Chemtrails Video with Ballast Barrels

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Your "team" searched my personal history, went to the John Mack Institute Xperiencers web page, went to three separate facebook pages and my own personal page. Visted my three youtube channels and who knows what else... your "staff" even grabbed a photo of me and posted it without consent or choice... and then grabbed another different photo of me and used it as my avatar for your debunking web site... I would call that stalking, intimidation and harassment.

I used your photo as your avatar. It's my custom to pick an avatar for people if they do not pick one themselves, to help with identifying who said what. I usually base this on their user name or something they say about themselves, or their first topic of discussion. Since you made a big deal of people not using their own faces as avatars, I assumed you wold be fine with using an image of yourself you yourself had posted on the internet. If you don't like it, then you are free to change it.

I would prefer it though if we could keep the discussion to contrails, and not about you.
 

Rico

Senior Member.
It's extensive... and again it all comes down to this you don't work for the government, and even if you did, even you might not know what really goes on... its speculation and conjecture. If global warming is what many say it is, and a global extinction event were on the horizon, the evidence of trying to stop it would be evidence that there is a threat. Neither I nor you can deny the earth is heating up.

Well I'm curious what your new evidence comes down to. You've peaked my interest, though your choice if you wish to share or not.

You do mention speculation and conjecture though, and you do have to realize that it's a little bit baseless to go off that alone. We can always speculate the 'government' is doing some shady ploy using planes to spray stuff, but that can only go so far as what lines of reasoning you have to build such suspicions. Yes, global warming is an issue, but why does it always have to be a cover-up? Also, why does it always have to be planes?
 

John Massaria

New Member
"Do you own a watch? Do you know how to tell time? DO you need to know how the watch works in order to tell time?"

Most people dont care how things work... they just go around not questioning much of any thing- as long as it works and they are getting paid- fed and housed, people are simple like that when it comes to things working for them...

ethanol is added to gas right? do you think most people understand exactly what it does or had a choice about that?

If and I am saying if, again we can agree the earth is heating up and species dying at alarming rate (from extinction), and possible global extinction event were on the horizon (IF)... and IF the goverments tried to correct this globally... and again, so not to get people panicking, didn't tell them the whole truth... and were say adding ... um additives (not chemicals wink wink) to the jet fuel to extend cloud cover no matter troposphere or not, so that the clouds could extend cover and protection from that great big ball that is also heating up... so as to provide some relief, again IF as a measure to protect.... is it not possible again... IF it were top secret. The people dispersing the jet fuel, the airline pilots, the crew, the general population really couldn't or shouldn't question it, since they don't even know it's in the fuel to begin with... I am just saying again... IF.... I guess that's a dumb statement.... anything could be if... but I can tell you... there is some data for concern that points to uncontrollable warming... enough so that I deleted my video and any and all posts related to the subject. My sole only discussion on this topic has been here... and now I am so tired, and writing in nearly a pitch dark room, I want to continue, but feel this should end here... at least for me. Good night guys...
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
"Do you own a watch? Do you know how to tell time? DO you need to know how the watch works in order to tell time?"

Most people dont care how things work... they just go around not questioning much of any thing- as long as it works and they are getting paid- fed and housed, people are simple like that when it comes to things working for them...

ethanol is added to gas right? do you think most people understand exactly what it does or had a choice about that?

If and I am saying if, again we can agree the earth is heating up and species dying at alarming rate (from extinction), and possible global extinction event were on the horizon (IF)... and IF the goverments tried to correct this globally... and again, so not to get people panicking, didn't tell them the whole truth... and were say adding ... um additives (not chemicals wink wink) to the jet fuel to extend cloud cover no matter troposphere or not, so that the clouds could extend cover and protection from that great big ball that is also heating up... so as to provide some relief, again IF as a measure to protect.... is it not possible again... IF it were top secret. The people dispersing the jet fuel, the airline pilots, the crew, the general population really couldn't or shouldn't question it, since they don't even know it's in the fuel to begin with... I am just saying again... IF

Would you agree though that there's zero evidence to support that "IF" actually being true?

