If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?

Because I don't have any chemical composition of the trails I see, and they look just like persistent contrails.

I have no reason to believe they aren't contrails, and neither do you.

So, she knows you disagree with her about what the trails are based on a lack of evidence.

OK, just clarifying.

There is no proof of what's "going on with chemtrails today".

That's the whole point. There is no proof that the trails are anything more than contrails.

NONE

Not being comfortable expressing yourself is actually a good thing when you don't want to expose your lunacy and lack of intelligence.

The stalker is saving you from even more embarrassment.

Windy . . . you are a hoot. . . .

:144:

The real mystery is why someone like George would get pleasure out of harming people.

George was attracted to the medical community for some reason. George's favorite film is probably THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU.

And George, you are one sadistic mother fucker.

If George banned people who could see through this BS, George wouldn't have a thread.

Some people FEEL their way through life the way others THINK they FIGURE their way through life. . . both often do quite well . . . Often both are correct about many things and wrong about most. . . .

Nice to know I am loved by one and all. . . .

Without some controversy . . .most threads would fail quickly . . . unless the topic is just too interesting to pass up. . . . few Threads succeed in duration, significance or volume . . . that is just the way it is . . .

All George, you are as one to all. You is smart, you is kind and you is allowing stinkfuckers on your thread.

And banning people just because they disagree is right how?

What a ridiculous cop-out!

Leave it to you for an editorial. . . .

I suspect you figured that out. . . . No, it is what I believe . . . actually . . .

Last Edited by George B on 03/29/2013 01:11 PM

So, you actually believe these people have "felt" there way in regard to the trails in the sky, and have done quite well, and aren't making assumptions based on a lack of education in certain subjects?!

I'm asking you specifically...not about "some people" this...and "some people" that...

Do you think VT is seeing "chemtrails" or contrails over Vermont. What is more likely?

Why do you allow the "stinkfuckers" comment to remain, but delete my reply?

I have had this discussion with VT on a few occasions . . . she feels she is experiencing something I have not experienced . . . not trying to put words in her mouth but she feels she has special knowledge and I can accept and respect that . . . so I have NOT seen persistent trails in the sky that convince me they are chemtrails but I have seen things I cannot explain and wondered how they happened . . .

:feb 2013 sky2:

Last Edited by George B on 03/29/2013 01:48 PM

Your demeaning reference to a woman was over my threshold of acceptance . . .

Last Edited by George B on 03/29/2013 01:31 PM

George is female - I figured as much. Probably a sadistic USAF nurse. I've seen her kind before.

anyone with even one working eye can observe the shit being spewed in the sky every day

cunts are blocking the sunlight for one thing - everything needs sunlight

only a blind man could miss it

I say, good! Nothing grows in the shade and Canuk women are too damn fat as it is. They're big enough already.

Sorry, wrong as usual . . .

So you think it is a conspiracy to promote global dimming and reduce food production?

Last Edited by George B on 03/29/2013 01:45 PM

Ahhh, the stupid is strong in this one - along with the evil.

Interesting you should point to global dimming . . .

1) The decade of 1990s had a dip in stratospheric aerosols. This dip (see below) was caused by the clearing of the atmosphere in the 90s.

"Hofmann and coworkers (12–14) argued that the “background” stratospheric aerosol layer increased by 5- 9%/year through the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, and again at about 5-7% in the 2000s. However, in the 1990s stratospheric aerosols decreased by similar magnitudes. "
[link to junksciencecom.files.wordpress.com]


2) Within the same article cited above are definitive statements that stratospheric particulate (aerosols) increased during the late 1990s - 2000s effectively reversing the negative trend in the early 1990s using three different methods . . .


"Multiple instruments have been used at Mauna Loa for estimating or measuring total aerosol optical depth and atmospheric transmission. Here we present observations taken there on the cleanest days, when much of the aerosol burden likely resides in the stratosphere. Figure 2 shows three independent data records that all indicate increases in aerosol optical depth (or, equivalently, decreases in transmission) at Mauna Loa from the late 1990s to the late 2000s: from ground-based transmission data using the pyrheliometer ratioing methodology (20, 21), a Precision Filter Radiometer [1999 to date (22)], and a stratospheric lidar (14). Figure 2 compares these data to the mean tropical and global stratospheric aerosol optical depths from combined satellite observations by the Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment (SAGE) II (1990–2005), Global Ozone Monitoring by Occultation of Stars (GOMOS, 2002-2009) and the CALIPSO lidar (2006–2010), see (16, 17, 23–25); the overlapping periods of the different satellite instruments allow accurate quantification of the trends over time (17). The four independent data sets from satellite, lidar, total transmission, and aerosol optical depth as shown in Fig. 2 jointly support the view that the “background” stratospheric aerosol layer has changed significantly over about the past decade [see (25)]."

[link to junksciencecom.files.wordpress.com]

[link to data.giss.nasa.gov]

Last Edited by George B on 03/29/2013 02:01 PM

Not good enough..you don't find "stinkfuckers" demeaning?!

George, you are the most dishonest person I have ver encounterd.

Can't post here...

Censorship is disgusting.

Especially when it's so blatantly one sided.

Bye

And you allow the same demeaning word from a chemtard...

Wow.


Poor George....