U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-30-2012, 04:08 PM
 
5,113 posts, read 4,963,140 times
Reputation: 1732

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me View Post
This thread get more hilarious every day!
Its more like exposing the ignorant ...

 
Old 08-30-2012, 04:13 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,443,515 times
Reputation: 7641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Then you think the Obama administration, geoengineering scientists, Bill Gates and Richard Branson (and many others) are deluded conspiracy theorists.
Lets get something straight....

geoengineering scientists? Where?

The obama administration is composed of politicians

Bill Gates is a marketing person

Richard Branson? This video says it all:


DAVID ICKE is SIR RICHARD BRANSON!..Case for Conspiracy EXPOSED!! - YouTube

After all these years you'd think that if there were any TRUTH to the chemtrail allegations there would have been an uproar throughout the world...

But what do we see? Pathetic micro blogs grasping at any straws to try and scare people... chemtrail conspiracy proponents spewing forth allegations but then refusing to answer any questions to bring believability to their claims....

This thread should be the shining example to everyone just how simple-minded these conspiracy theorists really are, how hollow their logic and facts are, how childish they are when exposed to accredited scientific peer reviewed facts...

And now this "geoengineering" crap.... They think by changing the verbiage people will start to listen to their pathetic conspiracy?

If they were smart they would have realized that mankind has been tinkering with the environment for centuries... but that would mean they'd have to wade through numerous history books to dig out what has really occurred, and as we've seen in this thread that's not their style nor does it seem to be within their intellectual grasp....

Last edited by plwhit; 08-30-2012 at 04:30 PM..
 
Old 08-30-2012, 05:18 PM
 
Location: Ohio
19,984 posts, read 14,277,179 times
Reputation: 16155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
There has been no debunking and no one has provided any credible information to disprove that geoengineering aerosol spraying is a real operation.
Are you freaking serious? How blind are you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
.. otherwise I will not respond to the people who obviously did not watch the documentary and who are obviously uninformed and unwilling to seek the truth.
When are you going to practice what you preach?

Your blatant refusal to address the evidence presented against you indicates that you are "unwilling to seek the truth."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
On the contrary, we have provided documents and video from Obama's own science czar talking about geoengineering aerosol spraying programs and we even have the world leading geoengineering scientist explaining the operation.
Talking about Geo-engineering and actually engaging in Geo-engineering is not the same thing. The fact that there might be research into Geo-engineering, is not proof that Geo-engineering is actually taking place.

As I pointed out, and which you ignored, in the early 1960s, the Atomic Energy Commission with congressional approval studied the feasibility of enhanced radiation weapons -- nuclear weapons with the out-put tailored to neutrons, gamma rays or x-rays.

Even though they studied and researched such weapons, they never actually designed, built or tested such weapons -- it was all done on computer using modelling.

The gamma ray and x-ray enhanced radiation weapons were deemed to be of no value, but the neutron weapon was of great value, and so in the late 1960s, Congress approved funding to develop and design such a warhead.

Again, I point that out because you are incapable of distinguishing between proposals, research and actual implementation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Hell, I even added an article on Bill Gates and Richard Branson who are heavily investing in geoengineering research and lobbying the USA and UK governments to start aerosol spraying (aka: chemtrails).
And I debunked your article.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
The funny thing is that our experts are from your political side.
Since I have no political side, what political side would that be?

Yes, I am an ultra-conservative, but I'm no fan of the Republican party, and despise the Democrats even more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
John Holdren (Science czar) if Obama's pick and so is the geoengineering scientist we referenced. These guys are radical liberals. So you think you know better than the real scientist ...
I understand reality, and I know how to read, and more importantly, I understand what I read --- you do not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
So the only thing that you and your Saul Alinsky posse is doing is spreading disinformation to dumb down the people who just might not like the government spraying heavy metals over their head or manipulating the weather to cause drought that's killing our food supply and also causing severe storms that's killing people and destroying property across the country. And lets not forget the massive wildfires that are fueled by the drought.
What "disinformation?" You've been given repeated attempts to refute all of the evidence presented by everyone against you, and you have made no attempt to refute their evidence.