Would you also agree there's evidence that is is NOT true, given that the composition of jet fuel is carefully tested at many stages, and in many places?

Would you also agree that the current scientific consensus is that contrail cover has a net warming effect? So your idea is not really that useful?

This site is about debunking. Debunking is about proposed evidence. If you don't have any proposed evidence, then there's nothing to debunk, and no reason to give your theory any weight.
 

John Massaria

New Member
yes net warming effect because it traps more than it reflects... that makes plausible sense. They are at wits end... and I am getting close too... I am tired...
 

John Massaria

New Member
Would you agree though that there's zero evidence to support that "IF" actually being true?
Mick, if you were President (or any other national leader) and you knew a global extinction event were on the horizon (50 years or so), would you go around spreading the news?
 

Mattnik

Moderator
John, this is going to go on and on. Why don't you start a thread clearly listing your claims so we can address them one at a time. At the moment you're asking one vague question after another.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
yes net warming effect because it traps more than it reflects... that makes plausible sense. They are at wits end... and I am getting close too... I am tired...

No they have not ever started to exercise their wit.

Look at the geoengineering research out there. It's all about the future. All about stuff they might need to do in the future. There's only a tiny minority of scientists who think we need to start geoengineering immediately. Twenty years ago there were NONE.

Look up David Keith. See what he actually says about geoengineering. If you have the time then see what he says to some local conspiracy theorists:


He said he'd fight to the death to try to stop it. And according to the chemtrails promoters like Tanner, Keith is the biggest geoengineering cheerleader out there.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Mick, if you were President (or any other national leader) and you knew a global extinction event were on the horizon (50 years or so), would you go around spreading the news?

Of course I would. You need to get everyone on the same page. People respond very well to external threats like war or pandemics.

But do you really think this global extinction event has somehow escaped the notice of the world's scientists?
 

John Massaria

New Member
Editing posts? I have not touched this thread since you've been banned. The only thing I noticed was that Mick moved your posts to its own thread...your own posts have not been modified by Mick or myself, and if it were, there would be a note on the post saying so.
Understood.... and thanks for clarity on that. I appreciate that...
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Editing posts? I have not touched this thread since you've been banned. The only thing I noticed was that Mick moved your posts to its own thread...your own posts have not been modified by Mick or myself, and if it were, there would be a note on the post saying so.

I've edited at least one post for politeness, but none of Johns. I think I might have deleted a repeat post. And I'm going to tidy up the repetition of Greg's letter (excellent though it may be).
 

John Massaria

New Member
if we can get me some graphs of global extinction of species over time from early recorded history until RECENT (not 2008) I could find few and none past 2008 maybe 2009
also temperature graphs seem to drop off around same time... odd. Maybe...
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Let's take one of your premises. Species extinction and a possible global extinction event. I will agree that we are losing a lot of species at this time and humans are to blame, directly or indirectly for much of it. I have seen little evidence that global climate change is causing the current increased loss. The two factors, right now are loss of habitat and invasive species (most of which hitched a ride, one way or the other, or was deliberately introduced).

In the future, it might, but while it might be bad for humans, it could allow another species to dominate. The extinction event that removed the dinosaurs, allowed mammals to dominate.

Now to if governments would do it without telling us, they might, some most likely would. Then there would be the problem of keeping it covered up. Thousands of folks would know and some would be able to produce solid proof, receipts for materials, for sprayers, and for other equipment.

All that being said, there is no solid evidence of any 'spraying' to stop global climate change. We DO NOT have god enough understanding of weather and what effects it. We have only started understanding the effect of 'La Nina', We still do not know why the Pacific heats up in some years. No responsible scientist would sign on to such a program at this time
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
if we can get me some graphs of global extinction of species over time from early recorded history until RECENT (not 2008) I could find few and none past 2008 maybe 2009
also temperature graphs seem to drop off around same time... odd. Maybe...

