Chemtrails, Geo-engineering And HAARP

markwilson wrote:
Time of my lengthy post 1455. Time of his post 1500

Where are the CHEMICALS?

Schpankme wrote:

markwilson wrote:
Time of my lengthy post 1455. Time of his post 1500

Where are the CHEMICALS?

At the very least there would be fuel residues like soot and other combustion byproducts. Don't they constitute chemicals?

I'm not taking sides here. In my own childhood I remember them evaporating quickly. I used to love watching. There are some now that definitely persist, merge and block the sky but this happens with water vapour too from jet planes. It may be different types of fuel cause differing effects and who know whether it's all intentional or not. It could be negligence, ignorance, greed or an intentional poisoning!

Here is a description of certain soot or 'carbon black dust';

https://climateviewer.com/2018/10/07/carbon-black-dust-the-chemtrail-secret-for-weather-warfare-geoengineering-and-ozone-destruction/

markwilson wrote:

Question; when the United States, and others, were bombing the bejesus out of Dresden, did it only kill those innocents because they were "BELIEVING" it would?

Do you see it? Information regarding 5G is "fear propaganda." This gal discusses 5G, frequencies and the harmful impact on the human body they can have, here:

So the question now becomes why Schpankme and Just Vital (and others), refuse to assent to demonstrable facts in nature regarding the spraying of particulate chemicals into the air, which LINGER forming clouds, as opposed to the disparate conditions causing contrails to quickly evaporate behind the jets when conditions are right to create such contrails.

I don't think you should compare 5G (and chemtrails) with the bombing of Dresden. Those people actually died in one of the many PROVEN (physical) atrocities of WOII - so no believe is required. How many people do you know that died from 5G exposure or inhaling to much chemtrail? This comparison is disrespectful imo.

Regarding the documentary I shared; I did this because the goal of this documentary is obvious to cause fear NOT to inform us with valid information. The title contains APOCALYPSE in CAPS, this alone should trigger a red flag - not to mention the documentary itself, containing people like David 'reptile' Icke.

For the record: I used to blindly believe that chemtrails were a thing (same as Nukes) and that they are spraying something in the air. I did this without seeing any physical proof besides seeing trails in the air that stayed there longer than others. Thanks to people like Schpankme this got me thinking; because as long as I don't see birds fall of rooftops with aluminium poisoning, plant-life dying for no apparent reason, or ground-samples containing all kinds of metals etc, I don't have any proof for those 'trails' being CHEMICAL-trails. And because in addition many known controlled (alternative) media sources promote chemtrails (and 5G), for me that is more than enough reason to be very skeptical about this subject - at least until I have seen SCIENTIFIC proof of them spraying chemicals.

Until then, it is my understanding that they are poisoning our MINDS - not with chemicals, but with fictional fears.

Something else is that many people on those sites that have "alternative" information on 5g and chemtrails are pretty much playing out the dunning kruger effect. What happens is in short that connections are being made that have no factual basis. A network of "false" information creates overconfidence in that "information" as knowledge and create a cognitive bias. Especially in western culture. It has become a plague.

Just Vital wrote:

markwilson wrote:

Question; when the United States, and others, were bombing the bejesus out of Dresden, did it only kill those innocents because they were "BELIEVING" it would?

Do you see it? Information regarding 5G is "fear propaganda." This gal discusses 5G, frequencies and the harmful impact on the human body they can have, here:

So the question now becomes why Schpankme and Just Vital (and others), refuse to assent to demonstrable facts in nature regarding the spraying of particulate chemicals into the air, which LINGER forming clouds, as opposed to the disparate conditions causing contrails to quickly evaporate behind the jets when conditions are right to create such contrails.

I don't think you should compare 5G (and chemtrails) with the bombing of Dresden. Those people actually died in one of the many PROVEN (physical) atrocities of WOII - so no believe is required. How many people do you know that died from 5G exposure or inhaling to much chemtrail? This comparison is disrespectful imo.

Until then, it is my understanding that they are poisoning our MINDS - not with chemicals, but with fictional fears.

