Look Mummy, There's an Aeroplane in the Sky...
- Thread starter ClaytonBigsby
- Start date
Stillbuzzin
Well-Known Member
Dam dog I see you still trippen. How the hell are you.
bluntmassa1
Well-Known Member
Why don't I get to see these chemtrails? I've watched the refill planes right over head and all but not onces have I seen anything like that and I've been looking for years since I seen the first conspiracy. But I guess there is a bit of rich people around me the Illuminati don't want to kill themselves. Lol
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
These are ship trails ... the particulates in the exhaust nucleate clouds.
dannyboy602
Well-Known Member
Red1966
Well-Known Member
They are actual clouds. Some artificially formed clouds will last for hours, some for minutes. depending on weather conditions at that particular altitude and location. Reason a plane will appear to start and stop producing trails. Reason trails don't always come from engines. Only idiots think we're being sprayed.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
"This plane" is at a different altitude
racerboy71
bud bootlegger
lol, not actual clouds.. i sat out on the porch the other day for a few hours, and watched the so called clouds being sprayed out of the back of plane.. af first, they were just straight lines going from one end of the horizon to the other, but slowly, over time, the lines broadened, and spread out into what looked almost like normal clouds, only there wasn't a cloud in the sky before the planes flew over..
guess i'm an idiot and what i saw with my own 2 eyes was lying to me..
there's no doubt that they're spraying something, i'll just withhold taking a guess as to what..
that thing that looks like a cloud in between the two obvious chemtrails that i watched come out of a back of plane weren't there before the plane sprayed w/e it was and over i'd say, 20 minutes to a half an hour or so, spread out to a more cloud like structure instead of the straight lines that they were sprayed with..
racerboy71
bud bootlegger
it is, my giant, bulbous, veiny penis..
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
Indeed, negro, how the hell are you? Good to see you around. I hope all is well for you, Kemo.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
Damn. I thought that pic was just photoshopped for effect.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
What are artificially formed clouds? Only idiots blindly listen to the man behind the curtain.
Contrary to rumors of “conspiracy theory”, the Department of Defense invented and published the term, “Chemtrails” in 1990 as the title to a chemistry manual for new pilots attending the esteemed US Air Force Academy. With the manual funded by the American taxpayer, the term “chemtrails” continues to be used by observers to describe unusual jet aircraft or rocket emissions.
Chemtrails: Chemistry 141 and 142, Fourth Edition CB (Applications and Concepts in Chemistry) by Usafa
ISBN: 0201306840
ISBM-13: 9780201306842
Publisher: Addison Wesley Publishing Company (1998-03)
Spiral-bound – Sales Rank: 4847383
Product Demensions: 10.8 x 8.9 x 0.5 inches
Later editions of this textbook are now available online. SeeBookFinder4U or Google Search by ISBN number = ISBN: 0201306840
In 2001, US Rep., Dennis Kucinich introduced HR 2977 “Space Preservation Act of 2001”. The text of the Bill defines Chemtrails as an exotic weapon.
1966 NASA Document Reveals Goal of Engineered “Climate Modification”
https://chemtrailsplanet.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/national-weather-modification-program-nasa-1966.pdf
This set of documents from 1966 reveals a network of government agencies in perpetual and secret collaboration and the military toModify the Global climate. Created by the elitist National Academy of Sciences – decades of an inter-agency culture of secrecy explains why the issue of covert aerosol Geoengineering (chemtrails) is a taboo topic to be degraded to the status of “conspiracy theory” by a matrix of complicit bureaucrats at every opportunity. This is why the FAA, NOAA, NASA and your local TV “meteorologist” refuse to employ scientific observation when asked to comment on an unusual sky filled with bizarre aircraft spraying.
