Why in the World are They Spraying?

,    »  -   223 Comments
1.7k
5.83
12345678910
Ratings: 5.83/10 from 77 users.

Storyline

Why in the World are They Spraying?Since the release of the groundbreaking documentary What in the World are They Spraying?, people have woken up to the damaging effects from chemtrail/geoengineering programs.

As a result, movements around the world are being formed to address these crimes. While many who were previously unaware of these programs are now taking action, the question now that is often asked is why is this happening.

Michael J. Murphy, Originator and Co-Producer of What in the World are They Spraying? in association with Barry Kolsky have produced Why in the World are They Spraying? which will answer that question.

This is an investigative documentary into one of the many agendas associated with chemtrail/geoengineering programs, "weather control".

More great documentaries

Comments and User Reviews

  • Teddy Mcd

    Okay - I'll bite and watch it this early Sunday morning.

    Note to Vlatko - Umm, is this conspiracy month on TDF?

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    I am curious as to why this is under Conspiracy.
    1i

  • Jack1952

    There is no "nonsense" category. Simple enough.

    Just looked out the window. The sky is blue. My expert opinion, anyway.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZMK6YNWJACHQ5CRCJW5TNYFURI KsDevil

    If this were true, then Iran should be seeing very unusual weather. Buit it still makes for good drama.

  • bfearn

    As the documentary?? clearly shows the "chemtrails" are coming from the engines of various aircraft at altitude. Coincidentally jet aircraft produce water vapor when they burn fuel and this quickly freezes.

    There are all sorts of real problems to deal with!!

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    are you serious?!?!?! its chemtrails! thats why its under conspiracy. because its bulls***

  • nosferat1

    Because everything that you do not know or understand is B.S....makes sense.

    I really like close minded people that always label anything that requires people to think "hmm, maybe he is right, maybe he isn't but just maybe, I should read more about the subject before I open my mouth and label everything I do not understand as a conspiracy"

    People like you still think that Oswald was the only shooter and he alone killed JFK from that impossible angle with a magic bullet, right? Aspartame is a "nutrient" right?:) and obviously so is Sodium Fluoride, I mean we should all drink at least half a cup of sodium fluoride in the morning, because some make believe doctor showed us some nice,shiny colored statistics on the T.V. commercial.

    Why we are on it, do not read, only losers read and it induces thinking, that can be soo tiresome and annoying. Instead just watch CNN and especially Fox news, I mean they are the good guys and never lie, nor does any government lie. I mean what a preposterously stupid idea is to think that the government maybe, just maybe lies to us. How dare anyone question them, quickly let us label them conspiracy cooks.

    In the age of information and mass disinformation, prematurely labeling everything as a conspiracy can have dire consequences, ever thought of that?

  • fender24

    Why is it bs? and what are they spraying then?

  • fender24

    Look up Global dimming then, how blue is it really :D.

  • fender24

    Were do all the aluminum come from? it is not supposed to be in the rain.

  • fender24

    Chemtrails contain barium, aluminum, micro-fibers, nano particles, and mycoplasma. In the United States, chemtrails spray's country of origin, there have been a disease called Morgellons Disease. This is created by the micro fibers in chemtrails emissions. Many people suffer from this disease and the government ignore it.

  • brianrose87

    I'm really torn on this issue. as fender24 mentions, the findings with high levels of aluminum and barium in the atmosphere are real, and there is a cause. These are good findings with serious implications.

    On the other hand, any half intelligent person initiating these programs would know its a losing battle. This would cost billions of dollars a year, require massive continuing cover-ups as the program continues, and has severe negative impacts on human health. I doubt a program such as this would be approved on a multi-national basis.

    Think of it this way. The global response to climate change has been nearly mute, especially by the big players (U.S. and China). Why would governments spend billions poisoning their citizens to fight global warming on an hour by hour (these chemtrails have a short half-life), and not spend anything on the long term solution of reducing fossil fuel use?

    I'd be more convinced if these programs didn't require tremendous double-think by the governments enacting them. Its like the government would say to itself "Hey lets risk it all to band-aid over global warming with chemtrails, but spend almost nothing on changing the CAUSE of global warming".

    I'm sure I'll get plenty of cogent responses about various aspects I didn't cover in this brief comment, and I'd love to have a discussion.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    let me ask you:
    Do you think the (airplane?) trails appearing in the sky, are caused by the augmented air traffic or by natural formation?
    1i

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    people like you think that anyone who doesnt agree with them just hasnt done the research.

    i bet you think you KNOW who shot kennedy. you are pretending JFK was in fact a conspiracy you are pretending there is no benefits to flouride or aspartame.

    yes and the next tactic of the conspiracy theoriest is to just claim the other person watches mainstream news and doesnt read enough....then take the position that because the government has lied, EVERYTHING is now a lie.

    you are typical and have not said a SINGLE thing to support your cause. just made many sweeping baseless claims.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    no one is spraying anything. they are contrails.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    no they dont. can you show me some evidence for these claims?

  • Jack1952

    I just looked again and the sky is very blue, but about four percent dimmer than it was in 1960.

    I have noticed an increase in global dim-witting. A very troubling phenomena.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    con trails....that had to be funny.
    1i

  • Achems_Razor

    Here you go, about your "Chemtrails"

    Chemtrail conspiracy theory,

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtrail_conspiracy_theory

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1584055844 Michael Turley

    Evidence? Let me see. The British government admitted some years back to laying chemtrails over Scotland. Airplane Comtrails dissipate at least in 90 seconds. You can watch the planes laying chemtrails bank and go back to cross the trail they've laid. Several planes crisscrossing themselves several times. Where is that flight going? Why do these trails merge then form cloud covers? There is plenty of government documentation explaining why they are doing it. For anyone to dismiss it as BS is simply not to have done any research and READING on the phenomenon. Of course, that has always been the way of the body public and exactly what the omnipotent corporate state depends upon; i.e. blind obedience without question. March in lock-step to the tune of the masters. It isn't the person on the throne in DC that is the real problem. It is the throne itself and those putting the puppet on the throne.

  • nosferat1

    I never claimed to know who shot Kennedy, but unlike you, I'm not a a pompous arse to call everything everyone else mentions as bs.

    I just do not consider myself that smart,educated and intelligent, but thank the heavens that there are people as smart and educated as you that always guide us in the right direction by calling everything you do not agree with as bs conspiracy theories, this of course without having any kind of proof whatsoever. Good luck on that note..

    So how many PHD's and years of research you have in this field? :)

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    not everything. just when people try to act like they KNOW something evil is happening just because they lack the information or proper education to fully grasp it. (specifically chemtrails)

    i dont need proof to call something BS when it lacks proof to be considered true.

    this is why you people believe this nonsense. you dont seem to understand how logic works.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @nosferat1,

    Why the anger? Why would you think he is a loser, close minded, and a pompous arse? He simply disagrees. Before going any further with this name calling you might want to read the comment policy.

  • Jeremy Hughes

    Agree with you completely, except on the Aspartame, in fact, someone recently linked a cool video in the comments somewhere here on this site, was a lecture by a chemist / biologist, or food expert, I believe, and he basically ran through 2 hours of chemical makeup, reactions in the human body, glucose vs sucrose vs Aspartame and other new alternative sweeteners, and by the end of the doc, had at least to me, proven that sucrose and any manufactured sweetener is straight poison to the human body. Fructose, etc, natural sugars, are fine, but he talked about how cells change when aspartame is introduced etc, I wish I could remember what it was called, something like "sugar - deadly stuff" or some such thing. Lemme see if I can drag it up on youtube, give it a watch, tell me what you think Epicurus -

    and I found it : /watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

    @ the youtube

    Please, because I respect your opinion, and have found truth from you in the past, let me know what you think of it : )

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    con short for condensed.

  • Jeremy Hughes

    Thank you, the Lustig guy seemed to know his stuff, but I've always noticed a difference between eating a piece of fruit and a candy bar, fruit I'm fine, candy bar, after about 20 minutes, I crash out into a semi comatose state, feeling lethargic and just crappy, will watch though, thanks for the reply : )

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mercenarry-ForHire/100000621480223 Mercenarry ForHire

    If i could Spray Anything it would be Deodorant.Why?

    *Point at the Person we all know who never changes clothes and lives with 30 cats.*

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Dean-Edgington/1003719946 Dean Edgington

    Ok people, don your tin foils hats lest ye doubt or be gotten at by the anti-truth rays of the elitist lizard people. Actually Vlatko, that could be a new catagory: Tin foil hat/1-D mentality interest ;-)

  • Jack1952

    Its laudable to be open minded but not to the point of being gullible. Just because a government lies does not mean that they are automatically guilty of every wild accusation made against it. Accusations should come with evidence. Not much evidence provided here. If they want me to believe that this is true they will have to do a better job in providing data to back up their claims.

    If you don't want to labelled a conspiracy kook, don't have such kooky ideas.

    Making unfounded accusations can have dire consequences. Have you ever thought of that?

  • Jack1952

    Morgellons Disease is not recognized by the CDC and a multi year study failed to identify any organisms on any patients who claim to have the disease. The CDC has suggested that these patients may be suffering from psychiatric problems. Patients are self diagnosed and they say that a doctor who diagnoses himself has a fool for a doctor.

    How do you know that the United States is the country of origin of chemtrails?

  • Jack1952

    It is not up to anyone to disprove allegations. It is up to the one who makes the accusation to back up his claims with strong and convincing evidence. If he can't, then it is B.S.

  • Karenwasherefirst

    Maybe one of you should build a website, and then people can report sittings of chem trails on it, creating a database of proof!

  • nosferat1

    Name the segment where I called him a loser? I did call him a pompous arse on good reason. When you have no proof, no credibility, no credentials but start labeling any information that you do not agree with as bullshit.

    What does that make you? Did the comment policy mention that somewhere? I don't know, maybe I missed something.

    I like how people on the internet always think they somehow know the answer to everything. None of us has the ultimate proof whether chemtrails are actually real or not. So the verdict of a normal person would be "hmm interesting, maybe they are right, maybe wrong, still, thanks for the info" and not "what a bunch of bullshit, I know this is not real, I mean I do not really know since I have no relevant education in this field but I KNOW that this is all a conspiracy and whatever anyone says, I am right"

    Also where is the segment in the comment policy that allows people to troll continuously? How many replies has epiricus made so far?

    If anyone has anything to mention, they politely say "look, the makers of the docu made some valid points, but even though they look like people who know what they are talking about, I disagree with them and here are some links and info to support my claim, now you make your own decision and see if you believe chemtrails exist or not"

    But on the other hand you can always take out the "omg it's just a bullshit conspiracy" card.

    Oh and btw Dondon, you just made a fool out of yourself, I think for the 10'th time already. I won't even bother to fully reply to your post, not worth my time. Achems_Razor and me are maybe agreeing on some points, but same person? Yeah...right.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Dean-Edgington/1003719946 Dean Edgington

    Yeah there is a bit of bias around here that, on occasion, affects the way certain comments are received. I'm not saying this has happened in this case (I haven’t been following the discussion) and I don’t think it’s much of a problem generally but religious and conspiracy "believers" tend to be treated a little differently at times. I guess I’m sort of on the sceptic and atheist side of the divide but I like to see all comments treated equally, it’s the basis of freedom of speech. Still, Vlatko and co. do a sterling job.

    BTW, I won’t be referencing any examples of apparent bias because I have a life*** i.e. I don’t have the will or time to trawl through hundreds of discussions/slanging matches.

    Keep talking...

    ***not entirely true ;-)

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @nosferat1,

    Just follow the comment policy. There is no good reason for name calling.

  • nosferat1

    Comment policy seems to give preferential treatment to some. There is no need for name calling, but is there a need to troll continuously and label everything that does not fully relate with your thoughts as a conspiracy?

    I don't know, maybe there is a need. People with no research, posting wikipedia links that even they do not fully understand, to back up their claim calling other people who took time,money and years upon years of studies and research as conspiracy freaks.

    Nope, I can't seem to find any fault in this logic, as of fact it makes perfect sense. I mean let us label everything we do not fully know or understand as a conspiracy theory and label everyone who might have an open mind as a conspiracy freak.

    For a very long time,no one could fully prove that smoking was bad for you. Everyone who tried to link cancer to smoking was called a conspiracy freak, only after many protests, documentaries, books and a fight that lasted for decades, did people start to wake up.

    I see a fine example of the same bigoted mindset here. I mean why should we allow even the possibility of the thought that chemtrails might be real, right? Everyone who believes that is just a conspiracy freak because...because why? Because we and by that I mean you people here know better? Because all of you spend decades of your life on research and can prove without a shadow of a doubt that only you are right?

    Well, good luck to everyone on that note, I shall not waste any of my time and yours again.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @nosferat1,

    You don't understand do you? Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. Read the comment policy.