Your ignorance does not allow you to be aware of the fact, that the recorded history of the United States shows that there is a major drought every 87 years, that lasts on average about 9 years, and that this history starts in the 1590s, with the first three failed attempts to colonize the area that is now Roanoke, Virginia. Specifically, that drought lasted from 1595 to 1604.

The next major drought occurred 87 years later beginning in 1679 and ending in1688. 87 years later another major drought begins in 1762 and lasts through August 1771. Once again 87 years later in 1846 it's drought time in the Southeast and South, this one lasting through 1855. So, guess what -- 87 years later in April 1930 the last rains hit the Plain States and it's drought time for guess what -- the next 9 years -- yes the rains finally come in June 1939. That was the Dust Bowl which caused 2.5 Million Americans to flee and destroyed some dozens of towns (some are still buried in dust).

The next 87 year cycle beings April 2014.

Feel free to attempt to refute any claims I've made.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Yep, headache ... burning eyes ... loss of energy... These symptoms have been reported by countless people all over the world when aerosol spraying is above them.
Reality fail.

Admit that one micron is one-millionth of a meter, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that there are 25,400 microns in one inch, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a nominal-sized particle is ~48 microns, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a particle >100 microns has a terminal velocity of 0.5 m/s, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a particle >100 microns falls to Earth at the rate of 1,800 meters per hour, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that 1 mile is 1,600 meters, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that commercial, and generally all military aircraft fly at altitudes of 24,000 to 36,000 feet, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that normal flight paths are are altitudes of 4.5 miles to 7.0 miles, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a particle >100 microns discharged from an aircraft in the flight path will fall to Earth in 4.5 hours at the earliest, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that this statement......

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Yep, headache ... burning eyes ... loss of energy... These symptoms have been reported by countless people all over the world when aerosol spraying is above them.
...is false since it takes 4.5 hours for a particle >100 microns to fall from the sky to Earth.

Admit that a nominal-sized particle has a terminal velocity of 0.2 m/s, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a nominal-sized particle falls to Earth at the rate of 720 meters per hour, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a nominal-sized particle discharged from an aircraft in the flight path will fall to Earth in 10 hours at the earliest, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that this statement......

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Yep, headache ... burning eyes ... loss of energy... These symptoms have been reported by countless people all over the world when aerosol spraying is above them.
...is false since it takes 10 hours for a nominal-sized particle to fall from the sky to Earth.

Admit that a particle <1 micron has no terminal velocity, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a particle <1 micron may remain airborne for up to several years, possibly never falling out, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that fuel filters on jet propulsion engines range from 0.5 microns to 10 microns generally, but not more than 40 microns, or provide proof to refute.

Admit that this statement......

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Yep, headache ... burning eyes ... loss of energy... These symptoms have been reported by countless people all over the world when aerosol spraying is above them.
...is false since aerosol sprays cannot reach ground for at least 10 hours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
In this Satalite image you can see all the aerosol spray trails (AKA Chemtrails) on the edge of the storm front.


Live Satellite Images Of Geoengineering? Over The Uk October 13th 2009 - YouTube
Admit that kerosene-based jet propulsion fuels cannot be contaminated with the alleged particulate matter in chemtrails prior to combustion, or show proof to refute.

Admit that kerosene-based jet propulsion fuels cannot be contaminated at sufficient levels to produce aerosol contaminates in parts-per-million (ppm) as claimed, or show evidence to the contrary.

Admit that the design of the fuel-cells in the wing-tanks of commercial aircraft prohibit the storage of any other material in a dry or liquid state, or show detailed schematics or drawings proving otherwise.

Admit that commercial aircraft have no weight/load capacity to carry materials other than kerosene-based jet propulsion fuels, or show schematics/diagrams to the contrary.

Admit that commercial aircraft have no capacity to disperse chemicals or particulate matter, other than jet engine exhaust, or provide schematics/diagrams to refute.

Admit that airports have no facilities to store aerosol material to be sprayed in the air, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that there is no method or means of loading aerosol contaminates aboard commercial aircraft, or show evidence to the contrary.