It often takes a year or two for figures to be collated, and then published, and then freely available. especially for things like extinctions, which really are not things measurable on a yearly basis - more like estimates. How can you tell when the last of a particular type of monkey died? The year of extinction is often only an estimate, based on looking back at a history of observations.

But see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_risk_from_global_warming

In 2008, the white lemuroid possum was reported to be the first known mammal species to be driven extinct by man-made global warming. However, these reports were based on a misunderstanding. One population of these possums in the mountain forests of northern Queensland is severely threatened by climate change as the animals cannot survive extended temperatures over 30 °C. However, another population 100 kilometres south remains in good health.[11]
Content from External Source
So basically no extinctions yet. Other factors are more significant right now.
 

John Massaria

New Member
I will when I get back on... for now it's 1:05 AM .... need some sleep.. good night all... and Cairenn sorry for calling you a Celtic Lady! before... I guess I felt a bit overwhelmed by so many people
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
Nobody has every suggested it is in any way difficult to spray stuff out of a plane.
As long as you don't suppose the high-bypass turbofan engines may be used for this purpose, John.

They cannot, for reasons of physics, chemistry, and other technical considerations. That rules out ALL the engine trails you can see. Also the proposed Welsbach materials would SHINE like a lamp* at jet exhaust temperatures of 1,100 deg C.

You must also consider geo-engineering facts. Volcanic plumes come back to earth in days, because their particulates bond electro-statically with stratospheric and tropospheric moisture. Only when the particles are lifted above the stratosphere, where water molecules are practically non-existent, does their endurance increase to weeks or months.

That's at around 80,000 feet, where only reconnaissance or fighter planes, rockets, and weather balloons can fly.

* They were discovered in a late-nineteenth-century search for the most efficient gas or paraffin lamp mantle element. Calcium was the first used, hence "Limelight".
 

PCWilliams

Senior Member.
The photo you see comes from Boeing 747. This is not a usual occurance, and the particular photo you have taken is a 1974 study of vortexes, which consists of 6 smoke generators, 3 on each wing. They were doing this study to see how different devices and mechanisms on the Boeing 747 can break up or at least weaken such vortices. Because vortices created by large aircraft poses hazards for aircraft travelling behind them, this study was important in understanding and improving on aircraft spacing during the take-offs and landings.

It was tests like this that led to the rule that aircraft landing or taking off behind a 747 (We called them "heavies") had to be spaced a minimum of 5 nautical miles behind the heavy aircraft instead of the usual 3 NM spacing requirement. A heavy aircraft like a 747 can leave a vortex that could literally flip a smaller aircraft.
 

PCWilliams

Senior Member.
John, quoting studies about sacharrine or cigarettes doesn't distract us from the subject matter of this thread, nor does it prove anything about the claims your video makes.

Now, where did you get that photo of the Dryden vortex study? Did you redact the original source and context, or did someone else do that? If so, show us where you got it. Someone is being deceptive here, either someone deceived you, which you should be concerned about and need to publcly expose so that others are not similarly deceived, or you did the cropping yourself. Which is it, and what is the truth about this photo?

This question goes to motive, honesty and integrity.
What is the truth about how youcame to post this photo?

View attachment 1829

I would find it very interesting if the same person who has flooded this forum with an avalanche of documents (Proof by Verbosity) in an attempt sell the illusion of a well researched position actually knew, or should have known, the benign origins of this photo. :confused:
 

PCWilliams

Senior Member.
I have been contacted over the years by quite a few people who have the same sort of story as this one from Contrailscience.com:



If they had a place to gather, they might come together there. One interesting case involves a major figure in the chemtrail movement whose name is easily recognizable.

A family member contacts me regularly and reports that this person has alienated family members and best friends over the subject, and demonstrates extreme paranoia to the detriment of the family.

I'm probably not well suited to do this, but I sincerely think that if a place existed for such support, it would eventually find members accumulating and could be very helpful.