  • Daniel Jones

    I remember the pre-grid blue skies. I was also one of the first people to start photographing the blatant chessboard square patterns *(first appearing) over US cities like Atlanta in the early 90's. It's disturbing that anyone born after sometime in the early to mid eighties doesn't even recognise that there is any difference. They've just grown up in this toxic sludge and call it normal.

    This doc does a lot to clear up the patent, vested interests and money trails that inevitably connect to the geo-engineering elephant in the living room.

    * edit for clarity

  • dewflirt

    Supposing they were trying to make clouds leak, how would they know the rain was a result of their efforts? It's a cloud, clouds are wet and likely to rain anyway. And how would you compare the amount of rainfall from a cloud before seeding to the rainfall after seeding. Can you measure how full a cloud is? And why would I believe this anyway? They have enough trouble predicting tomorrow's weather, let alone organising it! They're just guessing, maybe looking for any excuse other than global warming and pollution? Always makes me feel better if I can blame someone else! As for the doc, someone should tell them, the plural of anecdote is not proof ;)

  • over the edge

    nosferat1
    do you know the definition of conspiracy theory? here it is "1.a theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.
    2.
    the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public. "
    why doesn't this doc fit that description ? and your smoking example is a good one. when enough evidence was gathered and the relevant studies were done the claim went from conspiracy to fact. there is no reason if what this doc proposes is true the same thing can occur here. also accusing the site of bias when Vlatko includes the docs that might go against what he thinks shows his desire to give a fair chance to those who do not think as he does. wouldn't it be easier to just not include the doc at all and avoid the issue all together if he was so biased?

  • dewflirt

    Check out the red rain in Kerala, also rains of fish, frogs, squid and worms, bird blood (in italy), crabs, periwinkles and jellyfish! Way more interesting than filaments ;)

  • nosferat1

    I understood the comment policy just fine.

    Expressing an opinion is 1, calling other people names like "conspiracy freaks" and labeling and entire documentary as a bull*hit conspiracy is something else, would you not agree? or do you not see the difference between "they might be wrong" and "bwhaha bulls*it conspiracy"? are they the same to you? is that what it means to express an opinion? D*mn I did not know that, from now on everyone that does not agree with me will be called a ****** and whenever someone counters I will always reply "well you know, everyone has the right to express their opinion"

    I mean as far as I know the rules of the game, if you label something a bulls*it conspiracy, you are required to present valid,cold hard facts to support your claim. Also you can't go presenting wiki links anymore, nope, you waved to that argument goodybe the minute you called the docu a bulls*it. That means that YOU know better, and that in turn requires YOU do present proof that YOU researched, I am still waiting for those people in here to present their research, their PHD thesis on this subject, I am waiting for those documents.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    im sorry fender but if you believe that website you posted, then you are beyond help. what makes you think that website is telling you the truth?

    Morgellons (also called Morgellons disease or Morgellons syndrome) is a name that was given in 2002 by biologist Mary Leitao to a proposed condition characterized by a range of cutaneous (skin) symptoms including crawling, biting, and stinging sensations (formication); finding fibers on or under the skin; and persistent skin lesions (e.g., rashes or sores). Doctors, including dermatologists and psychiatrists, regard Morgellons as delusional infestation (also called delusional parasitosis), i.e. the belief that there is a pathogenic infestation despite contrary medical evidence.
    Despite the lack of evidence that Morgellons is a novel or distinct condition and the absence of any agreed set of diagnostic symptoms,[not in citation given] the Morgellons Research Foundation and self-diagnosed Morgellons patients successfully lobbied members of Congress and the U.S. government's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to investigate the proposed condition. The CDC researchers issued the results of their multi-year study in January 2012, indicating that there were no disease organisms present in Morgellons patients, the fibers found were normal clothing fibers, and suggested that patients' sensations were manifestations of "delusional infestation".

    please fender....please wake up and learn how to think critically. you seem to believe in anything and everything that is clearly a hoax.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    "but is there a need to troll continuously and label everything that does not fully relate with your thoughts as a conspiracy?"

    who is trolling continuously and please give an example?

    are you saying the only people who would dare call you a conspiracy theorist are those that dont understand or dont do research. what if i told you that i was a conspiracy theorist when i was younger and believed all these silly little things also? i have read all the websites/books, watched all the documentaries. i believed in chemtrails and 9/11 and JFK. dont pretend like you are the only one who studies this stuff.

    how about you stop CRYING and start trying to use evidence to defend your position?

  • http://www.facebook.com/shan.wang.1272010 Shan Wang

    can anybody tell me where to find the subtitles of these videos? thanks a lot.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    "but is there a need to troll continuously and label everything that does not fully relate with your thoughts as a conspiracy?"

    oh the irony. i have credibility, i have credentials. and i have NO proof from your side. learn what the burden of proof is.

    "I like how people on the internet always think they somehow know the answer to everything. None of us has the ultimate proof whether chemtrails are actually real or not. So the verdict of a normal person would be "hmm interesting, maybe they are right, maybe wrong, still, thanks for the info"

    so if i told you that fairies make the gardens grow and photosynthesis is just a conspiracy would you say "hmmmm interesting, maybe you are right, maybe wrong, still, thanks for the info"?

    NO! you would want evidence or proof. and without that you would call me an idiot AND RIGHTLY SO.

    "Also where is the segment in the comment policy that allows people to troll continuously? How many replies has epiricus made so far?"

    replying is not trolling. In fact I am a moderator of the website and im pretty sure there is no rule stating how many posts you can make. I have also been on this website for a number of years now.

    now stop crying to vlatko and ACCUSING me of being a troll. that is a pretty serious claim to make against someone. could get people banned. but i guess making false claims without evidence is kind of....your thing.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    If what many consider possibly chemtrails were all contrails, they would be regular as planes have pretty regular schedule.
    But no, some day the sky does remains blue while on other days it is covers with while trails and then the whole sky becomes "cloudy" even though it is a sunny day. Passenger and commercial planes don't take brakes.
    I don't know what's going on for sure, but something ain't right!

    1i

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    Is this the site that convinced you that all is normal and dandy?
    1i

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    I solved that in a disclaimer a few days ago.
    I am stupid and good at it.
    1i

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @nosferat1,

    No one said that you're a conspiracy freak. @Epicirus labelled the doc as conspiracy BS, he didn't say a word to you, until you came out with your insults. You started pouring out you anger and insults just because someone said that this documentary is a conspiracy. In case you didn't notice the doc is under "conspiracy" section of this site, which means I also believe this is conspiracy BS, and a lot of other people share that belief. True, lot of people believe in the contrary but that doesn't mean we should flame this thread.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    Thanks, of course i didn't' know that. Google? what is that?
    You did not answer my question to Achems by the way?
    1i

  • Daniel Jones

    What an odd coincidence lol. I very nearly mentioned that simple test in my own post. Flights follow the same time and direction day after day. If you see a chemtrail forming at a given time it should be there at the same time and place the next day but this is almost never the case - even disregarding for atmospheric variations which might affect the length of the trail on any given day. But on days that you can see both a chem and a contrail try timing the obviously disappearing contrail and it will be there the next day at the same time.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    It's the travel agent in me talking....worked 10yrs as one.
    1i

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    big difference between could seeding and chemtrails. this is a problem of equivocation.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    that is all based on the weather that day.

  • Lynne Overlander

    Excellent!!! I am impressed with the research and documentation that went into this video .... and the sincerity and intellectual responses of those interviewed... Thank you for producing this documentary and making it available to the public!
    Lynne

  • Yavanna

    No equivocation going on at all. You need to watch and understand the lecture by one of the top US scientists on the matter. There is nothing ambiguous nor misleading in either her lecture or my comments. I posted it so enjoy.

  • Kateye70

    Interesting link, Epicurus. I found that reading the comments gave even more information than just the initial article.

  • Kateye70

    I live on the US east coast, in the Boston-Washington DC travel corridor, near one of the major airports.

    The day after 9/11/2001, when all air traffic had been shut down, I went outside to go to work, and looked up. I was amazed and just stood there. The sky was stunning. I had been living in that area for almost 20 years and never saw a sky like that, even on the nicest days.

    In contrast, I grew up on an isolated military base in an area with little to no air traffic, in the days before airplanes became as common as buses.

    One day without air traffic made the East Coast skies as clear and pristine as the ones I remember from my childhood. Those of us old enough to remember those days marveled at how we had forgotten what the sky really looks like.

  • Daniel Jones

    Aye, the Iceland Volcano shenanigans did that for the UK in 2010. Weeks of clear blue skies while the planes were all grounded :-)

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    however people here are claiming that they are spraying chemicals from little machines on planes and the goal is so that the chemicals fall down and some how adversely affect the population (even though those same government officials share the exact same air and sky as everyone else)

    cloud seeding technology is not what we are discussing.

  • Yavanna

    Sulphur is a chemical (well i thought it was an element but tomato tomato) which they are admittedly spraying from air planes. This isn't a word play - they are spraying chemicals. They are only admitting to sulphur at this point but who knows what else? I think you are now being obtuse.

    The people believing more noxious chemicals are being sprayed can substantiate their own claims I am merely evidencing that they are spraying something and people should not be so closed minded in their responses to what at first might seem outlandish claims.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    what you are talking about is Stratospheric sulfate aerosols (geoengineering) and it is designed to offset the effects of global warming.

    could you provide some links i could see where governments have admitted to trying this?

    Im pretty sure there is too much concern about the negative side effects of this for any western country to be doing it on a large scale other than small experiments for research purposes.

  • Jack1952

    The dissipation of contrails is dependant on humidity. If it is humid the trails will last longer because the air is saturated with moisture. Humidity does not follow a schedule.

    These contrails are more common today because of the marked increase in air traffic in higher altitudes. Toronto, a world class city, had a terminal that could no longer handle the increased traffic and had to expand in the early seventies. Air traffic out of Toronto has increased incredibly since then and it is obvious by the amount of high altitude planes flying over my home one hundred and sixty kilometres to the east of the city. Coincidentally, contrails have increased also.

  • Jack1952

    Sincerity does not mean that they are correct. Most of what they presented is available with a simple Google search. What they fail to do is pinpoint exactly who is responsible. Never answered any questions that would lead to the perpetrators. Did not show us a sprayer, where these planes are based, what governments are involved, who in the government is actively participating and who isn't, did not name a factory where this spray is produced, no description of the infrastructure necessary, no explanation why governments not involved are silent about it, and no explanation how the perpetrators plan to survive the poisoning of the planet that is meant to kill the rest of us. That is just a start. This is a poor investigation that doesn't begin to address the situation they are describing.

  • Jack1952

    There is a great difference between a proposal and the implementation of a plan. There are also proposals on how to terra-form Mars. Doesn't mean they are doing it.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    Off course!....
    1i

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    Not all the "people here are claiming" what you accuse them of. But all of you are claiming it's bull****, as you answer my first question on the thread.

    1i

  • lakhotason

    What confounds me is that one group of conspiracy theorists say what man supposedly puts in the atmosphere affects the climate while another group of conspiracy theorists say the trillions of tons of what we know we put in the atmosphere does not affect the climate.

    I'm confused. Could these conspiracy theorists decide one way or another?

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    because it is (it being the claims made by the documentary).

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    different chemicals in different quantities.

  • lakhotason

    Yes but these conspiracy theorists say their minute amounts of chemicals cause massive changes while at the same time say massive quantities of the very same chemicals cause no changes.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    well trying to pin down the logic of a conspiracy theorist is like trying to herd cats.

  • lakhotason

    And push a string.

  • Yavanna

    Why don't you email Jane Long directly at the research institute? It's been two years since her "proposals" so surely the experimentation has moved along and if there is no sinister side to this and it's part of our war on global warming then she can point you towards the relevant reports.

    However my best guess is that as with most experimental sciences (particularly those with obvious military applications) they will keep such information to themselves as long as possible. So I doubt she would answer your or my questions.

    For one thing they admit that they don't really know the long term side effects and consequences of geo-engineering of this type. In the lecture they equate it to using a gastric band to fix obesity. They say it's a severe response to an acute problem. If the global warming problem is as drastic as they say and the solution so harsh then it is a certainly that they wont immediately make it common knowledge. As you quite rightly say, there is too much concern for the potential negative side effects for them to do it all openly. People for some reason have an adversity to being sprayed by their governments.

    There is some discussion in the lecture about an international treaty preventing the proliferation of chemical spraying but they mention that within the treaty there is an exception whereby sovereign states may "self spray." And as I have indicated from my personal experience I believe this is being done in the UK. The UK would be the perfect test tube, being of a moderate size and island based. As for your point about "is it being done on a large scale?" Well it must be being tested on a reasonably large scale or else the test would be useless for determining a global effect. These huge trails are seen all over the world (but mostly in the USA and the UK.)