“The gradually accumulating evidence of positive results from efforts at weather modification led the Committee on Atmospheric Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences, in November 1963, to appoint a Panel on Weather and Climate Modification “to undertake a deliberate and thoughtful review of the present status and activities in this field and of its potential and limitations for the future.” – Page 6.
https://chemtrailsplanet.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/weather-modification-the-evolution-of-an-r-and-d-program-into-a-military-operation.pdf
This Federation of American Scientists document is a 1986 Critique of the 1966 NASA initiative where the author (Leitenburg?) characterizes NASA’s Weather Mod Program ashijacked into a military weapons system. This document is one of several found in: Studies of Military R&D and Weapons Development by Milton Leitenberg, Senior Research Scholar – Center for International and Security Studies, University of Maryland, College Park. Leitenburg is author of several books.
The familiar aviation term “contrail” is a contraction of the two words “condensation” and “trail”.
Similarly, a “chemtrail” is a logical application of the contraction rule where two similar words, “chemical” and “trail” are spliced together as a single recognizable word.
The term “chemical trail” became part of the NASA lexicon when published in the document “Chemical Aspects of Upper Atmosphere Research”. Excerpt below:
“Langley research center released tetramethyl-lead vapor trails in lower heterosphere”
“Thus, in the search for a satisfactory chemiluminescent agent, the Langley Research Center released tetramethyl-lead vapor trails in the lower heterosphere during two night-time (early morning) experiments on January 22, 1964. In each experiment about 22 Ibs of liquid Pb(CH 3) were carried aloft by the type of rocket shown in figure 6. The visible chemical trail extended from an altitude of about 89 km. to 113 km…”
Source: NASA: “Chemical Aspects of Upper Atmospher Research” Published May 8, 1964, Page 6 and 7
By Richard A. Hord and Harold B. Tolefson
Stillbuzzin
Well-Known Member
You still flying helicopters for a living?I still say taking the train is safer. But have at it.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
CIA Document 1035-960: Foundation of a Weaponized Term 52
by MHB Administrator • Home • Tags: Central Intelligence Agency, conspiracy theory,propaganda, public opinion
“Conspiracy theory” is a term that at once strikes fear and anxiety in the hearts of most every public figure, particularly journalists and academics. Since the 1960s the label has become a disciplinary device that has been overwhelmingly effective in defining certain events off limits to inquiry or debate. Especially in the United States raising legitimate questions about dubious official narratives destined to inform public opinion (and thereby public policy) is a major thought crime that must be cauterized from the public psyche at all costs.
Conspiracy theory’s acutely negative connotations may be traced to liberal historian Richard Hofstadter’s well-known fusillades against the “New Right.” Yet it was the Central Intelligence Agency that likely played the greatest role in effectively “weaponizing” the term. In the groundswell of public skepticism toward the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA sent a detailed directive to all of its bureaus. Titled “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” the dispatch played a definitive role in making the “conspiracy theory” term a weapon to be wielded against almost any individual or group calling the government’s increasingly clandestine programs and activities into question.
This important memorandum and its broad implications for American politics and public discourse are detailed in a forthcoming book by Florida State University political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, Conspiracy Theory in America. Dr. deHaven-Smith devised the state crimes against democracy concept to interpret and explain potential government complicity in events such as the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the major political assassinations of the 1960s, and 9/11.
CIA Document 1035-960 was released in response to a 1976 FOIA request by theNew York Times. The directive is especially significant because it outlines the CIA’s concern regarding “the whole reputation of the American government” vis-à-vis the Warren Commission Report. The agency was especially interested in maintaining its own image and role as it “contributed information to the [Warren] investigation.”
The memorandum lays out a detailed series of actions and techniques for “countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.” For example, approaching “friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors)” to remind them of the Warren Commission’s integrity and soundness should be prioritized. “[T]he charges of the critics are without serious foundation,” the document reads, and “further speculative discussion only plays in to the hands of the [Communist] opposition.”
The agency also directed its members “[t]o employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.”
1035-960 further delineates specific techniques for countering “conspiratorial” arguments centering on the Warren Commission’s findings. Such responses and their coupling with the pejorative label have been routinely wheeled out in various guises by corporate media outlets, commentators and political leaders to this day against those demanding truth and accountability about momentous public events.
*No significant new evidence has emerged which the [Warren] Commission did not consider.
*Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others.
*Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States.
*Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it.
*Oswald would not have been any sensible person’s choice for a co-conspirator.