Admit that the following data.....Trace Elements in Frobisher Bay Rainwater(pp. 177-179) S. J. Vermette and V. G. Bingham...is true and accurate, or show evidence to refute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Whatever you want to call it is fine with me but when I see thick non-dissipating trails spewing from aircraft ... on a very hot (>95F) and dry day... with the thick trails expanding over a short period of time to form a white hazy strange cloud filled sky's that significantly reduce sunlight in a period of a few hour ... I call that textbook geoengineering aerosol spraying.
Admit that the air temperature on the ground has no bearing on air temperature at 2,000 feet or 5,000 feet layers, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that Boyle's Law applies to gases, or prove that Boyle's Law is flawed.

Admit that at 16,000 with air density of 60.9% and air pressure at 16.21 mgHg that the air temperature is 2°F, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that at higher altitudes, the air temperature is below 0°F or show evidence to the contrary.

Admit that this statement ....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Whatever you want to call it is fine with me but when I see thick non-dissipating trails spewing from aircraft ... on a very hot (>95F) and dry day... with the thick trails expanding over a short period of time to form a white hazy strange cloud filled sky's that significantly reduce sunlight in a period of a few hour ... I call that textbook geoengineering aerosol spraying.
.....is based on scientific ignorance of air temperature, air pressure, air density and altitude, and displays a total lack of knowledge of the principle's of Boyle's Law.

Admit that this statement ....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
I provided the maximum ground temperature (with margin) where real contrails can exist at a given altitude and lapse rate and showed that real contrails can not exist on a hot summer day in Vegas when ground temps are above 100F.

.....is based on scientific ignorance of air temperature, air pressure, air density and altitude, and displays a total lack of knowledge of the principle's of Boyle's Law.

Admit that this treatise....Atmospheric Environment (1967) Trace metals in rain and snow during 1973 at Chadron, Nebraska, A.W. Struempler, Chadron State College, Chadron, Nebraska 69337, U.S.A.Received 20 January 1975. Revised 7 July 1975. Available online 14 April 2003.....is true and accurate, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Here is a clue ... its not that fact that aluminum is present in the rain water ... its the ppm level that is significant.
Admit that the level of Aluminum in ppm is statistically normal relative to every study done since 1907, or provide evidence to the contrary that it is statistically abnormal, and that in being abnormal, it is statistically higher.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
ScienceDaily (Jan. 25, 2012) — Carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of coal, oil, and gas have been increasing over the past decades, causing Earth to get hotter and hotter.
That premise is false. There is neither global warming, man-made global warming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
New research led by Carnegie's Julia Pongratz examines the potential effects that geoengineering the climate....
Admit that you do not understand the definition of "potential" or provide proof to the contrary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
The team found that, in the model.....,
Admit that you completely misconstrued the article because you failed to understand the meaning of the words "potential" and "model" or provide evidence to refute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
The scientists, who advocate geoengineering methods such as spraying millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth...
Admit that "...30 miles above earth..." is 158,400 feet or provide proof to refute.

Admit that no commercial aircraft on Earth can operate above 60,000 feet, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that no military aircraft on Earth can operate above 125,000 feet, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that the only aircraft to reach 125,000 feet was a MiG-25, or provide evidence to refute.

Admit that there does not exist any possible way to spray "...millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth." or show evidence to refute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
First off I flat out don't believe your rant about not watching mainstream media or listening to mainstream radio.
Well, since you believe they're spraying millions of tons of aerosols at 30 miles in the sky....even though I have proven that to be impossible... I can understand why.

05-23-2010, 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
We're in a hotel room watching it right now. It looks different on TV (we don't have a converter box or cable so we have to download the episodes).
You thought I was kidding? I had to go rent an hotel room to watch the last episode of LOST.....because I don't have a TV. I'm sort of condo-sitting. The guy who lives here is out in Brown County caring for an elderly parent. He took the TV with him. I don't really care.

And why would I listen to the radio? Your music blows chunks.

My little WinAmp thing says I have 1,628 items and of those how many since 2005? A tune by The Fray, 2 by Rascal Flatts, one by Sara Bareilles, and one by Warpaint. I am not at all impressed for the garbage that passes as music.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Do you really expect me to believe you don't watch mainstream media but yet you hang out continuously on this political forum and spew countless liberal political talking points including the defensive counter points used by most liberal hacks almost word-for-word as if you have the liberal political agenda playbook at your finger tips?
What liberal talking points?