    What you are now calling Cloud Seeding and she was calling Stratosperic sulfur aerosols I choose to call Chemtrail spraying. I have no objection to your terminology as the cap fits. Maybe the more conspiracy oriented folks here think they could be adding other chemicals to the aerosols. The thing is - they could easily do so. Please watch the lecture in its entirety - or at least from 14 mins to about 30 minutes as the use of aluminium particles is discussed.

    Please also read the guardian article which describes how the British military have tested germ warfare on it's own people in the past. Up to 60 or more years ago they sprayed god knows how many things on us. Perhaps we'll know the truth of all this in another 50 years time when they release the classified documentation......

    The documentary here is about WHY? My original post gave a rational response to the question and evidenced it by pointing to scientific research and development that had moved so far (at 2010) that they have designed military airships for the purpose. That takes years and this has been on the table for as long.

    Most of the debunking against the existence of chemtrails is based on how and why. Jane Long says how. She mentions existing aircraft suitable for the purpose, and developmental airships. The why is stated as a response to global warming.

    Epi I think you live in Canada somewhere. Have you never seen one of these huge trails going from horizon to horizon? If you have then have you not at least considered it strange? Did you ever remember seeing this stuff 10-15 years ago? A quick bit of googling indicates that they have been seen in your country.

  • Yavanna

    I`m sorry I don't bother responding to straw man arguments.

  • Jack1952

    Why did the makers of this film not approach Ms. Long, as she is an expert, and ask her opinion of chemtrails? I suspect the reason is because of this quote from the Guardian Environmental Network in which she says "One thing we didn't talk about is a concern I have that the only people who are engaging in this issue are people belonging to groups who think there is a geoengineering conspiracy, that the government is already doing climate modification and that's why we get all these jet contrails everywhere. I just think it's very important to expand the discussion beyond this group, which is not extremely legitimate as representatives of concerned society. I'm very concerned that we take this beyond the conspiracy folks." "Not extremely legitimate as representatives of concerned society" is what she says of the people who made this film. Once again, she has made some proposals. She has in no way suggested that they be implemented...at least until more research has been done. The report of her task force calls for comprehensive study of geoengineering options.

    That is not a straw man argument.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003018964335 Vexst Junglist

    it makes me angry that something that involves so meny has been kept so quiet, who are these pilots, do they even know what they are realeasing into the air, where i live i see so meny chemtrails, and when i dont the blue sky looks so great, white skys are so unnatural, its such a shame no one seems to a give a ****. **** is **** dowg.

  • Philio

    Refreshing, a voice of reason.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003018964335 Vexst Junglist

    morgellons is self asembling nano tech, i kno that for a fact, as jesus told me,

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    so you assume a lack of questions answered automatically means a conspiracy? or maybe they wont answer them because they are baseless or unfounded. that is another more likely scenario.

    cloud seeding, stratospehric sulphur aerosols, and chemtrails are three very different things.

    I live very close to Pearson international airport. i see airplanes all day every day and yes those trails are simple contrails. and yes this stuff has been there as long as there have been airplanes, however there is A LOT more these days because of the mass amount of travel due to increased population and means.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    LOL you are trolling right?

  • Yavanna

    "Why did the makers of this film not approach Ms. Long,......."

    You could write to the authors of this film and tell them to do exactly that? I didn't say I was a fan of this video and it's not up to me to defend their lack of acuity.

    "quote from the Guardian Environmental Network"

    Could you post a link to that please. I cannot properly discern what she is saying from what you are saying. In any case from what you have thrown together there makes no difference to anything I have said or linked to. Nor the inferences I have drawn. She is merely stating that she doesn't have a high regard for conspiracy theorists. I don't either in general. It piques my interest however that she IS aware of the high amount of "contrails" and that her work will obviously be picked up upon because of groups wondering WHY.

    Have you actually watched the lecture? They were at least well into experimentation as of 2010 if not implementing, or else they wouldn't KNOW that the proposal would work, and they wouldn't have known the types and number of aircraft needed to go global, and they wouldn't have had built airships for the purpose. So in answer to the part of your previous post:

    "There is a great difference between a proposal and the implementation of a plan. "

    1) Ms Long expresses certainty. Scientists never do this unless repeatable verifiable evidence can be shown. This implies that much experimentation has already taken place.

    2) Two years have since passed. More than long enough for these stages to have been bridged even if by the time of her presentation this wasn't already the case.

    3) Aerosol spraying has been done in the past, this isn't a new technology. The only way to test her plan however is to do it on whatever scale is necessary to achieve a useful sample of data. She is effectively stating a proposal to go global. She did not say it was untested. I have never said it has gone global.

    4) She is working for the US military who are not well known for being open and honest. She was almost certainly not telling the whole story.

    Quite often plans are proposed and acted on quickly. I could give you some inane examples but I wont be petty. The circumstances would be subjective and in this case they say we are in dire peril and need drastic solutions yesterday! So why would there be this "great difference" as you say and I humbly ask you to quantify what you think that might be. Your argument is non sequitur.

  • Yavanna

    I never said I assumed a lack of questions answered automatically means a conspiracy - don't try to put words into my mouth. As I said to Jack in another post I will not involve myself with the construction of a strawman argument.

    So you have seen normal small contrails and you live near an airport. Have you seen huge ones? That's what I asked. I see both in the same airspace. I said I live near airports because I see a LOT of aircraft at varying altitudes. This was so as to show that I am familiar with what is normal and what is not. It would be very unlikely that normal airports would be used for the purpose of spraying. Even normal contrails are produced at higher altitudes so your close proximity to an airport would actually preclude the possibility of seeing the big ones locally; as aircraft at Pearson would be at low altitude, either landing or taking off.

    The increase in the amount of air traffic argument is a very common one used on the debunking sites. It could have increased by a factor of 100. That would not answer the question of why some so called normal contrails are so huge and hang and spread out over hours. People are certainly seeing a lot more contrails over the years because of increased traffic. This is not what people have issues with.

  • Yavanna

    "cloud seeding, stratospehric sulphur aerosols, and chemtrails are three very different things."

    No. They are essentially the same. They all introduce elements in the atmosphere. They all produce trails and clouds. Your argument is just wordplay. Again - please use whichever one you feel most comfortable with. The result is the same.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    next one should be; Where in the world are they spraying?
    We see them all the time in the booneys, perhaps not so apparent in the large cities.
    1i

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    so because i live near an airport i wouldnt ever see them?

    i see planes flying at varying altitudes sometimes not stopping at this airport. sometimes they are tiny little dots and the only time contrails spread large is when the weather is right.

    sometimes it happens sometimes it doesnt. but it is always just contrails.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    they are different things.

    one is meant to produce clouds for rain, one is meant to stop or slow global warming and the last is meant to poison and control a populace.

    it is not wordplay they are three VERY different things.

    you are basically saying a blimp a fly and a parrot are the same thing because they all fly.

    arguing this point doesnt matter. i know you are arguing about stratospheric sulphur aerosoles, and there is no evidence that it has been done.

  • Yavanna

    Yeah - but then that might mean that the people who do these amateurish videos might actually need to put some real journalism into their efforts. I applaud them for questioning the status quo but they don't really do a very good job at it.

    There are groups of people (off the top of my head one group is on the Isle of White) who track chemtrails and document them, but It needs a concerted effort to join the dots. I always check the skies but I`ve got used to them now and what can I do about it anyway? Sometimes I will check the live satellite imagery when I get back home and see huge slashes across the maps. I can only hope that they have a benign purpose.

    Part of the problem is we've become over familiar with seeing them. That and the internet generation are largely in their twenties now and don't know a time when we had normal skies. Watch any TV or movie from the eighties and even the nineties and you will NOT see chemtrails. But hey they'll be older one day. have more life experience and be far less inclined to believe what the people on the magic box tells them.

    Quite often the people arguing against the existence of chem trails simply don't live in areas where they are prevalent. They haven't seen them therefore they don't exist. But it boggles the mind that they can see the numerous images and not see what we see.

    What annoys me intensely is being referred to as a conspiracy theorist because I question mainstream opinion. But worse: Conspiracy is not a dirty word. Theory is not a dirty word. I resent the degradation of my language to misrepresent people with valid concerns. I resent the smugness of people who think that if you ask challenge an authority view you are to be likened to a crazy trouble maker. Burn him he's a witch - he disagrees with the dear leader!

    These same people almost always source all their opinions and facts directly from a "debunking" website. They read it as gospel without ever giving thought to why most of these sites are professionally run. Seriously: who funds and operates these sites? It's strangely on par with religion versus atheism. Atheist sites are mostly appalling. Whereas religious apologetics usually have professional well funded sites. If there is a concerted and dedicated effort to debunk an issue that takes my interest to a higher level. What interests are these sites favouring? These people are not casual hobbyists.

  • Yavanna

    "so because i live near an airport i wouldnt ever see them?"

    Probably not. Contrails are as I said; are produced by aircraft at higher altitudes. As a rule you don't get aircraft at high altitudes going over airports. The controllers tend to get upset when that happens.

  • fender24

    LOL u are sorry? :D Copy and paste from Wiki that's great. Do you're own research or Are u afraid of what u might find?
    It is beyond imagination that they are living in this situation and still having to try and convince people that it is a real disease. Check out Connie_M 2006 She had morgellons for 10 years. See for yourself.

    The website i offered is one of many sources that do more to answer the mystery about morgellons then CDC will ever do, who do nothing but showing hostility and being dismissive with the morgellons community over the span of the last eight to ten years. Why should i believe them?!
    Scientists claim that Humans do not have fibers that are blue or green, yet when they study the Morgellons patients, they are finding synthetic fibers of blue and green, & they don’t know what to think of it, just like Jan smith is offering her own study.

    NEW studies confirms that Morgellons disease is not a delusional illness, as some in the medical community maintain.
    Veterinary microbiologist Marianne J. Middelveen and internist Raphael B. Stricker.
    Check out they're published study that Morgellons disease and the veterinary illness known as bovine digital dermatitis have similarities. BDD causes lameness, decreased milk production, weight loss, and skin lesions near the hooves of affected cattle. Fibers seen in the BDD are similar to those seen under the skin of people worldwide who suffer from Morgellons disease.

    In January of 2012, new independent research just published in the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dermatology Research found that Morgellons is in fact a real disease

    Check out nanotechnology.

    Dermatologist Peter Mayne

    Dr. Staninger has been documenting and treating Morgellons' patients and tying the exposure to nanotechnology.
    under the skin of people worldwide who suffer from Morgellons disease.

    U have no idea what u are talking about, so i am sorry EPICURUS.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    i see contrails everyday. lots of them. i can guarantee you they do not only form at high altitudes.

    they are not only formed by exhaust but by water particles coalescing at the wing tips.

    "Their formation is most often triggered by the water vapour in the exhaust of aircraft engines, but can also be triggered by the changes in air pressure in wingtip vortices or in the air over the entire wing surface."

  • crassfrazier

    Because WE allow it!?...Yea Foster Gamble, its OUR fault for creating fallacious need for toxic products and generating billions in personal wealth!?...Who is really externalizing the cost of business?...Why you, of course!...the(elite my ass) CRIMINAL CLASS...not US!

  • http://twitter.com/WebbieMe Thelma

    to me these guys know what there talking about and if you refuse to believe them that is your choice but there lotsssss of people that know it is real.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    you mean there are a few loud people that BELIEVE it is real.

    they dont KNOW.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    I would give a "like" on some of what you write, but on the rest i won't.
    1i

  • fender24

    NEW studies confirms that Morgellons disease is not a delusional illness, as some in the medical community maintain.

    Ray Stricker and Marianne Middleveen, and their associates, with no budget, only the power of original thinking, and rigorous scientific discipline provides in they're study the EVIDENCE i was seeking which the CDC and u clearly overlooked, CDC should be ashamed! The evidence come from people much more educated then u and me! So if that doesn't makes what i have said credible, Morgellons disease is not a delusional illness, then i am sorry epicurus then u need to wake up.

    Morg. Dis.: A Chemical and Light Microscopic Study by MJ Middelveen, EH Rasmussen, DG Kahn and RB Stricker present relevant clinical observations combined with chemical and light microscopic studies of material collected from three patients with Morgellons disease. The study demonstrates that Morgellons disease is NOT delusional and that skin lesions with unusual fibers are not self-inflicted or psychogenic. They provide chemical, light microscopic and immunohistological evidence that filaments associated with this condition originate from human epithelial cells, supporting the hypothesis that the fibers are composed of keratin and are products of keratinocytes.

    Morgellons Disease: A Chemical and Light Microscopic Study as cited above has been a “must read” by the Faculty of 1000 (F1000). (F1000 is a global community of over 10,000 experts who select, rate and evaluate the very best articles in biology and medicine.)

    Now that they've identified the fibers as keratin-type structures created by our own bodies, the next step is to find out *why* they're created.