I think it is far more disrespectful to act like the bombing of Dresden and chemtrails have the same effect. One is clearly for instant death and maiming while the other is to caused medical issues and a slow long death. Yeah burning to death is terrible but is slowly dying in a hospital not also a terrible death? I think you may be the one falling for brainwashing as half the post on this thread are Schpankme repeating the same lines over and over. Then there are people like Mark who are typing out well thought out responses and citing multiple sources. Who is the one trying to indoctrinate?

Also he still is yet to answer multiple questions asked by members like he is above answering them. Why do you condone his bad behavior while condemning Mark? He is still yet to answer why he said plants can resist aluminum when it was convenient but then if they were spraying aluminum it would cause instant death of plants when it’s convenient. Well which is it?

markwilson wrote:Let's try it this way. You either agree/disagree with the following. Please address each point individually with a true or false, followed by a succinct rejoinder of only that one, or those, you find false. Because I'm tired of your tit-for-tats.

1) Contrails occur when conditions exist to cause them (i.e., temp, altitude, etc.). We see them ocularly sans any WWII pictures. Water evaporates leaving no trace.

True/False?

2) Chemtrails occur because added ingredient(s) are introduced into the sky that is absent in a contrail. We see them ocularly sans any WWII pictures. Chemtrails leave trace.

True/False?

3) Contrails quickly evaporate as ice particles do (see above video taken from my phone), chemtrails do not.

True/False?

4) Chemtrails are not the untainted water of a contrail, hence, do not evaporate as do contrails. What goes up, comes down.

True/False?

I am very much interested in Schpankme addressing each of the 4 points above.

Realearth wrote:
I am very much interested in Schpankme

Chemtrails are created by; wait for it; where are the Chemicals?

Chemtrails without Chemicals are called Contrails.

Just Vital wrote this; "I think this: frequenties like 4/5G or wifi can really be harmfull, if you actually BELIEVE it is harmfull." (all-caps in the original)

Streamlining that just a bit, he said this; "I think frequencies or wifi can really be harmful if you actually BELIEVE it is harmful."

That is an illogical comment. The reference to people being bombed at Dresden was to highlight the silliness of a statement that pretends that something that is harmful, is only harmful if one "believes it is harmful." I could have just as easily used the USS Liberty attack by Israel as an example making the point. "Belief" wouldn't have spared a single man that died that day.

If a thing is harmful (5G for example), belief does nothing to add to, or take away from, the harm caused by the harmful thing.

Yours was an illogical statement to make.

I shouldn't have to reiterate that which screams illogic on its face, simply because somebody who doesn't grasp the illogic of it even after it has been pointed out, will not be corrected even though the illogic is pointed out. They will make a worse argument trying to extricate themselves and justify their illogic—like Just Vital did with this retort;

"I don't think you should compare 5G (and chemtrails) with the bombing of Dresden."

I didn't compare the "5G (and chemtrails) with the bombing of Dresden." I pointed out the silly idea that "belief" has anything to do with the harm brought about by anything that, in reality, somehow does harm to another, the beliefs of the recipient be damned. Belief doesn't prevent harm.

And the grand finale in his attempt at extrication was this: "How many people do you know that died from 5G exposure or inhaling to [sic] much chemtrail?" (all-bold in original). My argument had nothing to do with how many "died from 5G exposure," anymore than it had to do with how many died at Dresden. It had to do with the illogic that however many have been harmed or died at the hands of anything harmful, belief had not a darn thing to do with it.

We have an agreement in this community, for example, that we in fact live on a plane, yet we want to give a pass to the hidden power when it comes to 5G (energy), and conductive particulate matter forming manmade clouds in the sky.

I sense a disconnect.

What is energy? What kind of energy was used on 9/11? What frequencies do damage? Why was the hurricane just off the east coast not reported nationally on 9/11? Was the controlled media occupied with something else already on their calendars? Who controls HAARP? Who controls those frequencies? Why are streetlights becoming now, little computer stations accessing the internet with communications being passed back and forth?

What is the cause of unnatural cloud formations (think symmetry of the energy deployed, as revealed in those UNNATURAL cloud designs). Can natural clouds be manipulated? Can only manmade cloud formations of specific designed particulate matter be manipulated by our enemies?