No liberal on this forum would ever dare call me a liberal. You can't even show one liberal talking point I've ever made.

And no, I don't need mainstream media. Economics is economics and it doesn't change just because you have TV or not. Same with nuclear weapons. Nothing has change since I played with nukes, except that there are a helluva lot less. And US Geo-political strategy has remained unchanged since 1976.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Then you go on about science and the level of oxygen in the atmosphere and keep going on and on as if it has significance in the discussion of geoengineering when it has very little and you didn't even mention what that is.
Uh, yes, I did mention what it was.....

quote=Mircea;25832472]Do you understand the reason that aircraft cannot fly about certain altitudes is due to the fact that there is insufficient quantities of Oxygen to combust the jet propulsion fuel?

Hello science?[/quote]

The article you copyright violated was a proposal discussing hypothetical possibilities, not realities.

This....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
The scientists, who advocate geoengineering methods such as spraying millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth...
...is impossible. Which part of "impossible" do you not understand?

There are no aircraft on Earth capable of reaching 30 miles.

There are no commercial aircraft capable of reaching 11 miles. The only aircraft that can cruise at 60,000 feet are military aircraft, and those are combat aircraft. The ceiling for a C-130 is 28,000 feet -- why? Uh, it's a turboprop -- there isn't enough oxygen at higher altitudes for combustion. For a C-141 the ceiling is 41,000 feet. Why? Two reasons, the jet turbines are not high performance and the cargo bay is not pressurized for higher altitudes.

So how in the hell are you going to spray "...millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth" when there is no possible way to reach that altitude?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
The following article is about Geoengineering scientist David Keith and his research and plans for geoengineering the earth.

Solar-radiation management (SRM) would involve releasing megatonnes of light-scattering aerosol particles in the upper atmosphere to reduce Earth’s absorption of solar energy, thereby cooling the planet. Another technique would be to release particles of sea salt to make low-altitude clouds reflect more solar energy back into space.
Another fail. Where's the upper atmosphere?

It's above the troposphere, which is 11 miles above Earth......again....for the hard of hearing....there are no aircraft capable of "...releasing megatonnes of light-scattering aerosol particles in the upper atmosphere..."

Provide detailed specifications for all aircraft on Earth that can carry bulk quantities of aerosol particles into the upper atmosphere.....

....or continue to look like a fool.

Thread-killing....

Mircea

Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
Gotta admit, first time ever I've been branded a radical liberal on C-D.....
I know...how the hell are you supposed to respond to something as stupid as that?

I've been slandered and libeled as a liberal.

Commiserating...

Mircea

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
I left the door open for new candidates but you must first prove your worthiness. You must meet some or most of these qualifications:

- show evidence of pushing a radical liberal political agenda
- no self opinion, you must parrot the radical liberal political spin doctors
- you must be capable of effective ridicule to shut down your opponent and make them feel stupid, no matter if they were correct or not
- you must be capable of using your opponents own rules against your opponent, even if your points are untrue
- you must be capable of lying straight face to win an argument
- you must show proof you have read "Rules for Radicals" and you can adhere to the rules
- the most important factor is to never admit you were wrong or lying no matter what, even if you must generate more lies to cover your tracks
Are you a graduate of the Reverend Jim Jones Academy of Brain-Washing?
Or did you take the David Koresh Speed Brain-Washing Course?

Not amused...

Mircea
 
Old 08-30-2012, 05:29 PM
 
5,113 posts, read 4,963,140 times
Reputation: 1732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
Are you freaking serious? How blind are you?



When are you going to practice what you preach?

Your blatant refusal to address the evidence presented against you indicates that you are "unwilling to seek the truth."



Talking about Geo-engineering and actually engaging in Geo-engineering is not the same thing. The fact that there might be research into Geo-engineering, is not proof that Geo-engineering is actually taking place.

As I pointed out, and which you ignored, in the early 1960s, the Atomic Energy Commission with congressional approval studied the feasibility of enhanced radiation weapons -- nuclear weapons with the out-put tailored to neutrons, gamma rays or x-rays.

Even though they studied and researched such weapons, they never actually designed, built or tested such weapons -- it was all done on computer using modelling.