I agree, there ought to be some kind of CA (Conspiracists Anonymous). I have two family members so far down the rabbit hole you can try to discuss donuts and somehow they end up telling you about the Rothschilds.
 

PCWilliams

Senior Member.
The issue with the conspiracy 'patients' is that they don't think they are the issue. They won't take help seriously because they believe they are in the right and so they don't need help. It's exactly the same as when you present them with verifiable evidence to contradict their claims--they don't acknowledge it, they don't think they are valid, because they are completely convinced that they are in the right even if they don't really know why.

I think really what they need is someone they can trust and someone who can be patient with them in working out their reasoning skills. Someone who is close and someone with good cognitive skills.

I used to think this also Rico. But i have two family members who have slipped down the hole. I've tried every which way to introduce some sanity. The problem is, when you try to make delusional people aware of their delusions, they simply make you part of their delusion. You become one of "them." This is what has happened to me. I have become one of "them" in their minds. I am corrupted by the system. I am brainwashed by my television. I am dumbed down by the fluoride in the water. I am blind to the truth ("There is only one truth" - my family member). I am in denial. Etcetera.

It's a weird place to be. :confused:
 

John Massaria

New Member

and still your insults (#8) persist... your web site will be an icon of rudeness, bravo. Rude, and shame on your moderator again.
You both violate your own rules: Content:Content contributed to the Site should be relevant to the subject scope of Metabunk. Content may not be illegal, obscene, defamatory, threatening, infringing of intellectual property rights, invasive of privacy or otherwise injurious or objectionable. Please read our Community and Commenting Guidelines, which are incorporated herein by reference.
"Threads should be kept on-topic, and discussion should be kept very polite. Threads should ideally be short and focussed, with a thread title that accurately describes the content. New topics should be in new threads"
see:https://www.metabunk.org/content/119-about
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.

Attachments

  • mauna loa3.jpg
    mauna loa3.jpg
    149.4 KB · Views: 336
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
and still your insults (#8) persist... your web site will be an icon of rudeness, bravo. Rude, and shame on your moderator again.
You both violate your own rules: Content:Content contributed to the Site should be relevant to the subject scope of Metabunk. Content may not be illegal, obscene, defamatory, threatening, infringing of intellectual property rights, invasive of privacy or otherwise injurious or objectionable. Please read our Community and Commenting Guidelines, which are incorporated herein by reference.
"Threads should be kept on-topic, and discussion should be kept very polite. Threads should ideally be short and focussed, with a thread title that accurately describes the content. New topics should be in new threads"
see:https://www.metabunk.org/content/119-about

Sorry about that. I missed that while iPhone moderating. It's been deleted now. I'm setting up some more specific politeness guidelines:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/1224-Politeness-Policy
 
Last edited:

John Massaria

New Member
Sorry about that. I missed that while iPhone moderating. It's been deleted now. I'm setting up some more specific politeness guidelines:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/1224-Politeness-Policy
Mick- I just re-read your new Policy- it's much more clarified for all members and guests...
I know your job is difficult, but that guy should be put on suspension or removed all together as a member. They should be professional. Your members need to follow the rules of your web site. The entire metabunk was created to fix what is wrong and clean up the internet. Insults and defamatory comments should not be tolerated simply for the fact it ruins YOUR entire premise for being helpful and useful to others- the very reason you started this web site. I know it's not easy being the owner of a web site...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Insults will not be tolerated. But that was a poor taste joke made before I instituted a more specific politeness policy today.

So let's move on. I see you've removed the video, which is good. Do you still think there's evidence to support the chemtrail theory?
 

John Massaria

New Member
John, quoting studies about sacharrine or cigarettes doesn't distract us from the subject matter of this thread, nor does it prove anything about the claims your video makes.

Now, where did you get that photo of the Dryden vortex study? Did you redact the original source and context, or did someone else do that? If so, show us where you got it. Someone is being deceptive here, either someone deceived you, which you should be concerned about and need to publcly expose so that others are not similarly deceived, or you did the cropping yourself. Which is it, and what is the truth about this photo?