    This news need to get out to the major media to our docs to (perhaps slowly but surely) see that this condition is just as real as my breath, and then try to help them!. Thousands of people deserve it.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    lol i cant believe you believe this and then copy paste it here.

    you have no idea how science works and that is your problem.

    these two quacks are not published. there is not a single journal that accepts this paper.

    WHY WOULD THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY BE HIDING THIS? WHAT IS THEIR GAIN?

    its a shame how easily people can be fooled when they dont have the proper tools to think critically.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christian-Tintin-Johansson/562803246 Christian Tintin Johansson

    Anyone who believs in this **** must be a bit r*tarded. Just like the id**ts who firmly believe in the "free energy" devices on Youtube, even though the maker of the device and the video say it is driven by a motor because the scematics from the "inventor" never could work.

    Please stop posting mockumentaries about crazy stuff and start posting real documentaries set in the real world.

  • docoman

    30 plus years ago as a kid I used to watch jets going over. Sometimes their contrails lasted less then a minute, some days it lingered for hours, sometimes spreading out, sometimes staying quite thin. Sometimes there was no trail at all. I assumed then, as I do now, much of it was related to the atmospheric conditions (temperature and humidity, wind speed ect) the jet was flying through. Whatever it was on a particular day, all the jets that passed over left similar contrails.
    I don't know if they're 'spraying' anything now, but the contrail observations I did see years ago, seem the same as I see now, as many people report in other places. If they are spraying, they must've been for over 30 years then, going on my observations. Otherwise it's the same now as it was then, just more traffic.

    Edit- not only jets, I've seen on WWII doc's piston engine bombers leaving long contrails.

  • memoiandi

    You might not be an *****, but you are at least certainly delusional.

  • fender24

    Why do u think i am delusional?

  • memoiandi

    Really? Have you not read your previous posts? I don't need to waste my time proving you wrong as others have already done a fine job of that. Your posts have shown you to be intelligent. Therefore, since you are not unintelligent, you must be delusional in holding on to such easily and repeatedly falsified beliefs.

    I hope I answered the question to your satisfaction. However, I'm guessing not.

  • fender24

    LOL. So u are calling M. J. Middleveen and co author RB stricker much more educated people delusional then because my "falsified beliefs" comes from they're research. Then Prove to me that they are delusional with a credible source that support it because they make such "easily and repeatedly falsified beliefs." and if they're research is based on falsified beliefs then what is false with they're study? were is the proof which support that?

    Good luck.

  • memoiandi

    Thanks for proving my point. Like I said, you are delusional and I shall not waste anymore of my time talking to you.

  • Yavanna

    Your insertions into this conversation about water vapour trails (from wing tips etc) are irrelevant. It's tantamount to me bringing up the CO2 released by passengers in a car whilst discussing the pollution caused by their car. Sure it's there but so what? I felt you were deliberately being obtuse and pedantic. It simply doesn't justify the effort of a serious response.

    I`ve spent an hour or so studying the graphs on your link. They all involve the path of an aircraft crossing through clouds of varying moisture content. There is very little difference in any of the graphs. and little if any explanation of persistence other than them being caused by lower temperatures delaying the melting of ice particles.

    The photos of contrails linking to each graph type do not show clouds.
    That's the first problem. I regularly see ALL types of contrails whether it is cloudy or not. Whether it is hot or not. In all conditions of humidity and whatever else, and all year round. I also regularly see aircraft in the same airspace producing vastly different contrails.

    Natural clouds are formed at varying heights, the highest of which is 6 KM. I will repeat my earlier citation for ease:

    "Contrails only form at very high altitudes (usually above 8 km) where the air is extremely cold (less than -40 degrees C)." .....NASA

    So there is another anomaly and contradiction.

    Quote from the top of your link goes further to evidence why I believe chemtrails, or if you prefer "deliberately caused massive contrails that persist and spread" are being used to modify the climate.

    "Contrails, especially persistent contrails, represent a human-caused increase in the Earth's cloudiness and are likely ot be affecting climate................"

    Epi, I'm glad you've made me question my standpoint in this matter but only time will tell what the truth is. They say a critical point in our future will be around 2020 so we don't have that long to wait. You have a fixed view on this matter and I'm never going to be able to convince you otherwise. You rely heavily on debunking sites and wikipedia and are too trusting of official versions of events, whilst history continues to prove mainstream information a useful propaganda resource that can be varied to suit. On another level too science evolves and changes with newer information and maybe that might provide a better example.

    I don't carouse the conspiracy websites. I become aware of matters like this from a multitude of factors including personal experience. Then I do my own research. I read all the opinions including those of debunking sites. There is misinformation on both, whether deliberate or not they cannot be completely trusted whatever side of this debate you on.

  • Yavanna

    I never said it is a localised "phenomena." This is something reported all over the world.

    Your points about the UK and Long being in the USA make no difference. Politically and militarily you might just as well think of the UK as being the 51st state anyway. In so many regards they are so much in bed as to be indistinguishable. However perhaps on a scientific level they may have fallen out somewhat............

    So firstly, thank you for the direct to link to the Guardian article. In this she does actually STATE that her "proposals" ARE actually be a follow on to pre-existing research that IS being done in the UK!

    "If you just battle ahead without taking some time to do public engagement, you're going to end up doing what the Brits are doing right now, which is funding some geoengineering research [to spray aerosols into the atmosphere], sending the scientists out in the field to deal with the public, and then having to postpone the whole project because they just mismanaged it. So we feel that's a very good example about how not to run it, that it should be done in a much more deliberative way. It shouldn't just be science. It should be social science and law and humanities and members of the public that are debating about how we move forward, and then in the future if there is anything that we think would be a good idea to do, you are in a position to use the products of your research. A secret project in the back room is just the absolute wrong idea."

    "I'm pretty unhappy with what the Brits have done right now in terms of how they're managing this experiment."

    So basically Jack I can only thank you once again for bringing this article to light. It has tipped the balance for me. I was somewhat agnostic about the whole issue. But now my rather moderate theory is (as you say) a conspiracy FACT. Aerosols ARE being tested in the UK and almost certainly in the other countries where "chemtrails" have been seen.

    I can see why you only quoted the part of a report that suited your argument. Either that or you only read what you wanted out of it. I only respect Jane Long more for her candidness in wanting to be transparent, and for her concerns that conspiracy theorists of a more radical nature might damage her work. The part you quoted earlier now makes a great deal more sense when read in context.

  • fender24

    "these two quacks are not published. there is not a single journal that accepts this paper"

    Morgellons Disease: A Chemical and Light Microscopic Study
    Cited by Faculty of 1000

    OMICS Publishing Group
    An Open Access Publisher

    Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dermatology Research

    "the journal that you cite here is an online open source journal that is not very credible"
    That is you're claim which lack credible proof, i have no reason to believe this journal is not credible .D

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    "Your insertions into this conversation about water vapour trails (from wing tips etc) are irrelevant. It's tantamount to me bringing up the CO2 released by passengers in a car whilst discussing the pollution caused by their car. Sure it's there but so what?"

    completely false analogy. you can not see the co2 being released by the passengers in the car. it will never be mistaken for the exhaust from the car.

    "I felt you were deliberately being obtuse and pedantic. It simply doesn't justify the effort of a serious response."

    funny im begginging to feel the same way about your posts now. I have continually attempted to make what is being discussed as clear as possible so as to avoid being obtuse and pedantic.

    ""Contrails, especially persistent contrails, represent a human-caused increase in the Earth's cloudiness and are likely ot be affecting climate................""

    that doesnt mean it is the intent of the planes, nor is it conclusive.

  • Jack1952

    You have interpreted the quotes about the Brits to suit your own opinion.

    Quote. "Brits are doing right now, which is funding some geoengineering research [to spray aerosols into the atmosphere], sending the scientists out in the field to deal with the public, and then having to postpone the whole project because they just mismanaged it." Did you not see the words research and postpone. It doesn't say anything about ongoing implementation.

    Quote ""I'm pretty unhappy with what the Brits have done right now in terms of how they're managing this experiment." Experiment...not a full blown project.

    When asked if she felt about the idea about secret research (not a full blown project, mind you) she responded this way. "There wasn't anything that we know about that's going on like that. The conspiracy theorists have a right to their opinion, but I don't know of any evidence that would support what they think is going on." I don't know how one could misinterpret that.

    This is what you wrote earlier in a comment directed towards me. "I have never said it has gone global." So I took this to mean that it was a localized phenomena. I'm sorry but I'm sure it would be easy to make this mistake by what you said.

    This is a quote that you posted "His US experiment, conducted with American James Anderson, will take place within a year and involve the release of tens or hundreds of kilograms of particles to measure the impacts on ozone chemistry" Hundreds of kilograms is nothing. That is one plane making one flight. You have stated many times how the skies where you live have changed because of these suspicious contrails and the implications are that hundreds of flights are engaging in this activity right now. Your evidence consists of watching contrails personally or on the internet and the talks of a scientist who is discussing the need for research into geoengineering because we may be facing a climate change catastrophe.

    Everything you have said in all your posts implies that you believe that it has gone much further than just research even before you read the article that I referred you to. All I can do is wonder how two people can read the same article and come out with such diverging conclusions based on what that article said. Its as if we speak two completely different languages. Maybe I'm being unfair but what I see is someone adjusting what he reads so they match his own opinions. There is no way this article supports or gives any credence to a conspiracy involving chemtrails.

  • Teddy Mcd

    These too are my observations.

  • fender24

    Okay? That's you're opinion.

    If u do not have evidence from credible sources to support you're falsified claims u should keep it to yourself. You're words are simply not enough and u say i need to wake up? I rather listen to people more educated.

  • Wang Global Team

    How do you explain th existence of 4 to 6 parallel chemtrails when the aircraft only has 2 engines ? Are you reinventing the laws of physics ?

  • bfearn

    Hey, what do I know!!

    I just flew numerous types of jet aircraft for over 40 years and observed just a few contrails. The fact that|I never saw such a thing is probably due to my ignorance and bias.

    Good luck chasing imaginary problems when the world is full of real problems you could be trying to solve.

    Captain B. Fearn

    PS: Too bad you have no name.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    the trails also come from wing tips. once again just go look up CONTRIALS.

    you are being tricked by conspiracy theorists.

  • Daniel Jones

    Lol the transhumanist agenda crew here are all in a lather again and wielding their derogatory conspiracy theorist allegations as if that were something to be ashamed of.

    I am reminded of a Plato quote: "Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught falsehoods in school and the person that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool."

    Nothing ever changes ;-)

  • Jack1952

    Who is teaching falsehoods? It is you and those like you who are making the allegations. We can't believe you because you offer no evidence. "I have seen trails in the sky that linger for hours." That's not evidence. That someone in the government once lied isn't proof. Please learn the term "rules of evidence". Find out what it means. Understand how deep one must go to find true evidence. If just one of you could do that, I, and the others, who doubt you now, would believe you, because we do understand the rules of evidence. That's all we ask yet all we get are superficial anecdotes and interpretations of observations. Evidence does not leave itself open to interpretation. It is self revealing. Show us the planes, up close. So close you can see the sprayers. Find the manufacturers... the truckers that deliver the stuff...the mechanics and crew that work and fly those planes. Do something besides look up at the sky and say "Look at that. They're spraying us". This is nuts and bolts investigation. Confront the culprits. Show them the work orders. Ask about the paper trail. Don't automatically accuse because you don't like the government. And what in the world does a quote from Plato have to do with contrails? Does it somehow make you feel wiser, or smug in your belief that you have the insight most don't have?

    I'm left just shaking my head at the mindset and the complete incomprehension of how to present a case.

  • Daniel Jones

    Jack , at the risk of sounding facetious I will say this: The transhumanist, scientific reductionist agenda would have us believe that the TRUTH only exists in the rules, deeds and sayings of the new high priests of their own choosing. You guys are like a very bad circular argument gone wrong. You choose the rules, the acceptable sources, experts and the jargon and expect people to abandon their basic right to common sense and to just believe that everything that goes against modern vested interests is somehow a conspiracy theory and anyone who dares to look in that direction must be nuts or stupid.

    You expect people to believe that any evidence presented from sources that you do not like is not evidence at all.

    I howl with laughter when I see the standard moronic debunking sites or Wikipedia being used to quash serious investigation by good people who simply desire the truth in a world filled with so much spin and lies in every important aspect of their lives. Have you ever followed the money trails behind those lame debunking sites?

    Science might be able to statistically prove the possibility that an elephant can hang by its tail from a buttercup but I'll keep my common sense that tells me it aint gonna happen.

    If your beloved post-industrial science wasn't so perpetually busted faking its own data, bending its own rules, and so obviously working for the benefit of industry rather than human life, more people might mindlessly believe everything it has to say or not say. But that just isn't the case anymore.

    And no I don't feel wiser for the quote. It just seemed to be a perfect description of the prevailing mindset of the diehard apologists here.

