't want to know. Like any research project you must sift through some articles that aren't informational and only include the ones that are truly informational and not just theories.

---

Sigh... If you don't care, stop responding. Let someone else help me. That's fine.

I DO want to know. And I would assume that you (collectively) would want to reach out to those that don't know and convince them. But your attitude is completely counter-productive. If that's your attitude, the chemtrail issue would be best helped by your remaining silent and letting those that want to help, help.

quote:

---

Back in the early nineties the skies were often clear -- totally! Did jets and airliners change their jet fuel formulas? I see what I see in the skies and this confirms all the reading.

---

I don't remember clear skies from my childhood, neither in California nor in Denver. But I certainly can't prove that... but it's part of my first-hand information that I know from my life, looking up... I see nothing different today than in the past.

quote:

---

Please don't respond to this line by line -- your time would be better spent in research!

---