Discussion in 'Contrails and Chemtrails' started by Mick West, Oct 24, 2011.
A recent one from Texas, probably noteworthy because it shows the airborne webs:
Interesting, most of the webs seem to be traveling up-and-out.....not "falling".
Exactly what you'd expect from ballooning spiders at the start of their journey.
If I understand correctly the poster's camera is pointing straight upward, so the webs are likely moving laterally. He states he had set the manual focus to an estimated 200 ft. which would translate to altitude in that case.
Even if the camera is pointed straight upward (zero deg), the purpose of fledgling spiders is to travel a distance. Winds and breezes will dictate the direction, and aloft areas may take them even farther.
The voice on the vid says "up in the clear blue sky", and I don't interpretate
that as "straight-up", though maybe possible perhaps....lol
In other words, it wouldn't matter if the video shot was "straight up", the ballooning method is what's being documented, not a chemical release.
All evidence points to spiders.
Arguments to the contrary, should contact an arachnid society (or two), but this rarely happens, or they're not trusted (or documented) for some reason.
Many commenters on these YT videos state that they see it for the first time in their region. My reply is that only the wind determines the flight path and landing zone for the webs.
Anyway, when googling "ballooning spiders texas" it's obvious that these events are in no way unusual or rare there.
From the BBC so might be censored outside the UK?
Chemweb sprayer caught red handed spanning a pond (sorry for external link I thought FB videos auto-embed)
here is a follow up video claiming "scientific proof" they are not spider webs using an "optical" test:
Who is this HAARP Report guy anyway?
Many believers claim these "webs" are so toxic that they shouldn't be touched with bare hands.
If I lived in an area where these airborne webs are often found....I'd join a believer on a floating Web hunt, collect several Web bundles....and I'd eat them, on camera.
Prepare for a resurgence of the "chemwebs"
Finally got this post to work
I'm not kidding.
I'd eat their collected "deadly" fibers.
Would eating spider silk or a few old tree silk fibers harm me ?
(maybe, I should check the suspicious tree, but I think spider silk - no.)
Can't find any references that say spider silk is in any way toxic, in fact it is high in vitamin K and has been used to aid healing of wounds
In the glory days of UFOria it was called "Angel Hair."
An old Nuts and Bolts UFOlogist from a dying generation of such laments...
Flying saucers used to be all the rage. UFOlogists were a thriving community. They thought they were on to something cosmically important. A new age!
Now the whole thing's as dead as the Twist and poodle skirts.
Here is a clear link between web fibres and contrails:
It's a pity that the photo embedding is not allowed. You need to click on the link to see it.
[Mod: Added a cropped version]
Spider silk is mainly a protein called fibroin, which is actually being tested as a form of ultra-thin edible "shrinkwrap" for food: https://www.engineersaustralia.org....wrapping-may-revolutionise-food-supply-chains
Eating spider silk shouldn't do you any harm, although, being quite sticky, it would likely pick up a fair bit of environmental dust, dirt and other gubbins.
There are some reports of long strands in the air as early as January, for example, in Texas.
The explanation I have come across, is that adult spiders will shoot (spin) long strands as a means of mobility within their habitat......to change or alter their current position for a better place to gather food, or as a means to escape a predator.
Here is an exhaustive list of spiders in Texas....and it lists when (what months) adult spiders are active...
Chemweb believers claim, "but I don't see any spiders". That's because spiders are most active at night, and tend to hide or coward during the day...because during the day, they become yummy prey, mostly by hungry (daytime) birds.
It's the spider's function of survival.
haha! real funny! I guess that old Charlotte used to live up in the clouds huh? This web like substance can be seen on multiple videos falling from the sky! Not just floating sideways through the air! PLUS there are many that have done test on them and they ARE showing proof of petroleum /fuel products, aluminum, barium, and other metals. So you go ahead and make jokes about it if you want to, but you may be better off in the long run to investigate some more first. just saying........ Let me know if you are interested in learning the truth?
Go ahead! Eat enough of it then get back with me! That's if you are able to by then!
Do you people seriously think what this man is showing he collected is really just some frikn spider webs? REALLY? Have you not ever seen a spider web in your garage? That crap is NOT spider webs!
You are failing to understand that ballooning can also take place during winter.
There are so many problems with that video. I'm sure others can do a better job of casting doubt on the logic used than I can, but I'll make some comments for starters:
All through the video, he keeps referring to comparison of the subject samples to "natural spiderwebs". The most obvious problem with that is that natural spiderwebs come in tremendous variety. I think that's been mentioned in this thread already, but a VERY brief summary of this is provided in Wikipedia.
This clearly is not a complete tabulation of types of spider silk, but it shows there's lots of variety. So, back to the video, it's just not logical to conclude that the cobweb samples that this guy collected are perfectly representative of all other kinds of "natural spiderweb", yet for some reason he thought it was okay to use just those samples to form his "base line" of comparison. It wouldn't be at all surprising to me if ballooning spiderweb were quite different than cobwebs, but obviously that possibility would surprise this guy. In fact, the ballooning webs that fell from the sky were almost certainly from a different species than the cobweb spiders from which he collected his base line samples of comparison, so there's that complication too. With no supporting evidence at all, he's clearly assuming that not only is there no variation between silk types, but no variation between species. And we're supposed to believe conclusions based on this random collection of uncontrolled observations? He would have been far better off to collect some bona-fide ballooning silk to compare to his mystery material. That would be such an obvious comparison to make. Why didn't he think of that?