Who is promoting, gaining access to growing numbers of homes with listening and watching devices? Do those connect to the internet? Do they listen, send back information? To whom is it sent?

Who poisons with vaccines? The elite?

And you fellows want us to give government a pass on 5G and particulate matter? I don't object to contrail water evaporating behind a fast moving airplane. I do object to manmade clouds by the psychopaths controlling the things antithetical to my pursuit of happiness.

Energy. Energetic. Control of energy. Did you guys get a chance to view that video I posted just above? That gal is pretty sharp. I chastised her though for the self-censorship format of video, bowing before the Jews at YouTube. I told her to do as Eric; short intro with link to a platform that won't censor her so she doesn't have to butcher the content by censoring it herself. Harmful frequencies that she talked about in that video?

What propagates, directs, aims energy? Does 5G enhance the deployment of energy by the Controllers? Is it connected to particulate matter forming clouds and falling back down again throughout the plane? Does the criminal government have equipment that can employ energy against the people? Is 5G a harvestable enhancement for the employment of frequencies that are harmful? Brain fog? Fluoride distribution? Isn't fluoride, courtesy in part by none other than Donald Rumsfeld (cough, cough), the cause of calcification of the pineal gland (3rd eye)? By whom? Who wants me to have brain fog? Isn't fluoride a byproduct of the manufacture of aluminum? Particulate matter? An industrial waste product in our water?

Isn't fluoride a toxic poison?

Who spends megabucks to entice young men to enlist during Super Bowls? Who has the power to have the very children, whose younger, images only, were "killed" in Sandy Hook theatrical production just a couple months earlier, sing in the Super Bowl at halftime? Psychopaths?

Dr. Wayne Carver? Buffoon? Who conducted that false flag operation? Psychopaths?

Who has the brazen audacity to serve up fake CGI airplanes flying into the Twin Towers on earth-wide television? Who has the propensity to mess up their theatrical production by announcing the destruction of WTC7, while it stands tall behind her, some 20 minutes before a steel-girded steel-reinforced concrete building finally implodes using------- wait for it------- energy. Who had the foreknowledge, and who had the simpleton script-reader, read her stuff 20 minutes too soon? Did they forget to synchronize their watches?

Who has the energy to turn to dust Twin Towers of 110 stories each? Ten, eleven seconds? Energy?

But these guys want us to give criminal government a pass on the synergistic combination of whatever is being deployed into the air above us, conductive particulate matter, and its ability to conduct that energy from 5G (for example), and the energy of 5G frequencies.

Who knows all about energy? Freemasons? Who is guilty of every fraudulent thing NASA does? Freemasons? Are we approaching the capstone? Any agents in here?

Calling me a liar gives evidence of being a little touchy, does it not? You posted earlier you were done in this thread, did you not? Why are you back? Why would you call me a liar? Did you think the thread would end when you made that pronouncement that you were done with this thread? Did you know some 12 hours had passed between the two; the nighttime moon, and daylight contrail? I'm a liar? Have. you. ever. heard. of. wind. currents?

And in 12 hours would wind currents carry away that which was overhead as I try to see the moon, through the manmade particulate matter clouds; and the time I took the video of an airplane leaving a contrail midday? Why would you call me a liar?

Did you see the contrail evaporate? Do you see them evaporate when going over yourself? Do you see other planes leaving clouds that are not evaporating water behind them? Do you understand that in reality, two different set of circumstances--cause and effect--create TWO different things?

Why are we giving the hidden power a pass, or thinking that such technology won't, isn't, being used against us? Is resistance futile? Is that the message? I'm curious.

Who has the power to ban spectators at the Bahrain Formula One race over the phony Coronavirus? Hidden government? Who is paying for those empty seats? Who has a business interest and the massive amount of money to pay for those empty seats? Criminal government? "On Sunday it was announced that the season's second race in Bahrain would go ahead without fans..." (end quote)

No. Our enemies domestic do not get a pass. And it is ILLOGIC to have the pipe dream that criminal agents aren't using these things too. You fellows are gullible, or something worse. Demonstrable facts in nature. Evaporating water is not persistent, wafting, manmade cloud cover is.

markwilson wrote:
man made clouds in the sky

Where are the CHEMICALS?