This question goes to motive, honesty and integrity.
What is the truth about how youcame to post this photo?

View attachment 1829

The video shows the full image and a zoomed in version of it. I dont know what you mean by being deceptive, it is an airliner and it shows what it shows and still contains the information from NASA. Stop insinuating something that was not intended or perceived. Watch the entire video... oh and by the way... the video was even removed from my channel, yet you guys keep asking questions about it... why. Can we all be friends now?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The video shows the full image and a zoomed in version of it. I dont know what you mean by being deceptive, it is an airliner and it shows what it shows and still contains the information from NASA. Stop insinuating something that was not intended or perceived. Watch the entire video... oh and by the way... the video was even removed from my channel, yet you guys keep asking questions about it... why. Can we all be friends now?

It seems deceptive, or at least misleading, to use it to support the chemtrail theory, when it's nothing to do with spraying. It's known what it is, and there's no reason to use it in that context. Conspiracy minded people will see it, and think it's evidence, but it's not. Similarly with the barrel photos. If you know what they are, and use them to suggest something else, then that's going to look like deception.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
If there was a stabbing, and a media source published picture of Bob 'Smith', leaning over the body of John Doe, and his hand was on the knife in Bob's chest. Say that they just said this is a picture of the murdered John Doe, what would you think Bob's involvement in the murder was?
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
If there was a stabbing, and a media source published picture of Bob 'Smith', leaning over the body of John Doe, and his hand was on the knife in Bob's chest. Say that they just said this is a picture of the murdered John Doe, what would you think Bob's involvement in the murder was?
There isn't a murder weapon. Bob is checking John's chest for signs of life. He died from natural causes.

Only liquid hydrocarbons may be added to aviation spirit. Adding anything else would be immediately destructive to the engines. There aren't any exceptions to this, so try another analogy.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
There isn't a murder weapon. Bob is checking John's chest for signs of life. He died from natural causes.

Only liquid hydrocarbons may be added to aviation spirit. Adding anything else would be immediately destructive to the engines. There aren't any exceptions to this, so try another analogy.

Jazzy, I think you're misunderstanding Cairenn's post. She was making an analogy about the juxtaposition of the barrel photos and the chemtrail discussion audio.
 

John Massaria

New Member
Still many people believe these contain more than water, and have for more than 10 years. It's a belief, just like the Lockness Monster or Big Foot... and UFO's, those aluminum containers and drums only contain water and nothing more.... you know that but they just don't believe it... Some believe and some don't. Facts are facts, and I guess until they "smell" the water in those tanks, they just will not believe it... just like some people will not believe in God until they see Him... something to do with the Right and Left parts of the brain I believe, coupled with something also not scientific called faith and intuition. Go figure.
 

John Massaria

New Member
There isn't a murder weapon. Bob is checking John's chest for signs of life. He died from natural causes.

Only liquid hydrocarbons may be added to aviation spirit. Adding anything else would be immediately destructive to the engines. There aren't any exceptions to this, so try another analogy.

This talk about murder and a person named John (Doe) makes me uncomfortable.
I think I done with this web site...
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
Jazzy, I think you're misunderstanding Cairenn's post. She was making an analogy about the juxtaposition of the barrel photos and the chemtrail discussion audio.
Yep. I must stop skimming. Apologies.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Still many people believe these contain more than water, and have for more than 10 years. It's a belief, just like the Lockness Monster or Big Foot... and UFO's, those aluminum containers and drums only contain water and nothing more.... you know that but they just don't believe it... Some believe and some don't. Facts are facts, and I guess until they "smell" the water in those tanks, they just will not believe it... just like some people will not believe in God until they see Him... something to do with the Right and Left parts of the brain I believe, coupled with something also not scientific called faith and intuition. Go figure.

Really? Who, once they have seen the explanation, still thinks they are anything other than ballast barrels?
 
Top