The gamma ray and x-ray enhanced radiation weapons were deemed to be of no value, but the neutron weapon was of great value, and so in the late 1960s, Congress approved funding to develop and design such a warhead.

Again, I point that out because you are incapable of distinguishing between proposals, research and actual implementation.



And I debunked your article.



Since I have no political side, what political side would that be?

Yes, I am an ultra-conservative, but I'm no fan of the Republican party, and despise the Democrats even more.



I understand reality, and I know how to read, and more importantly, I understand what I read --- you do not.



What "disinformation?" You've been given repeated attempts to refute all of the evidence presented by everyone against you, and you have made no attempt to refute their evidence.

Your ignorance does not allow you to be aware of the fact, that the recorded history of the United States shows that there is a major drought every 87 years, that lasts on average about 9 years, and that this history starts in the 1590s, with the first three failed attempts to colonize the area that is now Roanoke, Virginia. Specifically, that drought lasted from 1595 to 1604.

The next major drought occurred 87 years later beginning in 1679 and ending in1688. 87 years later another major drought begins in 1762 and lasts through August 1771. Once again 87 years later in 1846 it's drought time in the Southeast and South, this one lasting through 1855. So, guess what -- 87 years later in April 1930 the last rains hit the Plain States and it's drought time for guess what -- the next 9 years -- yes the rains finally come in June 1939. That was the Dust Bowl which caused 2.5 Million Americans to flee and destroyed some dozens of towns (some are still buried in dust).

The next 87 year cycle beings April 2014.

Feel free to attempt to refute any claims I've made.



Reality fail.

Admit that one micron is one-millionth of a meter, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that there are 25,400 microns in one inch, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a nominal-sized particle is ~48 microns, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a particle >100 microns has a terminal velocity of 0.5 m/s, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a particle >100 microns falls to Earth at the rate of 1,800 meters per hour, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that 1 mile is 1,600 meters, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that commercial, and generally all military aircraft fly at altitudes of 24,000 to 36,000 feet, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that normal flight paths are are altitudes of 4.5 miles to 7.0 miles, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a particle >100 microns discharged from an aircraft in the flight path will fall to Earth in 4.5 hours at the earliest, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that this statement......



...is false since it takes 4.5 hours for a particle >100 microns to fall from the sky to Earth.

Admit that a nominal-sized particle has a terminal velocity of 0.2 m/s, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a nominal-sized particle falls to Earth at the rate of 720 meters per hour, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a nominal-sized particle discharged from an aircraft in the flight path will fall to Earth in 10 hours at the earliest, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that this statement......



...is false since it takes 10 hours for a nominal-sized particle to fall from the sky to Earth.

Admit that a particle <1 micron has no terminal velocity, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that a particle <1 micron may remain airborne for up to several years, possibly never falling out, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that fuel filters on jet propulsion engines range from 0.5 microns to 10 microns generally, but not more than 40 microns, or provide proof to refute.

Admit that this statement......



...is false since aerosol sprays cannot reach ground for at least 10 hours.



Admit that kerosene-based jet propulsion fuels cannot be contaminated with the alleged particulate matter in chemtrails prior to combustion, or show proof to refute.

Admit that kerosene-based jet propulsion fuels cannot be contaminated at sufficient levels to produce aerosol contaminates in parts-per-million (ppm) as claimed, or show evidence to the contrary.

Admit that the design of the fuel-cells in the wing-tanks of commercial aircraft prohibit the storage of any other material in a dry or liquid state, or show detailed schematics or drawings proving otherwise.

Admit that commercial aircraft have no weight/load capacity to carry materials other than kerosene-based jet propulsion fuels, or show schematics/diagrams to the contrary.

Admit that commercial aircraft have no capacity to disperse chemicals or particulate matter, other than jet engine exhaust, or provide schematics/diagrams to refute.

Admit that airports have no facilities to store aerosol material to be sprayed in the air, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that there is no method or means of loading aerosol contaminates aboard commercial aircraft, or show evidence to the contrary.

Admit that the following data.....Trace Elements in Frobisher Bay Rainwater(pp. 177-179) S. J. Vermette and V. G. Bingham...is true and accurate, or show evidence to refute.



Admit that the air temperature on the ground has no bearing on air temperature at 2,000 feet or 5,000 feet layers, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that Boyle's Law applies to gases, or prove that Boyle's Law is flawed.