*Such vague accusations as that “more than ten people have died mysteriously” [during the Warren Commission’s inquiry] can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes.
Today more so than ever news media personalities and commentators occupy powerful positions for initiating propaganda activities closely resembling those set out in 1035-960 against anyone who might question state-sanctioned narratives of controversial and poorly understood occurrences. Indeed, as the motives and methods encompassed in the document have become fully internalized by intellectual workers and operationalized through such media, the almost uniform public acceptance of official accounts concerning unresolved events such as the Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building bombing, 9/11, and most recently the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, is largely guaranteed.
The effect on academic and journalistic inquiry into ambiguous and unexplained events that may in turn mobilize public inquiry, debate and action has been dramatic and far-reaching. One need only look to the rising police state and evisceration of civil liberties and constitutional protections as evidence of how this set of subtle and deceptive intimidation tactics has profoundly encumbered the potential for future independent self-determination and civic empowerment.
by MHB Administrator • Home • Tags: Central Intelligence Agency, conspiracy theory,propaganda, public opinion
Conspiracy theory’s acutely negative connotations may be traced to liberal historian Richard Hofstadter’s well-known fusillades against the “New Right.” Yet it was the Central Intelligence Agency that likely played the greatest role in effectively “weaponizing” the term. In the groundswell of public skepticism toward the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA sent a detailed directive to all of its bureaus. Titled “Countering Criticism of the Warren Commission Report,” the dispatch played a definitive role in making the “conspiracy theory” term a weapon to be wielded against almost any individual or group calling the government’s increasingly clandestine programs and activities into question.
This important memorandum and its broad implications for American politics and public discourse are detailed in a forthcoming book by Florida State University political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, Conspiracy Theory in America. Dr. deHaven-Smith devised the state crimes against democracy concept to interpret and explain potential government complicity in events such as the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the major political assassinations of the 1960s, and 9/11.
CIA Document 1035-960 was released in response to a 1976 FOIA request by theNew York Times. The directive is especially significant because it outlines the CIA’s concern regarding “the whole reputation of the American government” vis-à-vis the Warren Commission Report. The agency was especially interested in maintaining its own image and role as it “contributed information to the [Warren] investigation.”
The memorandum lays out a detailed series of actions and techniques for “countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries.” For example, approaching “friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors)” to remind them of the Warren Commission’s integrity and soundness should be prioritized. “[T]he charges of the critics are without serious foundation,” the document reads, and “further speculative discussion only plays in to the hands of the [Communist] opposition.”
The agency also directed its members “[t]o employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.”
1035-960 further delineates specific techniques for countering “conspiratorial” arguments centering on the Warren Commission’s findings. Such responses and their coupling with the pejorative label have been routinely wheeled out in various guises by corporate media outlets, commentators and political leaders to this day against those demanding truth and accountability about momentous public events.
*No significant new evidence has emerged which the [Warren] Commission did not consider.
*Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others.
*Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States.
*Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it.
*Oswald would not have been any sensible person’s choice for a co-conspirator.
*Such vague accusations as that “more than ten people have died mysteriously” [during the Warren Commission’s inquiry] can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes.
Today more so than ever news media personalities and commentators occupy powerful positions for initiating propaganda activities closely resembling those set out in 1035-960 against anyone who might question state-sanctioned narratives of controversial and poorly understood occurrences. Indeed, as the motives and methods encompassed in the document have become fully internalized by intellectual workers and operationalized through such media, the almost uniform public acceptance of official accounts concerning unresolved events such as the Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building bombing, 9/11, and most recently the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, is largely guaranteed.
The effect on academic and journalistic inquiry into ambiguous and unexplained events that may in turn mobilize public inquiry, debate and action has been dramatic and far-reaching. One need only look to the rising police state and evisceration of civil liberties and constitutional protections as evidence of how this set of subtle and deceptive intimidation tactics has profoundly encumbered the potential for future independent self-determination and civic empowerment.
ClaytonBigsby
Well-Known Member
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Those things you call chemtrails
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Awesome. By not traveling this week, I missed my quota of "Coast to Coast"
Barium? Damn near killed him!
Barium? Damn near killed him!