Aside from the fact that he again provides no evidence, his pronouncement that natural spiderweb has a certain level of U.V. absorption so that flying insects won't see the webs ignores two obvious problems. Different spiders catch prey in different ways, with a great many NOT using their webs to catching flying insects at all, and that includes the cobweb spiders from which he collected his baseline samples. Cobweb spiders specialize in catching small arthropods that are walking on the substrate to which the lower part of the web is attached, most of which are just as blind as the cobweb spiders themselves. This is of no great consequence here, except to illustrate in yet another way how he leaps to conclusions without evidence.
He really steps off into major speculation with his final conclusion. There, he refers to "proteins such as DNA and RNA", which of course shows that he hasn't got the foggiest clue what any of those classes of compounds actually are, and then he makes the biggest leap away from any logical progression of logic so far in the video, basically saying that it only makes sense that this is a military experiment. Then, he includes his idea regarding the absorbtion of UV light as being a key component of the design of this man-made material, yet at no point has he related the level of measured UV absorption to that of any other material as a comparison. This whole video was so devoid of logic that I could hardly sit through it.
I'll add one other thing, and this is actually so basic it would trump all the other points, if in fact the other points could somehow be perceived as valid. The guy bases his analysis on samples which are not compiled via any kind of standardized method, and it's all done without replication. No actual scientifically valid evidence is ever based on a non-replicated study, and within such a study, all techniques must be standardized, not only for consistency within the project itself (how do you know what do the results even mean if you can naturally expect variation due to variable methods?).
Here you go comparing those flying webs to spiderwebs "in your garage" and thinking that's valid. Here you are, basically admitting and proving that you haven't seen mass-ballooning events with your own eyes and that you are unfamiliar with what it looks like, yet believing you are as qualified to make a judgment on the matter as anyone else.
To answer your question, yes, I do believe he's showing us spiderweb material, and you would too if you ever were out where a noticeable amount of spider-ballooning is happening. Last time I saw a mass-ballooning event, I was brushing little spiders off of me every couple of minutes. More than that, I was on a very large construction site with nothing but bare dirt, and yet adult jumping spiders of the genus Phidippus were all over the place, and they don't venture away from vegetation so I'm pretty sure they were ballooning just like the baby spiders were doing (this just happens to be a type of spider I'm very familiar with). The flying webs, and the little spiders themselves were everywhere, and the flying webs looked the same to me as what was pictured in video. Oh, I will add that I usually don't see the spiders associated with these flying strands, and I dare say that on the day when I saw little spiders on me, the average person would never have noticed. I pay closer attention to such things because spiders have always fascinated me.
What it comes down to, is that I see no reason to reach for comparisons between the floating strands that he illustrated and totally non-similar varieties of spiderweb when it makes a whole lot more sense to compare them to a variety of spiderweb that looks exactly the same.
Here again, be careful about jumping to startling conclusions about things which you obviously know nothing about. Nothing you have presented or quoted qualifies as even remotely conclusive evidence (by that, I mean presenting reasons supporting a conclusion which is more plausible than other possibilities). For what it's worth, I've watched spiders let loose a long strand of silk into the air, only to reel it back in and eat it! If that same line of silk were to blow in the wind to a distant location, the web material would still be the same thing as before (spider silk), something which is perfectly safe to ingest.
Moderator Note - deirdre
Chris's 'unsourced gish gallop about contrails and chem webs' moved to https://www.metabunk.org/chris-claytons-chat-on-webs-and-contrails.t8441/#post-202441
@Chris Clayton stay on topic please. Don't make random claims without providing the evidence.
Well.. if you knew anything about ballooning spiders you'd understand how and why the silk falls like it does. Take a couple days and go read up on them and come back... Share what you learned.
I did eat them. 11 years ago and still kicking. Maybe I'm Superman?
This is the proper way to analyze the material to determine if it's spider silk, information which has been out there for 16 years now:
No, you are obviously Spiderman. Seriously, did you think your secret could last?
Just a minor point. If chemtrails and chemwebs are a recent phenomena, post 1995 if the chemtrail believers are to be believed, then why are there reports of this mass fall of spider silk and ballooning spiders dating back well over 150 years? This a book from 1930 that described the phenomena.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...L#v=onepage&q=ballooning spiders 1930&f=false
(sorry I can't copy and paste)
Here is another report, from Australia, dated 1904
And why has identical falls of gossamer been, in the days long before the chemtrail conspiracy, or even manned flight been associated with UFO's, apparitions of The Virgin Mary, the acts of fairies and many other such fancies? And why has nearly every scientifically studied samples, dating back to 1917 if not before been positively identified as spider or insect silk?
Jay Reynolds and I would be willing to eat these silken strands and/or masses.
Worriers of these fibers are often afraid to even touch them.
Perhaps I (we) need to put this to bed, and demonstrate this on video.
How this could happen, is somewhat complicated, but not impossible.
Jay is from Arkansas, and I am from southern California......so perhaps there are two videos....with followup vids to prove we are still in good health.
Logistically, Jay and myself would have to personally witness the collection of such fibers, and eat them on (preferably) continuously recorded video. In other words, it's not a good idea to eat fibers anonymously sent through the mail.
Note....this is an extraordinarily extreme measure to prove something we are 99% sure of, but to only help dispel an unrealistic internet rumor.
Separate names with a comma.