    And one final point you seem incapable of grasping. Any well oiled conspiracy is, by its very nature, designed to be compartmentalised and evidence will be very thin on the ground. For the worst case scenarios one is forced to look for tidal waves of circumstantial evidence because, quite frankly, the perpetrators never intended to make it easy or even possible to prove. This is where mankind's inherent and very powerful common sense and intuition must kick in. But this is always the point where the lab coats start hurling insults and throwing all of their toys out of the pram.

    I have noticed a clear trend here. The insults and holier than thou attitude stems almost exclusively from the scientific reductionist posse.

    The true spirit of inquiry and open debate comes from the guys looking and thinking outside the box, rather than from within the closed minded corporate/scientific agenda side of the fence.

    Just another observation I'm afraid I can't prove but don't really give a dam*

    typo edit

  • Yavanna

    "completely false analogy. you can not see the co2 being released by the passengers in the car. it will never be mistaken for the exhaust from the car."

    It's a perfect analogy. Your reply just further shows that when you have no real argument against what I originally stated; you slip into wordplay mode. You only brought up wing tip ice to further obfuscate the debate. Strawmen didn't work so switch tactics.

    Stick to debating creationists perhaps. They're less inclined to recognise such shannanigans. Either way I have made my points clearly and succinctly; including that I would never be able to convince the likes of you. My post was not made for "you." You exhibit confirmation bias continually and it's pointless to discuss an issue with someone who hasn't the good grace to see another's viewpoint nor admit to points containing veracity.

    This is just a game for you. I fail to see what entertainment you get out of it.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Daniel Jones,

    Here we go again. Thinking "outside of the box."

    What almost every conspiracy theorist assumes is that all who oppose him must have corporate/scientific agenda and that they do not think "outside of the box." (whatever that means)

    People here are ordinary folks, just like you. They don't wear white coats, they don't work in the "industry." But they're different from you in one aspect - they don't believe in the conspiracy theory you happen to believe in. And further more, they don't believe in that conspiracy theory because they're ignorant or that they're lazy to investigate, but on the contrary, they've looked up the so called "evidence" and decided that it is not enough to persuade them.

  • Daniel Jones

    Yavanna you must accept the fact that the only recourse many of these scientific/technocratic reductionist apologists have left is to revert to the Hegelian Dialectic in times of trouble.

  • fender24

    All you're papers are not up to date!, LOL LOL because new studies already prove what i have said it is not a delusion anymore like BBD it has a true physical cause. One of you're journals show Raphael B. Stricker on it, who also is a co author on my journal from march 2012. He is educated enough and credible. He's work with Middleveen is great and CDC is a fraud i expect no truth from the government which prove me right again and again. If u don't it is fine, but it doesn't give u right to come with false claims that i have no evidence. Then you are lying and i am done talking to u.

    “This study puts the final nail in the coffin of delusional disease that these patients have been labeled with,” stated Dr. Stricker. “It proves that Morgellons disease is a physiologic illness. From here on, scientists will be able to move forward in finding a cause and a cure.”

  • Daniel Jones

    Vlatko

    You make unwarranted assumptions in your first paragraph and in the second paragraph you lump all conspiracy theories together under one roof, and then assume that disagreement is the issue at all.

    I, and other non conformists are fine with disagreement.

    The pervasive problem with this site is that your "scientific paradigm" posse gets to define the game, the rules, the sources and to top it all off - they immediately resort to character assassinations and insults, intentionally obfuscate or deflect attention away from valid arguments and define their own sources as "proof" and all others as quackery. I could go on but I have already defined this problem in previous posts.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Yavanna,

    Aside strawmen and obfuscation, do you really believe that there is chemtrail conspiracy out there? Before answering the question we must clarify what this conspiracy theory actually suggests.

    "The chemtrail conspiracy theory holds that some trails left by aircraft are actually chemical or biological agents deliberately sprayed at high altitudes for purposes undisclosed to the general public in clandestine programs directed by government officials."

    What evidence led you to believe this is true? As far as I can see your best evidence is "watching the sky" and one "video/article".

    Watching the sky is simply not enough, and I think Jack and Epicurus clearly showed you that the video/article is also not enough one to conclude that there is world wide full blown chemtrail conspiracy.

    Remember, we're talking about massive scale government cover up. Not an isolated experiment or a series of experiments that are or will be conducted to test geoengineering to prevent climate change catastrophe.

    Further more "chemtrails" are studied by many atmosphere experts and environmental organizations and they all conclude that all those are just contrails.

    I don't want to go in details, but at one point you actually tried to present that NASA is hiding important info on their website. It turned out you didn't look hard enough.

    So, what you actually posses is only a hunch that this experiment activity looks fishy and that there is possibility they were doing this for years in the past. But that is far away from real evidence.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Daniel Jones,

    Well you mentioned "thinking out of the box" and "corporate/scientific agenda", not me. There is nothing unwarranted in my comment.

    Simply, you place yourself out of the box (the one who knows the truth) and we are into the box (the ignorant who have agenda). That is the shorter version of all of your comments left, so far here.

    Don't allude that my "scientific paradigm" (whatever you mean by that) is stopping you from doing something. You're free to say whatever you want as much as you can and as much as you want. The rules are the same for you and me, of course defined by the comment policy.

    The floor is yours. But please skip the moral lessons. Get on to the evidence.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    the reason i linked the Stricker paper was to show that it admitted: "Further clinical and molecular research is needed to unlock the mystery of Morgellons disease."

    and yes i know striker said that in more recent paper however THAT paper has not been accepted by a credible peer reviewed journal.

    you are going in circles.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    i have made no attempt to argue against what you are claiming. right from the beginning i have admitted to the existence of what you are talking about. however right from the beginning pointed out that was not what this doc and my convo was about.

    you seem to be trying to argue about something i have not been trying to argue about.

    your defensive posturing makes me wonder.

  • Yavanna

    You are holding to a radical definition of chemtrail which I haven't addressed. I did hint that the aerosols could (and knowing military thinking) probably would be weaponised. At it's very simplest every contrail could be termed a chemtrail as aircraft leave trails that contains chemicals...but now I`m being pedantic......

    But to answer your question. I am agnostic as to what radical conspiracy theorists believe, ie that this is part of an NWO operation to depopulate or whatever. I do however believe that my very moderate theory (which I advanced in my original post) is not just likely but highly probable.

    Yes my further evidence is from my eyes, common sense and critical faculties. You make the rather derisive comment that my evidence is "watching the sky." Do you believe your own eyes Vlatko? Essentially an experiment requires observation in the first place. This observation I have performed over a lifetime. I have as a result formed a hypothesis and predicted results. I observe huge "contrails" and the sky is turned to a grey soup. I hypothesise that regardless of weather conditions or the presence of natural clouds I will see the same happen again and again and it does.The only two stages left in the scientific method (as I`m sure you are aware) are experimentation and conclusion.

    Unfortunately I am not Bill Gates (who is coincidently partially funding the New Mexico tests later this year) nor am I any other sort of billionaire. Therefore I cannot conduct such experiments personally. I must rely on "trusted" agencies such as the US military and certain UK labs to perform the experimentation. The lectures and articles I have pointed to prove experimentation HAS taken place. It is also now a mainstream scientific conclusion that stratospheric aerosols cause skies to become cloudy, and reduce global warming by blocking a proportion of solar radiation. Their conclusions has proven my hypothesis.

    Scientists are starting to become more open about the testing which they speak about in the past tense and ongoing tense. I believe (yes I don't KNOW) this new supposed transparency is a response to undeniable claims that the testing is taking place. That it has probably been taking place for much longer than documented. This is to a tiny extent "faith" based but further based on the subjective experience and known history of the modus operandi of such agencies as could implement such an plan.

    These ongoing experiments are now attracting fierce anti sentiment from environmental groups and competing scientists in the field. Not just the tin foil wearing hippies. More and more normal everyday people (I like to put myself in that group) are becoming aware of the issues. If the full extent of this experimentation was known then there would certainly be an intense public outcry. Professor Long is specifically concerned about this.

    For that very reason alone it is common sense experimentation has been clandestine. It would have to have been the military who carried out the implementation. They are the only viable organisation that have the "tools" for the job. Secondly science of a cutting edge nature tends to be very secretive. Not just that connected with possible military applications such as climate control but in most aspects of industry.

    "Watching the sky is simply not enough, and I think Jack and Epicurus clearly showed you that the video/article is also not enough one to conclude that there is world wide full blown chemtrail conspiracy."

    They have clearly shown me nothing of the sort. They have done nothing but muddy the debate by trying to associate and equate "my theory" to those of the more radical folk who do nothing but watch Alex Jones and David Icke videos. At what point have I concluded that there is a global chemtrail conspiracy? Jack wants to play "quote definition tennis" whilst Epi is all over the place with misplaced ideas about how contrails are formed.

    "you actually tried to present that NASA is hiding important info on their website. It turned out you didn't look hard enough."

    Poppycock. Sorry Vlatko but I answered that in depth previously. And if I didn't look hard enough the first time I certainly did when both you and Epi pointed to those graphs. I replied to that. And I continue to assert that they do not explain the huge contrails. I also indicated that some of their data is anomalous and contradictory. Whether that is deliberate or not is questionable. They're only human after all. I question all information. I don't just accept data at face value be it from NASA, Alex Jones or anything in between.

    You call my "theory" a hunch. Even if it is just a hunch then I would remind you most of the greatest scientific discoveries have been born from hunches. Please do not disregard your innate ability to intuit and enquire.

  • Yavanna

    If I`m coming across as defensive, that is born from frustration. I re-assert that what this doc about is the question of why these huge "contrails or "chemtrails" are happening. My original post advanced a working hypothesis that seems in every testable aspect to be true.

    I don't really have much else to say on the matter and I sense that both you and I have reached a point where we might start losing respect for one other. I don't want that to happen; so as with another long conflab we once had, it might be prudent to admit that we will not convince the other. Which I feel is a shame in this case as it's one I feel passionately about.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    seems to be true other than the fact that there is no reports or evidence of what you are talking about actually being done.

    it seems like to me that people are just mistaking contrails for other things. there is no credible evidence to suspect that the trails in the sky are anything else.

  • Daniel Jones

    Vlatko I apologise for posting 3 separate youtube video links. I confess to being overly passionate about this issue and just kept going. I'm done now I promise.

  • Daniel Jones

    Crap I lied. Search this youtube video "Government ADMITS secretly SPRAYING POISON on us!!! Also admit secret tests hundreds of times!"

    A local news report on chemtrails and government shenanigans proving barium found in chemtrail residues etc. Government admits contaminating urban populations with biological weapons testing and that they have the right to do it.

    Barium is radioactive. Thus not good for life..

  • Daniel Jones

    That's the badger :-)

    Edit: OMG I actually clipped and saved this one!! I have the actual article in my hand now. I realised at the time it was important and it never left my mind - although I did slightly scew the actual memory with radioactive elements. Still I didn't do that bad after 10 years!

  • fender24

    In this documentary you will learn how aerosols are sprayed in the sky above us and is used in conjunction with other technologies to control our weather like HAARP and EISCAT in Norway. While Geoengineers claim that their models are only for the reduction of global warming, that aluminum and barium particles should return the sun rays, it is now clear that they can be used as a way to consolidate a vast amount of both money and political power in the hands of a few - Illuminati - by utilizing weather it brings companies and organizations Illuminati hidden control of the earth's natural systems.

    This will of course be done at the expense of all life on the planet, and causes a lot of diseases, like morgellons, alzheimers etz, in humans and animals, beedeath, fish-/birddeath and poisoning of fauna and soils that threaten public health through the infected food we eat.

    The program is also used in warfare between states, for those who do not want to accept voluntary Illuminati New World Order.

    So if they are reducing global warming, Where is they're nobels price!??
    No one is taking credit.

    Can this explain the odd animal deaths lately? what do u think?

  • Daniel Jones

    If you can control the weather you have insider trading knowledge to wield at the Chicago Commodities Exchange where you can make Las Vegas Casino style bets (otherwise known as derivatives) on the predicted price of the crop in question. That price is intimately related to weather conditions.

    Chicago is also the US home of Al Snore's carbon trading bank which depends on f8cked up weather to exist (now officially dubbed "change" rather than "warming" as that has been well and truly ridiculed thanks to their repeatedly being busted attempting evidence manipulation).

    Please do your self a favour and have a look at the bets being placed this year against crop failures at the exchange.

    They are reminiscent of the put options placed agains American and United airlines pre 911. Someone has insider knowledge and is using it to make a killing.

    Incidentally - China just officially de-invested completely from the NASDAC because they say it's a rigged game and have invested completely in gold.

    George Soros ha just pulled all of his assets from Wall Street and doubled his gold holdings, So has Paulson and just about every corporate heavyweight you can think of.

    As horrific as it may be to imagine, the whole game is rigged and we're not even guinea pig status any more.