My time to post, 0854. Yours 0858. You didn't even read it.

markwilson wrote:
My time to post, 0854. Yours 0858. You didn't even read it.

The Question: Where are the Chemicals?

Schpankme wrote:

markwilson wrote:
My time to post, 0854. Yours 0858. You didn't even read it.

The Question:  Where are the Chemicals?

Did my rather lengthy post to which you replied in four minutes, lazily, mention "chemical" one time? Do you understand the term "particulate matter," used 7 times in the post you didn't read before responding to? Are you always so rash? Do you deny the particulate matter (of whatever content) forming manmade clouds behind airplanes? Do you understand that the particulate matter belching from airplanes is of the intelligent design of men, and not the design of the One, since only water crystals are seen evaporating behind aircraft not in the process of deploying the matter manufactured, transported under federal hazmat laws, loaded, and sprayed from, airplanes? Do you understand the difference between water evaporating and particulate matter remaining?

This was nonexistent in my youth.






But it exists over you on the days they are spraying particulate matter.

markwilson wrote:
Did my rather lengthy post mention "chemical" one time

You mean that rambling off-topic nonsense?

Where are these Chemicals 'you claim' fall from the sky?

From the 1st page, 1st post, 1st paragraph of this thread: "I have been investigating, through direct experience the spraying of the world, and the use of Direct Energy Tesla technology now for a decade. I am good friends with Dane Wiggington out here in N. California, who runs Geoengineeringwatch.org. I vouch for him personally and his dedication to exposing the truths, though his life is threatened doing so.
www.geoengineeringwatch.org/"

If I understand it correctly, the Admin, Thinkforyourself, reposted that in the wake of the resurrection of IFERS after it was disabled on the last server? If the admin at the time did indeed do that and could, of his own volition, not resurrect that content because he found the position taken by the guy who started this thread, objectionable; why are we disputing the solid evidence presented in the first page and throughout this thread?

I've got a question though; for everybody except Schpankme. He likes to dispute before hearing the argument. He's already pounding on the keyboard finding some old WWII picture to throw back in retort without bothering to actually watch the below video.

But for everybody else; when that airplane was landing (pay very close attention at 10 seconds into it) was that at an altitude and temperature that what we see coming from the airplane was a contrail—water ice crystals evaporating right before landing a few feet above the plane earth? And if the conditions weren't conducive to any possibility of freezing ice particles evaporating at that low altitude, what is that coming from his airplane?



Here's where Schpankme hits the paste button.

This whole discussion is strange to me. Wasn't the only thing actually done in this chemtrail case that they went into some field and measured some substances (using a glass jar with a metal lid) and connected that to the trails? Isn't it well known that some contrails can stay for hours on end and hasn't the amount of airplanes simply increased? Isn't that enough to explain it?

Highly recommended. That's right; not that many views yet. Truth doesn't take popularity polls. The kind of sky in his video was never present in my youth.



SAFETY DATA SHEET
Aviation Jet Fuel JET A-1 (JETA1)

"The product contains volatile substances which may spread in the atmosphere. Avoid heat,
flames and other sources of ignition. Take precautionary measures against static discharges.
Use only non-sparking tools. Ground/bond container and receiving equipment. All handling
should only take place in well-ventilated areas. Avoid inhalation of vapours and contact with
skin and eyes. Use personal protective equipment and/or local ventilation when needed. Do
not eat, drink or smoke when using this product. Wash hands and any other contaminated
areas of the body with soap and water before leaving the work site. Wash contaminated
clothing before reuse. During tank operations follow special instructions (risk of oxygen
displacement and hydrocarbons)."

https://www.neste.fi/static/ktt/10505_eng.pdf

I've got a question for everybody except Schpankme and Just Vital (Schpankme is already pounding away on the keyboard); After reading that safety data sheet, are crystallized contrails free of chemicals? And if the argument is that there is no proof of chemicals, and that the lingering manmade clouds for the better part of the day above me are benign and just water condensation (condensation trail, contrail), do those contrails have the chemicals requiring hazmat compliance still in them?

