Chemtrails? Doubtful. Things chemtards don't (or can't) understand.

You have proven they don't accept any answer that is not politically correct for them to make . . .

Of COURSE you know better than real scientists...

It is not the first time scientists have had blinders on . . . I would point to the struggle Physicians had accepting the role of germs and the need for hand washing and sterile techniques between treating patients . . .

Last Edited by George B on 06/21/2012 05:26 PM

The study had painstakingly gone on for three years, compiling large amounts of data. Through the death of a friend and mentor, an insight
came to him that helped him solve the riddle. It was common practice for students and doctors to go to the delivery wards just after completing autopsies for research or classroom studies.  Sanitary conditions were primitive, for this was before germ theory was developed.  Often, physicians did not wash their hands between autopsy and delivery.  As a result, they were carrying an invisible particle of infection on their hands from the cadavers to the mothers.  In other words, the doctors were inadvertently introducing into the mother’s body the infection that would kill her.  This would also explain the discrepancy between the two divisions:  midwives did not do autopsies.

Semmelweis ordered the doctors and students in his division to adopt a hand-washing technique employing a chlorine solution before they delivered any baby.  The change had an immediate impact.  In 1848, the first full year of hand-washing techniques were applied; and deaths fell dramatically, moving in line with rates from the other division and rates reported for home births.  The mortality rate after hand washing dropped from 1 in 10 to 1 in 100.





While this was a major break-through, do you think the medical world and work immediately celebrated?  No.  In fact, Semmelweis was not reappointed to his position the next year.   Even worse, it was so divisive that his division discontinued the hand-washing practice after he was not reappointed, and the mortality rate among mothers returned to their much-higher rates.  It would be almost 20 years before it was shown how Semmelweis’ “invisible cadaver
particles”—caused putrefaction in dead bodies and hospitals began to adapt the practical strategies of minimizing infection.

[link to justpeaceumc.org]

Last Edited by George B on 06/21/2012 05:45 PM

Ok, so STILL no evidence that the trails are anything but contrails?!

I'll check back later...

Keep trying chemtwats...

Sorry, just because it's unexplained, doesn't mean it's not normal and/or natural. Or, from other man made sources...such as increased coal use....or the like.

You CHOOSE "intentional aerosol injection program" only because you are a paranoid loser/conspiracy nut...not because you have sufficient evidence.

Seems your scientists . . . Who know more than you . . . Didn't cite increased coal burning or other human sources as a possible cause . . . They liked the invisible volcanic eruptions card as their explanations . . .


They sort of pulled it out of thin air . . . Pun intended . . .

Last Edited by George B on 06/21/2012 06:39 PM

Wouldn't that be "normal and/or natural" douchebag?!

Also, do you understand what "or" or "such as" mean...stupid?

Of course they know more than I do...and they certainly know more than you will ever know about the atmosphere...they didn't get their educations from google...

FFS you incredible twat...

We are talking about world wide atmospheric levels including over shit-loads of countries that are not in bed with the 'West'...

You really are a piece of work...

Yes, and your point is . . . ?

Seems like that is what NOAA was talking about . . .world wide increase in particulate in the stratosphere . . . Not just over the west . . . An intentional aerosol program affects the whole world equally . .

Last Edited by George B on 06/21/2012 10:08 PM

Ok, so no evidence that the trails are anything more than contrails...yet?

I'll check back later...

Good luck chemturds.

And NOAA very clearly stated they can account for it with numerous small volcanic eruptions...



And the levels are STILL far lower than they were in the 'dirty' 60's-70's...

Some 'program' of 'spraying' they got going there, huh?

It appears the "conturds" are still riding on the short bus. LOL

It only appears that way to you and your kind...because you are ignorant.

Everything I accept as truth is what has been known about the trails for almost 100 years. What you chemturds keep pushing as truth remains unsubstantiated. It's quite sad. Unless you have something new you'd like to share...I'm always looking for compelling evidence...

But, so far...the trails remain contrails.

1) Seems you and NOAA have a difference of opinion . . . .

"These particles are also called “aerosols," and the new paper explores their recent climate effects -- the reasons behind their increase remain the subject of ongoing research."

[link to www.noaanews.noaa.gov]

2) The spraying program is only concerned about stratospheric and high torpospheric levels . . . Which this very paper indicates success . . .
Particulates are increased and are showing a change in the rate of global warming. . . .that my friend is the headline of the paper. . . . see below . . .


NOAA study: Increase in particles high in Earth’s atmosphere has offset some recent climate warming
July 21, 2011



Last Edited by George B on 06/22/2012 10:57 AM

You go, George. Contards are still riding on the short bus.

...says a paranoid ignoramus...

Poor George...

He 'knows' more than all the climatologists in the world, yet still gets handed his ass on a daily basis by 'contards'...



[link to www.theaustralian.com.au]

Dem eebill Chin-Lee, and dems 'sprayin'!!!

Hmmm...coal huh...seems I've seen that mentioned before...

So you contend the scientists from NOAA were not aware of the coal burning in China . . . . Please !!!!!!

Thanks for helping me make my point again Snake . . . NOAA was aware and choose to point to unknown minor volcanic eruptions instead . . . seems atmospheric Scientists world wide are all suspect of having blinders on . . . Just like I said . . . They refuse to acknowledge the most logical explanation . . . An intentional aerosol injection program . . .

Does it prove that the trails in the sky are anything more than contrails?

No, and it isn't necessary . . . An intentional covert aerosol injection
program would seek to confuse As many people as possible . . . Using the cover of your contrails to accomplish their mission . . . Spiking jet fuel when possible . . . Using dedicated aircraft when and where they would not be easily detected . . . Night runs, runs above cloud cover, runs when persistent contrails are predictable, etc. . .

Visibility of aerosols is based totally upon atmospheric conditions . . . In the best of conditions they are visible for only a few hours . . . No matter what the aerosol contains. . . .

Not paranoid or ignoramus......would have to get in line behind you. Just love to watch someone with the smarts lead you conturd disinfo boys around by the nose.

Pretty sure I never said anything like that...

No...

And every time Whore-Hay is handed facts that show other sources of 'sulphur', he insists it proves him right...

It sure doesn't prove me wrong . . .

Then what is your point. . . ????

Is there anything that proves you right?

Yes, two years of evidence and your lack of ability to contradict almost anything . . .