    "Don't run , we're your friends... zap" Mars Attacks... lols

  • fender24

    Former FBI Chief, Ted L. Gunderson is a true american hero, everybody who does not know him should check him up, RIP.

    Wiki:
    "The last years of Ted Gunderson's life were spent warning people of what he called Chemtrails and of planetwide Satanic and New World Order conspiracies. Gunderson had identified military bases he said were responsible for dumping unidentified poisons around the world from unmarked aircraft which he indicated killed wildlife and perhaps even humans. Gunderson spent years speaking on this and has made a number of videos. He also claimed, at a 1995 conference in Dallas, that a "slave auction" in which children were sold to men in turbans had been held in Las Vegas, and that four thousand ritual human sacrifices are performed in New York City every year. He also claimed that the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City was carried out by the United States government and that the events of 9/11 were perpetrated by the United States Government as well.[9]"

  • Daniel Jones

    Hell yeah - just youtube the local news coverage showing the removal of 3 additional and larger bombs that were removed unexploded from Oklahoma City on the day in question. MULTIPLE LOCAL NEWS COVERAGE.

    It's live and real and I can't believe people don't even know it happened. It's like Building 7 amnesia.

    Off topic but I had to say it.

  • fender24

    But we got arnold! " I terminate u!"
    He should replace obama and save us from doom.

  • fender24

    interesting ill look into it.

  • Daniel Jones

    "more than one bomb at oklahoma city" will take you where you need to go in Youtube land

  • fender24

    how much do u think u could earn from crop fails?

  • Daniel Jones

    It depends on the bet. Millions...Billions. Depending on the bet you could earn more than the crop would be worth at harvest. That is the sad fact of the world we now live in.

    People really need to understand what derivatives really are as they are the lions share of the world debt every one of us has just taken on.

    Derivatives account for more than the total assets of the world at present.

    Does that even ring any bells? We owe more than the total value of all GDP's and GNP's in the world today.

    How did we get there? A series of 40/1 bets that went wrong started the initial collapse and nobody ever went to jail over it.

  • Daniel Jones

    Ok Vlatko thanks for the floor and your patience with reviewed link posts. I'm signing off now and leaving the door open for any nay sayers who choose to discredit the circumstantial evidence presented :-)

  • Yavanna

    I put that guardian link in my very first post.

    It is indeed conclusive evidence that governments would have no moral objection to testing weapons on their own populace. That they have had the technology available for decades and they are able to keep it top secret for as long as they wish.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Daniel Jones,

    You laugh at Wikipedia links, and at the same time you present cheesy YouTube links. As if they're more credible. Go figure.

  • Daniel Jones

    Vlatko you make me laugh sometimes you really do. Yeah just one second while I warm up my F-15 and I'll be back with some fresh snaps.

    Just what would you quantify as proof?

    The answer is nothing. You will accept no testimony, no video, no photograph. You are truly a *** individual.

  • magarac

    Never knew aluminium being a heavy metal. But the experts say´d it so it must be true.
    Just learn something every day:)

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Daniel Jones,

    I've only pointed out your bias towards sources with the same credibility. Obviously you prefer YouTube as your main source of evidence.

    Now what will you accept as proof that you're terribly wrong? Nothing. No official investigations, no NASA explanations, no debunking websites, no Wikipedia, etc... See, the same argument is applicable to you.

    Now, what kind of individual am I is none of your business. In fact you've already violated the comment policy. When out of facts just retort to good old personal disqualifications. Strike one.

  • fender24

    well all the TDF documentaries are linked to you tube. so that seems to me you're main source aswell. His you tube vid show ted gunderson speakin, doesn't that make it credible? i think people underestimate youtube :P.

  • Daniel Jones

    Again you twist my words. Obviously you are cherry picking from another thread with RobertAllen1 where both he and I agreed cordially that Wikipedia is ok as long as its a starting point and not an end all and be all.

    I even admitted that my Youtube evidence was circumstantial and yet you try to make out like I'm treating it like a holly grail and I never was. But we have to start somewhere and I can guarantee you that not 1 single piece of evidence would ever be accepted as proof by you so I tried a circumstantial approach - only to be heckled by you.

    You are an arch word twister and the facts dont support your bias.

    My original question remains unanswered as per your normal operating procedure.

    Just what would you accept as evidence?

    There is no physical evidence that couldn't be faked - audio, video, textual etc. I could show you a video of Obama himself admitting to it all and you would just cry CGI forgery.

    If you think I crossed the line and earned a strike so be it. I merely descended to your level and cast aspersions against your character that I feel are perfectly warranted at this point.

    And it does make me sad. Sad for the future of the human race that may some day be conned into sitting in a pot of slowly boiling water like a frog waiting for SCIENTIFIC proof that it's getting hotter before it's too late to jump out and save his @ss.

    You have a god or genetically given common sense that should kick in in times of crisis and yet you have a default authority worship mechanism that if it was able to infect the entire population of this planet would surely wipe us out within our own lifetimes.

    I will continue to do my utmost to speak to those who still have a rational self preservation mechanism left to them until the day I die.

    PS. It's no coincidence that you lost the soul of this site (AZ) when she left after our last conflab. There are many here who are getting bored with the standard operating procedure against those here who attempt to question the status quo.

    Just a thought for you to mull over...

    (edit) What really gets me (and I mean this sincerely) is that I used to think this was a really special place.

  • Daniel Jones

    Thanks Fender :-)

  • Jack1952

    Youtube is an amazing source of entertainment and information. It is also a place where anyone can post their own views whether those views carry validity or not. Therefore, when watching a video be sure that there is corroborating proof from other sources. I would think that is common sense with any information no matter what the source.

  • Daniel Jones

    Jack I completely agree with you. Starting point on par with Wikipedia.

    BTW I responded to one of your earlier posts but never got a reply. Always appreciate an exchange with you :-)

  • Achems_Razor

    Az has not left, she is under a new profile..."oQ"

    You are talking about personal issues here with some ad hominem thrown in that really has nothing to do with the doc, please keep it on topic.

    And for your info a lot of people still think that TDF is a special place.

  • Jack1952

    "transhumanist, scientific reductionist agenda" There's a mouthful. What the heck does it mean, though?

    You confuse science and the application of science. One is learning and the second is taking what one has learned and using it to one's advantage which can be for good or bad. Give one person a bat and he will go out a play a game of baseball with the kids. Give it to another and he may bash someone's head in for the twenty bucks in his wallet. The same goes for the knowledge gained from scientific research. It is a human issue not one of science or the scientific method. Scientific research gave us the amazing technology that allows us to discuss issues like the one we are discussing now. That is wonderful. It is not so wonderful when someone takes that technology to monitor our actions and limit our freedoms. However, that is not the computer's fault or the fault of the science that built the computer. It is the fault of the person(s) who usurp this amazing discovery for unethical purposes. Surely, you can understand that.

    It has nothing to do with the source whether I give credence to the allegations or not. It all depends on whether that source gives reliable, irrefutable evidence or not. When making allegations against someone that has the horrific implications that are being made, one must be more than sure. One has to have evidence beyond a shadow of doubt. The proof must be impeccable to the point that those who disbelieve are thought to be the wacky ones.

    The idea that conspiracies are too hidden from view prevents real evidence says that there is no evidence readily available and so intuition and suspicion will have be enough. A frightening thought. I would hate to be convicted of a crime without any evidence just the idea that I may have behaved in a strange or suspicious manner.

    Thinking outside the box has its merits under certain conditions but one should show restraint when applying this principle when making accusations of a criminal nature. My imaginative meanderings should not land someone in jail or worse. That would be displaying a lack of responsibility that is dangerous if accepted as the way to follow the rules of evidence.

    I must reiterate. You display an amazing lack of understanding of science, the scientific method and the application of science.

  • Jack1952

    Something went awry in my gmail account. I have responded to a comment and I think it may be the one.

    Youtube is too much of an open forum. Widipedia makes the attempt to present only information that can be verified. There is no restraint with Youtube. Say what you want...verification is never required.

  • Jack1952

    I would never, no matter who the person is, use a person who claims that four thousand human ritual sacrifices are made in New York City every year. That is an allegation that is so far out there that I am amazed that anyone would use him as a reference. He is not a real life "Fox Mulder" and definitely not a credible witness.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Daniel Jones,

    1. Skip the philosophy and moral lessons.
    2. Stop profiling me.
    3. Stop telling me (us) who is (were) the soul of the site. You don't know the nature of the site and you don't know what are you talking about.
    4. Don't patronize.
    5. Strike two.

    As per your original question, Jack already answered it hundred of comments ago. But you don't read do you?

    Here is the quote:

    "I have seen trails in the sky that linger for hours." That's not evidence. That someone in the government once lied isn't proof. Please learn the term "rules of evidence". Find out what it means. Understand how deep one must go to find true evidence. If just one of you could do that, I, and the others, who doubt you now, would believe you, because we do understand the rules of evidence. That's all we ask yet all we get are superficial anecdotes and interpretations of observations. Evidence does not leave itself open to interpretation. It is self revealing. Show us the planes, up close. So close you can see the sprayers. Find the manufacturers... the truckers that deliver the stuff...the mechanics and crew that work and fly those planes. Do something besides look up at the sky and say "Look at that. They're spraying us". This is nuts and bolts investigation. Confront the culprits. Show them the work orders. Ask about the paper trail. Don't automatically accuse because you don't like the government.

  • Daniel Jones

    Wow Vlatko. Strike 2? I must really be a threat here or something. Amazing. And Patronize? This place is so full of patronisation it should be carved above the door. Perhaps it is you who doesn't read...

    And you still have not clarified what you would even accept as evidence? I suspect nothing but you have dodged the answer 3 times. I only asked in an attempt to focus on that stream, but..never mind.

    Have a great day ;-)

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Daniel Jones,

    I've already answered your question. What do you want me to clarify? I quoted Jack, I agree with him, but since you refuse to read let me emphasize some of his words (again):

    1. Show us the planes, up close. So close you can see the sprayers.
    2. Find the manufacturers... the truckers that deliver the stuff...the mechanics and crew that work and fly those planes.
    3. Ask about the paper trail.
    4. Do something besides look up at the sky and say "Look at that. They're spraying us".

  • Daniel Jones

    1) Shown in youtube video and admitted could not vouch for it. Trouble is I can't take a physical plane and squish it down the internet to show you anyway so I need to resort to a video. That's just an irrefutable fact of any internet based discussion that requires proof. They guys are apparently f-15 pilots. Seemed a good place to start.

    2) Fair enough. However discrediting Ted Gunderson simply because his information is too shocking is completely duplicitous and outrageous.

    3) Paper trail clearly documented through Congressional record and Patents. SEE H.R. 2977 section 7. go to fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/hr2977.html

    4) That's patronizing. I merely posted a few links where others have done that but clearly focussed on a case of starting and stopping - thus disproving atmospheric or altitude being involved.

    It seems to me that the case will remain unprovable due to all evidence being rejected. But that means that no case can really be proven on any topic under discussion on this site.

    So the status quo simply wins the argument by default every time?

    (edit for clarity)

  • Daniel Jones

    If my previous post broke any rules it completely escapes me. I thought it fairly well fulfilled your criteria and demonstrates the impossibility of proving anything on the site. Quite frankly I destroyed you so why won't you post it please?

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Daniel Jones,

    Don't flatter yourself. You're not a threat, you're only nuisance. You didn't destroy anything, except your credibility and reputation... that is if you had any in the first place.

    You've clearly demonstrated that when shaken you quickly retort to ad hominem, personal issues, philosophy, moral lessons, preaching, and patronizing.

    You've also showed that you don't even remotely understand science, the scientific method and the application of science. Further more it seems you don't know what the word "evidence" means. Common sense is not evidence.

    So since I've answered your "original question" your response is that it is impossible to prove anything on the site. Remarkable. If that is the case why do you even bicker with these comments back and forth.

  • Jack1952

    I received a "Reply posted incorrectly" message. No agenda. Not everything is part of a large conspiracy and I doubt that anyone is afraid of any message you post.

    The number one reason I like this site is the comment policy. Too often, in other sites, the comments degrade to mud slinging and name calling. It is school yard debating and I appreciate the efforts that do not allow that behaviour here.

  • Jack1952

    The video is comprised of a plane leaving a trail which could be anything and may be suspicious but may not be. The narration is dubious and may be self serving. Apparently F-15 pilots but not confirmed. The entire video needs context before even being considered as evidence.

    My impression of Ted Gunderson is that of a bitter and angry individual. Bitter because he was passed by as the director of the FBI. He retired shortly after a new director was posted and it does appear it was due to his being passed by for promotion. His anger may be the cause of his losing touch with reality which manifested itself in those shocking allegations. He provided very little proof of what he was saying and thought that his career in the FBI should be enough to give him credibility. As Carl Sagan said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". Gunderson fails by this criteria.

