• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Whats the typical view of chem trails around here?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Gareth

Gareth

Nothin' to see here
Ive been pretty ignorant of the whole chem trails thing. Ive heard about it and occasionally read a little bit on it, but Ive never been interested enough to look into it too much, or form a solid opinion.

I essentially wrote it off as another ATS-esque conspiracy.

But I watched this movie last night called 'Aerosol Crimes'. Has anyone else seen that? Im curious if people here take this seriously or not.

I agree with the message of the film, in as much as these new trails certainly look different to regular contrails. They look a lot more dense and seem to hang around for a long time.

But that doesnt prove anything about whats in them and if they have chemicals or solids in them. So yeah, interested in hearing what people think.
 
I haven't seen anything that takes it out of the paranoid bullshit category.

I like the sprinkler lady. Anyone repost that vid for me?

Nm, I found it.
 
Aaron LeClair said:
I haven't seen anything that takes it out of the paranoid bullshit category.

I like the sprinkler lady. Anyone repost that vid for me?
Click to expand...

Thats where I have filed in my internal file cabinet too.

I was listening to a Catherine Austin Fitts interview though, and she seems to believe it 100% wholeheartedly. Its the reason I decided to at least watch the film.

And as far as I know Fitts is credible.

Right?

Heres the film if anyone wants to know what I have seen:

Aerosol Crimes 1st Edition
 
Aaron LeClair said:
I haven't seen anything that takes it out of the paranoid bullshit category.

I like the sprinkler lady. Anyone repost that vid for me?

Nm, I found it.
Click to expand...



she's going on and on about the stuff oozing out of the ground while totally disregarding the fact that they have stolen half of the rainbow as well
 
They are real. It's likely testing for a whole bunch of stuff. Weather modification, satalite imaging, and whole knows what else.

Do I think it's part of an "evil conspiracy to kill us all?" No. I do think it is dishonest that we aren't told about it and there is evidence to suggest what is being used is harmful to humans. That would make it criminal, but I don't think it's the intentions of them, but a serious side effect of the testing.
 
They are real. I've been watching'em lay'em out for at least 10 years now in south/central Tejas. I've even had the good luck to see them with a low power telescope (I was reading electric meters). The planes were bare aluminum colored and the trails were coming from the tail-fin area, it was not exhaust condensation.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
Gareth said:
Ive been pretty ignorant of the whole chem trails thing. Ive heard about it and occasionally read a little bit on it, but Ive never been interested enough to look into it too much, or form a solid opinion.

I essentially wrote it off as another ATS-esque conspiracy.
Click to expand...

I think there's a compelling argument for chemtrails. Check out William Thomas, he has interesting things to say on this subject. I have a video of his somewhere if you're interested, lemme know and I'll put it up on zshare for download.
 
So, lets say they exist.

The main thrust of that aerosol movie I posted is that they are causing areas that once had beautiful deep blue skies to now constantly have a white/grey haze.

This to me seems like a terrible side effect if true.
 
Chemtrails are contrails.

Contrails = Backed by physics and free of assumptions

Chemtrails = Speculative with no credible backing evidence

Ever wonder why "chemtrails" seem to populate the skies along side cirrus clouds?

The only true chemtrails are those of crop dusters. The "chemtards" as I like to call them, claim contrails dissipate after 30 seconds. This is false because contrails are clouds by definition; Cirrus clouds. Cirrus clouds can spread a linger for extended hours if the conditions are right. Anything the chemtrail "activists" speculate has already been logically explained by meteorologists.

Enjoy...

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LQDQGlk_Gq0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LQDQGlk_Gq0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

I swear, if I read anyone mentioning the NWO or the Illuminati I'm going to scream.
 
It's absurd to suggest ALL "chemtrails" are contrails when there are countless videos of the "spraying" being turned off and back on while continuing in the same pattern.

I can only speculate on what they may or not be, but it's obvious that there is spraying for some purpose going on.
 
i took some photos today of "chemtrails" they stretched for miles. there were several side by side. maybe 10 or so trails. and at the same time, high above them was a NORMAL contrail that dissipated very quickly.
 
I'm really on the fence about this one, particularly because I don't know the first thing about meteorology - thanks Jose! I really don't, and I've never actually heard any chemtrail pusher fully explain the science behind chemtrails, let alone the difference between chemtrails and contrails...other than their appearances.

This site Contrail Science - Chemtrail Pseudoscience among others, has really put my speculation in check, but I think the jury is still out for now...
 
When I think of chemtrails as an idea I'm reminded of the fact that in the 1990s the Clinton administration revealed that during the 1950s the US government had secretly exposed various populated areas to radiation in order to study it's effects (presumably the better to be prepared in the case of a russian nuclear attack).

FORTY YEARS. That's how long they kept that to themselves. You think they'd have any compunctions now about crop dusting the landscape with god knows what for some obscure purpose? Better think again.

Now, does that mean that's what chemtrails are or that chemtrails even exist in the conspiratorial sense? No, of course not. But I wouldn't put it past them, either.
 
cottonzway said:
It's absurd to suggest ALL "chemtrails" are contrails when there are countless videos of the "spraying" being turned off and back on while continuing in the same pattern.

I can only speculate on what they may or not be, but it's obvious that there is spraying for some purpose going on.
Click to expand...

Uhhhhhhhh...no.

The on and off theory is laughable. The reason the contrails break is because the aircraft is cruising through pockets of moisture. Meteorologists have explained that many times but it seems believers in the chemtrail theory aren't listening.

There is NO spraying. They are contrails.
 
pixelsmith said:
i took some photos today of "chemtrails" they stretched for miles. there were several side by side. maybe 10 or so trails. and at the same time, high above them was a NORMAL contrail that dissipated very quickly.
Click to expand...

How exactly do you distinguish a contrail and a chemtrail? I'm dying to know.

See the problem is, contrails DON'T dissipate quickly. This is a fallacy.
 
contrails do not go from one horizon to the other and spread out into clouds without ever dissipating. why would another jet flying at the same time NOT leave a persistent contrail?
and finally why would a contrail turn off and on?
 
pixelsmith said:
contrails do not go from one horizon to the other and spread out into clouds without ever dissipating.
Click to expand...

How can you prove this?

pixelsmith said:
why would another jet flying at the same time NOT leave a persistent contrail?
Click to expand...

With this question implying that there is a difference between what the two jets output, we would have to assume that the jets are flying at the exact same altitude under the exact same atmospheric conditions. How can you prove this?

Jose Collado said:
See the problem is, contrails DON'T dissipate quickly. This is a fallacy.
Click to expand...

Define: quickly
 
Chemtrails are in my grey basket.

I know that our sky is NOT static. There are pockets of (cloudless) moisture, updrafts, downdrafts, pressure zones and probably a million more dynamic forces at work at any given time.

I live close to Dulles International Airport near DC and see jet aircraft ALL DAY LONG. I've seen passenger jets (clearly marked) go through pockets and disperse contrails for just a moment, and then go back to flying with no contrail. I asked one of my friends, a small aircraft pilot about this and he explained the different types of contrails, complete with illustrations.

Yet I am curious when I see two like jets at approximately the same altitude (judging by the relative size of the craft) flying through approximately the same space, separated only by a moment or two and one gives off a constant "trail" and the other does not have a "trail" of any type.

So to me, Chemtrails are in my grey basket, until there is definitive proof one way or another.
 
Back
Top