|
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
|
|
Message Subject
|
If you believe chemtrails are real . . . what source of information has reinforced your belief most?
|
|
Poster Handle
|
Anonymous Coward |
|
Post Content
|
Just maybe Chemtrail conspiracy advocates had it right all along . . . persistent trails are a serious threat to the well being of the planet . . . they intuitively knew what they were seeing in the sky in such frequency and density was just NOT RIGHT . . . so what if they run amuck of proper scientific nomenclature . . . Too much persistent contrails and contrail induced cirrus cloud banks are a real threat . . .  But they are STILL contrails! Of course they have "some" effect! Where do you see anyone claiming differently?! But, to fight a fight against chemtrails" takes away any and all power to fight against contrails...no one will ever ate anyone who calls them "chemtrails" seriously....ever. There are certainly more of them compared to the 70s and 80s...but they are STILL contrails... No, the "advocates" believe there are "chemicals" intentionally being sprayed on them, for all sorts of reasons...to make them itch, to make them pick their skin, to give them Alzheimer's....the list is literally endless.... Calling contrails "chemtrails" only serves to distance anyone who would potentially care about the harm contrails could be causing us from the problem. Chemtards are their own worst enemies. "Ate" = take And they are a real POTENTIAL threat. There are many more things which should be considered a "threat" before we need to worry about contrail cirrus.. Don't try. To tell me otherwise George, you don't have the whole f the atmospheric science community behind your statement. Seems more like wishful thinking on your part. Why do you hate aviation so much?! Is there a story behind that? Please, do tell.
|
|
|
Please verify you're human:
|
|
|
Reason for reporting:
|