    Your paper trail is a bill requiring the United States to never engage in space militarization and includes the use of chemtrails. Doesn't prove they exist...only that there is a potential. Bill failed mainly due to the idea that most thought that passing such a bill would leave the United States vulnerable if the rest of the world didn't have this policy as law.

    You may not be able to prove your case due to limited resources but anyone who makes a video, like the video here, should do a much better job of stating their case. All they did was talk to a few people who had their suspicions and show video of the sky. No in depth stuff anywhere like I had asked for.

    This is not "win" the argument situation. This is a "hold in abeyance" argument. In other words, when you have the proof come back and I will listen and evaluate. What you have is not enough. The start of any case begins with zero knowledge. Evidence is gathered until every hole is plugged and there is no way to deny, in a reasonable manner, the legitimacy of the case. Again, not done yet. You see, I have not completely dismissed you or your argument. You just have to get more proof that is verifiable. Until then, I do not think that anyone is spraying the planet on a global scale.

  • Teddy Mcd

    Hmm... I was wondering where Az went. I was off-line for awhile. Now I know - thanks. And TDF is a special site - albeit with normal growing pains.

  • Effn Wasted

    Good Documentary. Ive tried informing people about the chemtrails. They either don't care or think its just another conspiracy.

    Ah don't you guys see that those expanding "contrails" that last in the sky for hours upon hours is our answer to the pending water shortage? I mean really?. If I have a glass of ice water. There will be condensation on the outside of the glass. Only until the water inside the glass reaches the same temperature as the air on the outside. How people can actually believe that those "contrails" that expand and last for ever is actually condensation is beyond me.

    Yes there are really contrails. Those that follow closely behind a plane. Then they simply disappear within minutes. (If even that long) The conditions have to be just right. I have never personally seen more than 2 actual contrails in 1 day. Lucky if I see 1 a week. Never mind 3,4...12. Yes Ive seen 12. All in less than 8 hours. I'm sure I'm not the only one!

    So those trails if not condensation. Then what?. If its harmless then why not tell people what they really are?. Although I wouldn't trust anything I was told. Show me the facts and proof.

    Common Sense... Have you seen it?

    With the chemtrails and GMO foods. No wonder people are getting rich from people getting cancer.

  • schenker123

    Whilst I do think the governments can and do illegal things, an explanation for contrails lasting is to do with pockets of high and low pressure in the surrounding vicinity

  • fender24

    Revealed: Army scientists secretly sprayed St Louis with 'radioactive' particles for YEARS to test chemical warfare technology

    source: Mail Online

  • Jack1952

    This is an isolated incident and involves the spraying of specific neighbourhoods and happened a long time ago. We are talking about a world wide spraying happening right at this moment. You are taking one incident and expanding it into a comprehensive global endeavour. One does not prove the other. You have to give direct evidence of this global chemtrail spraying that is happening today. The rest is just superfluous junk.

  • noconman

    You idiots who don't believe that their is something terribly wrong with chemtrails that have become an every day event in todays world, are obviously either to young to remember the clear blue skys of my youth, or never look up at the sky at all. I grew up near an airforce base in the early sixties with jets flying around daily. Contrails where only short trails and only on the jets at extreme altitudes. Never did I see anything that remotely resembles the obvious spraying at lower altitudes, in grid patterns and clear signs of particles falling and spreading out until a crystal blue sky turns in to a haze of unatural looking clouds.
    I'm to old to argue with anyone, it is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they are being fooled. I know they exist, and they are not natural. If you believe otherwise, so be it. This world has become a circus sideshow for me, and I laugh at the clowns who don't speak out against atrocities or even pay attention to reality. Call me names or insult my intelligence, I don't care...I will only laugh at your attempts. What a backwards world we live in where common sense doesn't seem to even exist.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_34DM2XG4FHWM32HQUCSJ2EIZ2E Here on Yahoo, it's offamy

    "I will only laugh at your attempts."

    Easy (unfortunately) to believe & the very root of almost every single CON-Theory. (Notice emphasis on "CON")

    You've made up your mind that said conspiracy DOES exist, & per your own direct words, you simply will NOT accept any other possibility or opinion, from ANYONE, regardless of how thorough, detailed, documented, & well-explained they may be.

    Therein also lies a huge example of the difference between a CON-Theorist & a skeptic. I am a skeptic, which is NOT necessarily a non-believer. For instance, I DON'T believe Oswald was the only shooter, although I have yet to see 100% factual info to prove that to me.

    A CON-Theorist says exactly what you just did, i.e. "I know it's a chemtrail, absolutely nothing will convince me other-wise, and I don't care what you think about it or your opinion."

    A skeptic says, "That sure is a funny looking contrail, but there's 100 planes per hour flying over here every single day & almost ALL have trails behind them. So common sense tells me it's just a funny looking contrail. But I'll keep it in the back of my mind in case some real believable proof of something different pops up someday."

    Which one would YOU trust more? Don't tell me, just be honest with yourself. If you go with the guy who sees a blinking red light in the night sky & calls it a UFO, over the guy who says, "Betcha that's the top of a radio antennae. We'll watch it as we get closer to find out" .... then you are WAY too gullible & drama-queen'ish.

    P.S. PART of your CON-problem is most likely related to how you compare early-60's air traffic to the 21st century. In the early mornings & late evenings there can be over 10,000 planes of all types in the air-space above the U.S. During the early-60's, commercial flight was in it's infancy, the military still had a significant percentage of prop-driven planes, & low altitude commuter/private type jets were near nonexistent. And you're using THAT near uncomparable situation to "prove" that your chemCONtrails exist? Uummm .... okay.

  • noconman

    You sir, are an i**** who put words in to my mouth. I said only that it is not natural to have so much debris sraying out of jets in irratic patterns. I never mentioned the "conspiracy" word. I never mentioned UFO's. The only thing I mentioned was that common sense doesn't seem to exist in this circus sideshow.
    Thanks for the belly laugh BoZo, you clowns crack me up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/subicrenata Renata Subi?

    I live in Slovenia , Europe and I saw it because after the movie I gave more time to this so it means I watched the sky and it is f****** rely going on :(

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/B5B5ZJNHAQAN6W5UA227I65REU mishap

    My tears of shame fall because I'm human and can't stop them from killing my Mother Earth......

  • http://www.facebook.com/steven.pridemore1 Steven Pridemore

    they just open'd up a whole new global market with it via global warming and carbon credits!

  • Mark Mills

    We have screwed ourselves, this is the governments attempt to slow down the inevitable. They are trying to replace the global dimming that has protected us from a runaway greenhouse effect. Watch "Global Dimming", its under the "Environment" category.

  • mycial

    You make more money if the crop fails. When people around the globe strive you make money. That is such a awesome idea apparently, the elite of scum do NOT GET THE FOOD the people eat. How far do we go down the rabbit hole of MORE conspiracy.

  • zibiahdncan

    Those who destroy the planet we live on to create wealth, they themselves will be destroyed. Its only a matter of time. This modification of the environment is insanity. Greed at its peak.

  • disgustedresident

    There really is a need to increase education in the sciences in this country. Too many people lack the important skill of critical thinking. Non scientists trying to spout science should set off a warning bell to anyone watching this. Apparently not. Sad.

  • Nakor4Twunny

    I swear this conspiracy had to start with some i*iot mistaking a contrail for something sinister, or maybe they heard the word and thought it was "chemtrail" and made this shit up, cause honestly, all the "chemtrails" look like normal airplane CONtrails to me. lol,

  • ladean63

    Really? Scientists have tested what is dropping on our heads in these (in your words) CONtrails! The findings were massive amounts of aluminum, dessicated red blood cells (viruses), etc., etc., etc.! I for one am being strongly affected as I have asthma and COPD. I have a brother that now has Multiple Myeloma, his lung collapsed AND he has an enlarged heart. Where he lives there are massive sprays done every day in northern Wisconsin! Please, Nakor4Twunny; please wake up and join in saving our planet. God Bless you.

  • http://www.facebook.com/liberty.abounds Justus Counts

    Didn't an expert on soil give his two cents? Does that count?

  • http://www.facebook.com/sparkster.hubs Sparkster Hubs

    It amazes me that some people still deny this when official information on chemical cloud seeding is freely available. See my article at Hub pages, this is scientific fact not conspiracy theory.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    ya according to your facebook page you are a little crazy. i hope you have the support around you to get the help you need.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    can you show me the reports of scientists finding massive amounts of aluminum and desiccated red blood cells.

    What would the governments purpose be in giving you asthma? especially in countries where health care is socialized like in canada, why would the government want us sick? it just costs them more money.

    now show proof for scientists testing and finding massive amounts of aluminum and blood cells.

  • http://1iotofoto.wix.com/otofoto oQ

    Hopefully the next one is Who in the world is spraying.
    1i

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003018964335 Vexst Junglist

    hah, i dont even know how to respond to that pathetic comment, as i was home educated and have not been infected by society, my mind is much more free than most, so i think help from what you would suggest would be the last thing i would need, all i require is love and respect, but most of humanity is kinda cruel and boring so i speak nonsense, its generaly a better use of my energy, rather then judging people like what most seem to do, you for example, define "a little crazy" on second thoughts, dont bother its got nothing of value to add to my life..........

    P,S i take it you dont agree with my morgellons theory then? trolololololol

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003018964335 Vexst Junglist

    my honest opinion about chem trails is that its a blackops project atempting to controll the weather, for what reason i do not know but they are most certainly not just passenger jets leaving vapour trails, if you really belive that then i guess good for you, egnorance is bliss, i for one think something is abit fishy about it. but i dont lose sleep over it. just gets me down that there is such a divide in knowlage with what those with power and those without are in the know of.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    home educated or home schooled? what do you mean by infected by society? one could argue that you have not been acclimatized to society and thus are ignorant to the ways the world works. when you are ignorant about people and how they work in groups then you are missing a HUGE component about society.

    me acknowledging that you come off a little crazy should add something to your life. it should make you step back and consider if I might be right. have other people told you the same? or have people slowly distanced themselves from you over time?

    psychiatry is not some evil organization that is trying to hurt you. you would probably greatly benefit from speaking to a mental health professional.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003018964335 Vexst Junglist

    i just find your presumption to be insulting, i never said it was some evil organization trying to hurt me, i just dont see what they could do to help, give me lithium, great, talk to me about my childhood great, all worthwhile for people who do not realise what the problem is, i know why i feel like i do, and aside from conforming i see no other solution to my so called insanity, i know how people work very much so and that is one of my problems, and it is why i do not take much of *sociaty" seriously

    i dont see a difference in home schooled or home educated, my early childhood did not entail learning pecking orders or how to submit to authority, i skiped the most affecting parts of the education system, college i was treated like what i was, not what they wished me to be.

    by saying infected by sociaty i simply mean, my world veiw is not what most would have, i can detach from, common needs, aspiration, ideals, morals,

    and people have not ever distanced them selfs from me, unless i have challenged, i find people very unwilling to admit there own flaws, yes people have called me crazy, and i admit by your standareds i am a crazy lunatic, but this is your opinion and is based on something rather vain, i am clear and precise in what i say and do, i know what i am, and i know my own drives, to see my self is not easy, sometimes i just get so wound up that spewing nonsense is somewhat of a release, i like this website very much and have watched much of the videos on it, but i must choose what media i consume wisely, i get too fed up with contradictions and out right unwarrented attacks on underserving victims, more often than not just to boost someone elses possition,

    i am in controll belive it or not, i am far from crazy in a clinical sense, the one time i did go to see someone after a traumatic experience i left feeling worse, so whats the point? i would much rather talk to an elder, a shrink more often than not is just another money seeking simpleton with no true knowledge. breath relax look into my self and let go of the things that make me mad, been there done that, but then i open my eyes and im still here, and the evil is still there, and i think well if i had money then i could maybe solve some of these problems, but then again, am i not just adding more problems, i love the world, i love creation the universe, but i hate with every ounce of my being the petty system we humans have created for our selfs, damn right im crazy, i wish i was climbing trees and hanging out with cats, any good anyone does now is just making up for something bad thats already there, nothing good can come from this untill it all breaks down and is reformed into something worthwhile, this is a world that i would be happy in, a world where i would have a sense of pride in myself and my fellow higher consious beings, i would not feel the need to poke and joke and laugh and taunt, but the fact is, george bush was president, toni blair was prime minister, we have something called a banking system with interest, and nothing has any value other than what we can keep from others........................................yadda yadda yadda, bed time me thinks, good night.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    Well since im going to give the time to listen to this talk, I hope you take seriously the objections im going to bring up.