If it was just water it wouldn't remain for the better part of the day, would it? Particulate matter?

If so, are they spraying those chemicals in the air, in flight? Or are the contaminants requiring special hazmat disclaimer and handling, being processed, removed, and rendered benign, before leaving the airplane and going into the sky above?

Hazard statements
H226 Flammable liquid and vapour.
H315 Causes skin irritation.
H336 May cause drowsiness or dizziness.
H304 May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways.
H411 Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects.

Right about now is where Schpankme is hitting the paste key demanding proof of chemicals along with a nice WWII picture.

We've now established true what Schpankme demanded. Chemicals in avgas requiring special treatment because of the toxins present. Chemicals. Engines burn fuel with chemicals. Unless he wishes to woo us with a published study in which it has been proven that ALL contaminants are removed prior to exhaust (this will require more than a WWII picture as proof).

It was actually a low threshold to prove him wrong when you think about it.

Am I a liar?

Got logic?

vincey84 wrote:This whole discussion is strange to me. Wasn't the only thing actually done in this chemtrail case that they went into some field and measured some substances (using a glass jar with a metal lid) and connected that to the trails? Isn't it well known that some contrails can stay for hours on end and hasn't the amount of airplanes simply increased? Isn't that enough to explain it?

got agenda?

vincey84 wrote:This whole discussion is strange to me. Wasn't the only thing actually done in this chemtrail case that they went into some field and measured some substances (using a glass jar with a metal lid) and connected that to the trails? Isn't it well known that some contrails can stay for hours on end and hasn't the amount of airplanes simply increased? Isn't that enough to explain it?

But you do prove my point; "Isn't it well known that some contrails can stay for hours on end...." (emphasis added)

But we don't need a "glass jar with a metal lid" on it to prove the chemicals. Too rich!

markwilson wrote:

vincey84 wrote:This whole discussion is strange to me. Wasn't the only thing actually done in this chemtrail case that they went into some field and measured some substances (using a glass jar with a metal lid) and connected that to the trails? Isn't it well known that some contrails can stay for hours on end and hasn't the amount of airplanes simply increased? Isn't that enough to explain it?

got agenda?

Because i ask some basic questions i have a agenda?

markwilson wrote:If it was just water it wouldn't remain for the better part of the day, would it? Particulate matter?

This, you jump from this to that is is a chemtrails. Yes some contrails stay for hours on end so what.

You didn't just ask a question. You don't think you gave yourself away with the "glass jar with a metal lid" inane prattle?! Those who disagree with you are country bumpkins, right?! Country bumpkins grab their "glass jar with a metal lid" to form their thoughts on a particular subject.

Why don't you bring the jar and I'll bring the lid and we'll have a country bumpkin party!

markwilson wrote:You didn't just ask a question. You don't think you gave yourself away with the "glass jar with a metal lid" inane prattle?! Those who disagree with you are country bumpkins, right?! Country bumpkins grab their "glass jar with a metal lid" to form their thoughts on a particular subject.

Why don't you bring the jar and I'll bring the lid and we'll have a country bumpkin party!

I do have some judgments about the people that believe this. In some cases this causes noise. But not if you are aware that you have judgments. Seemingly you take this very seriously, write huge posts but not with actual information. Just loose connections. You say we have an agreement we believe the earth is a flat plane, this has several observable facts and measurements you can do. That is not the same as this.

You claim I "write huge posts but not with actual information." Did you read the avgas safety data sheet? Does it address chemicals? Is that reference "actual information" germane to the discussion, shill?

I'd like to know; is that hazmat safety data sheet "actual information" germane to the topic of this thread?! Did I not post that comment before you accused me of "loose connections"? Is a federal government safety data sheet proving chemical additives in avgas, which you read before scribing your post, grounded in solid philosophy and logic?

Or is it not, simply because you don't agree with my position? Loose connections, jars and lids.

He asked for proof of chemicals. Did I give it to him? Is that data sheet a "loose connection"? I won't reply to you again unless you pony up something worthwhile. Because you haven't yet.