    First of all the woman speaking is NOT a doctor even though she has Dr. in her name, and she HAS NO DEGREE in science. so a couple red flags there are A) she is lying about her credentials. and B) she has no science background so hopefully she isnt talking out of her a$$. She ran a naturopath clinic which is another redflag, and after that burned down she went right off the deep end believing in Morgellons disease (which is not real) and chemtrails.

    in this video she is claiming that weather modification programs exist. that is true. however she then claims that the american government is spraying these chemicals over the skies. she has no proof for this and she also says (around the 2:10 mark) that contrails are exhaust which is flat out wrong. and also says that they evaporate "pretty quickly" which is also wrong. but she goes on to show pictures of different contrails at different altitudes, and because some are fatter she claims these are chemicals. THIS IS ALL WRONG. anyone can do a simple search about contrails and learn that they behave very differently at different altitudes and in different weather conditions (which occur at different altitudes).

    she went on to describe the negative affects of barium and aluminum but has not proven that they spray that into the air. she also keeps saying "researchers, and scientific studies" but doesnt ONCE mention the name of these studies or researchers.

    if this is what you take for evidence, i feel very sorry for you. but i hope you actually think hard about why you are accepting these wild claims with zero evidence, and also think about why you are being so easily fooled when someone makes these claims and you think they are providing evidence. it could be a form of confirmation bias.

    after the woman spoke was a silent slideshow that looked like a kid put together for a high school project that he would have failed unless his point was to show the benefits of weather control but not to show any evidence to it actually being done.

    PLEASE LUANN, you need to re-examine why you believe this stuff.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003018964335 Vexst Junglist

    what is your opinion about chemtrails then? i take everything with a grain of salt, i do not know enough about morgellons or that the cases i have see are remotely true, my opinion is totely fluid, i neither belive or disbelive it, chemtrails on the other hand are something i can see in my sky, i am not blind, i can see there is something unusual about them, unless jet engines have changed to produce trails which stay in the sky for much longer then i have no other explination than they are spraying (something) for what i can only speculate or make nonsense comments about, i guess the planes i see that do not have what would be called chem trails are the older jet engines which are still in use, i do see more long lived trails these days than i do reguler ones, to me this is something, not a conspiracy theory atall, but like i said, i can only speculate, and honestly, i dont really care all that much, i am more concerned with the amount of UAVs in the skys, now that is disturbing,at any given time if i look up i will see one, i do live very close to a major military air base maybe that has something to do with it. lol.

    ps

    disregard my question of your opinion as i have read your previous coments and have a roughe idea.

    i should add that i have seen both types of trail ocupying the same roughly the same area of sky at the same time. i guess the reason why im interested is that if it were true then it is a major breach of my human rights, even if it was simply geoengineering, people could have no way of knowing possible side effects of what they may or may not be doing, i think it is better to think the worst so long as it does not bring down your quality of life, i do not belive you know any defonate ansures to this question yet you talk down anyone who says that they belive it, do you really think people thinking that is damaging? i think it is a good thing, it will make people give a damn about things more if they think that there is something being done to them without there concent, just so long as it does not bring down there quality of life ofc.i belive anyone controlling something that involves everyone should be questioned brutaly, as with great power comes great responsibily, it is our responsibily to make sure these people are responsible for what they are doing. whatever that may be, if anything.but just remember, there is alot of sick people out there willing to kill for all manner of ideas, poisoning the sky is not so farfetched that no one would do it. there is eugenics going on even now. so i hear, (conjecture)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003018964335 Vexst Junglist

    they are spraying tomatoes from airplanes? hmm now i dont know what all the fuss is about, i love tomatoes, let them spray away. they should add abit of salt and basil and ill put a plate of pasta out.

  • Norman

    It's good that I've seen this, now I can rest contentedly in the knowledge that I am "..way ahead of them". I can't stop my neigbours from being loud and annoying, or some ballbag breaking into my car, or some jerk off selling jerk in my direction.. or my cat taking a s*it where he's not supposed to. But I guess I'll just go out and stop this global geo-engineering manipulation and fraud scam.. think I'll just have a wank.

  • http://twitter.com/cecil823 cecil82

    "...You idiots who don't believe that their is something terribly wrong with
    chemtrails that have become an every day event in todays world, are
    obviously either to young to remember the clear blue skys of my youth,
    or never look up at the sky at all..."

    That. Can these idiots use their eyes? Can't people believe their own eyes and ears anymore? Or do they have to wait to be told by their "leaders" what exactly it was they saw or herd? (pun intended)

  • http://twitter.com/cecil823 cecil82

    OK. I've been on this planet earth for 50 + years. Since I was a small child in west Texas I have always enjoyed watching the sky. I never noticed ANY lasting contrails like I first started noticing all of the sudden back in 1994-95. From there, it was an explosion of lasting contrails turning a bright blue cloudless day into a clouding day. I have eyes to see, I know what I see, don't tell me different. WHY these "contrails" are occurring, I do not know. Maybe jet traffic has grown so much and newer type plane engines cause this when the older one's didn't. Don't tell me they have always been there, THEY HAVE NOT.

  • anna miller

    This documentary explains the secrets of chemtrails with induction through HAARP. According to the information presented, chemtrails are not just being sprayed into our atmosphere to ameliorate global warming, chemtrails are actually causing climate change. Experiments to control the weather date back 60 years in the aim of gaining advantage on the battlefield. Now links are being made with gains on market derivatives and GMO food company Monsanto, and the bid to control the world's food production. Are the geoengineers psychopathic, mad scientists funded by
    globalists or good guys attempting to save our world from the ravages of climate change?

  • http://www.facebook.com/ladean63 LuAnn Peterson McMurry

    I have re-examined this subject and no longer fear anything in the sky. I am truly finding myself spiritually and know that by following my life path as a healer/intuitive which I've always been is my best bet :) I no longer follow the stuff of "fear mongering" like I did with all the "crap" on YouTube. Thank goodness! lol Thank you for all your information! Love & Light to you :)

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    This is wonderful news, and Im so happy to learn you no longer live in fear.

    peace.

  • http://www.facebook.com/anthony.brown.5030927 Anthony Brown

    Yeah, keep believing everything you read on Wikipedia...

  • Mikko Saari

    Well, you can do a lot of things to stop these things... just a matter of finding out what those things are and then doing them.

  • Mikko Saari

    The samples part of the video seemed pretty solid to me, clearly said they found aluminum and I thought they wrote off the sample contamination possibility well. Why you think they didn't Epi?

    And Soros buying their lands after drought or Monsanto coming in, those were all lies too?

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    the sample part has been discredited over and over again. the ppm they report in those samples are completely fine and within safety limits.

  • Esan

    The Bilderberg Group is behind All of this. It is all apart of their New W
    orld Order.Visit YouTube And Research The Bilderberg Group..It's not a coincidence that bill gates is affiliated with them.they hold secret meetings annually.and powerful people are only invited.and No One Ever speaks about the private meetings that's involved

  • Esan

    The Bilderberg Group is behind this. research them on YouTube and I'm not surprised that Bill Gates is affiliated with them also.how ironic.please visit youtube anyone and research The Bilderberg Group..

  • Cat Tastrophy

    I quit watching after 20min. At 16:46 I realized this doc doesn't appear to be clear on facts. When Mangels explains California's rain dumps into the Mississippi valley due to the continental divide
    and the nano particles from the water in California is responsible for
    severe weather in the east my jaw dropped. Anyone whose ever taken a
    geology or geography class should know that is false. There are several
    divides in the country and NOWHERE does rain from California flow to the
    Mississippi valley. Look it up yourself. Its a complete lie!

  • Gyttja

    Big ups, thanks for this!

  • Gyttja

    A very well made documentary with good information.

  • Marie

    OMG ! They just turned our planet in a living Hell !

  • fender24

    Exactly what i mean, i have spoken to the elders where i live as well. They tell the same thing, the sky is not the same anymore, the trails are like spider nets above you where it used to be a blue sky it's not good, could this explain some unknown diseases? i think so.

  • fender24

    She has a background in science and art, history and much more. I think u are either A). Lying, B) lying

    Dr. Perlingieri lectures and writes frequently about environmental issues that impact our health and lives. She was the Chair of the first
    global climate change conference in Maine (2006); and was one of 40
    Americans invited to Washington, D.C. (2007), to discuss the health
    implications of environmental pollutants. She has written numerous
    articles on the illegal geo-engineered aerosol toxins in Chemtrails and
    their significant impact on our deteriorating health and how this is
    also destroying our planet’s web of life. Her work has been published in
    The Ecologist, E the Environmental Magazine, and various newspapers.
    Her online articles have appeared on the award-winning news websites,
    Global Research (Canada) and London’s Institute of Science in Society.
    She has lectured in the US, Canada, London, Paris, Italy, and Mexico,
    and has been interviewed on PBS-TV, Pacifica radio, and BBC radio.

    The articles are easy to find u just use you're computer.

    New research has confirmed in a peer reviewed article that morgellons disease is real, so get you're facts right.

  • bumpercrop

    Tomorrow on August 25th at 2pm (Greenwich time) a global March Against Chemtrails will be held. Please Google: Global March Against
    Chemtrails. Anonymous announced today that they stand behind the global movement to stop chemtrail spraying.

  • Brad Lancaster

    um that's because schools is run by liars. School bad Wikipedia good!

  • Steve Mcconnell

    The reference to Cal rain in the Mis watershed is about rain that should have fallen in Cal but falls in the east. Pay attention and you can at least sound smart. Weather mod. will be in the future. Too deny this is s*upid. Are they doing it now? Don't deny that they could be. because you look ignorant. They will. They may be. Try to stay informed but remember the information isn't always correct and don't be fooled by absolutes. The only thing for sure is "nothing is for sure". The only time I'm completely sure I'm right is when I say "I may be wrong".

  • jc

    has nothing to do with the weather.... they are blocking the sun because the earth is heating on her own.. she is shifting consciousness... the chem trails are reflecting the suns light and radiation... both of which would activate our pineal gland and sync us with the frequency of the earth

  • DIMOJABE

    This is the main Geoengineering aerosol spraying documentary available in 2014 so far. It captures the goals that the different players have and how the aerosol spraying and the resultant weather modification plays into those goals.

    The current 400+ projects that have been going on for 15+ years without our knowledge or consent are breaking out into the consciousness of the average person - as we speak. People are learning to look up and differentiate between a contrail (very rare due to engine design) and an aerosol spray trail. Soon every American citizen - and world citizen - will understand that some very egotistical, psychopathic/sociopathic individuals made the decision to spray things on them that were very toxic and that they could suffer downline health impacts for the rest of their lives.

    I have identified over 25 organizations in private sector, government, non-profit and academia that are involved in this illegal "research" in complete violation of the International Nuremburg Code. I believe there will be at least another 30 added to the list before I am done.

    (Wikipeida: ...the Nuremberg Code and the related[5] Declaration of Helsinki are the basis for the Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Volume 46,[6] which are the regulations issued by the United States Department of Health and Human Services governing federally funded human subjects research in the United States.)

    When the citizens of the United States of America realize that they have been used in a national/global set of experiments - they are going to sue. That is the one thing we do well here in the USA. This is going to be the biggest lawsuit in the history of this country.

  • sonya

    This doc. included many many Ph D's who know what they are talking about, including a high ranking officer that was part of the U.S. military & air force. How can you discredit everyone of these highly respected individuals who have the science & intellect to prove what basic science & biology already tell us? I am sure that you are joking right?

  • maja

    So, your opinion is that PhD's never lie and cannot say things to manipulate you to think what they want you to?... Well done...

  • Chris

    I agree. I'm 30 and when I was growing up i've never seen this cr*p. Its metal particulates they drop. Youtube or google weathermen talking about random things showing up on the radar. They will tell you its "Chaff". Planes dump this and test it on the atmosphere..

  • Jason West

    God, eco-tards are just insufferable, aren't they? The earth is absorbing too much sun and becoming too warm and that's bad. Putting together a plan to reflect some sun and somewhat cool the earth is bad. If the sky isn't falling right on their heads they just aren't happy. Good weather is the expected, necessary consequence of climate change (bad). Horrible, destructive weather is the expected necessary consequence of global warming (bad). Excessively hot climates are the result of climate change (bad). Record setting low temps are the result of global warming (bad). The recession of the arctic northern ice cap is magnified while the expansion of the southern polar ice cap is conveniently ignored - or yet - STILL discounted as an expected product of reverse global warming (bad). Blue sky bad, non-blue sky bad, etc, etc, etc. These emotional arguments are so contradictory and self serving they're just laughable. The most hilarious part is that the scientific method has yet to support any of this stuff. People who believe in the ultimately unprovable God are sheeple, but those who do NOT believe in "climate change" are ignoramuses who want nothing more than to destroy the planet. God, eco-tards are just insufferable...

  • http://www.kulturetattoo.com/ Samuel Morgan Shaw

    look it up. Cat just dropped a bombshell and you simply ignore it. Why would do many PhDs miss this obvious fact?

  • http://www.kulturetattoo.com/ Samuel Morgan Shaw

    Watching them spray their poisons over the Hawaii region of the Pacific every two weeks like clockwork. 15-20 Contrails that turn to hazy clouds are not Contrails. They are Chemtrails.