Admit that at 16,000 with air density of 60.9% and air pressure at 16.21 mgHg that the air temperature is 2°F, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that at higher altitudes, the air temperature is below 0°F or show evidence to the contrary.

Admit that this statement ....



.....is based on scientific ignorance of air temperature, air pressure, air density and altitude, and displays a total lack of knowledge of the principle's of Boyle's Law.

Admit that this statement ....




.....is based on scientific ignorance of air temperature, air pressure, air density and altitude, and displays a total lack of knowledge of the principle's of Boyle's Law.

Admit that this treatise....Atmospheric Environment (1967) Trace metals in rain and snow during 1973 at Chadron, Nebraska, A.W. Struempler, Chadron State College, Chadron, Nebraska 69337, U.S.A.Received 20 January 1975. Revised 7 July 1975. Available online 14 April 2003.....is true and accurate, or provide evidence to the contrary.



Admit that the level of Aluminum in ppm is statistically normal relative to every study done since 1907, or provide evidence to the contrary that it is statistically abnormal, and that in being abnormal, it is statistically higher.



That premise is false. There is neither global warming, man-made global warming.



Admit that you do not understand the definition of "potential" or provide proof to the contrary.



Admit that you completely misconstrued the article because you failed to understand the meaning of the words "potential" and "model" or provide evidence to refute.



Admit that "...30 miles above earth..." is 158,400 feet or provide proof to refute.

Admit that no commercial aircraft on Earth can operate above 60,000 feet, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that no military aircraft on Earth can operate above 125,000 feet, or provide evidence to the contrary.

Admit that the only aircraft to reach 125,000 feet was a MiG-25, or provide evidence to refute.

Admit that there does not exist any possible way to spray "...millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth." or show evidence to refute.



Well, since you believe they're spraying millions of tons of aerosols at 30 miles in the sky....even though I have proven that to be impossible... I can understand why.

05-23-2010, 05:52 PM


You thought I was kidding? I had to go rent an hotel room to watch the last episode of LOST.....because I don't have a TV. I'm sort of condo-sitting. The guy who lives here is out in Brown County caring for an elderly parent. He took the TV with him. I don't really care.

And why would I listen to the radio? Your music blows chunks.

My little WinAmp thing says I have 1,628 items and of those how many since 2005? A tune by The Fray, 2 by Rascal Flatts, one by Sara Bareilles, and one by Warpaint. I am not at all impressed for the garbage that passes as music.



What liberal talking points?

No liberal on this forum would ever dare call me a liberal. You can't even show one liberal talking point I've ever made.

And no, I don't need mainstream media. Economics is economics and it doesn't change just because you have TV or not. Same with nuclear weapons. Nothing has change since I played with nukes, except that there are a helluva lot less. And US Geo-political strategy has remained unchanged since 1976.



Uh, yes, I did mention what it was.....

quote=Mircea;25832472]Do you understand the reason that aircraft cannot fly about certain altitudes is due to the fact that there is insufficient quantities of Oxygen to combust the jet propulsion fuel?

Hello science?
The article you copyright violated was a proposal discussing hypothetical possibilities, not realities.

This....



...is impossible. Which part of "impossible" do you not understand?

There are no aircraft on Earth capable of reaching 30 miles.

There are no commercial aircraft capable of reaching 11 miles. The only aircraft that can cruise at 60,000 feet are military aircraft, and those are combat aircraft. The ceiling for a C-130 is 28,000 feet -- why? Uh, it's a turboprop -- there isn't enough oxygen at higher altitudes for combustion. For a C-141 the ceiling is 41,000 feet. Why? Two reasons, the jet turbines are not high performance and the cargo bay is not pressurized for higher altitudes.

So how in the hell are you going to spray "...millions of tonnes of reflective particles of sulphur dioxide 30 miles above earth" when there is no possible way to reach that altitude?



Another fail. Where's the upper atmosphere?

It's above the troposphere, which is 11 miles above Earth......again....for the hard of hearing....there are no aircraft capable of "...releasing megatonnes of light-scattering aerosol particles in the upper atmosphere..."

Provide detailed specifications for all aircraft on Earth that can carry bulk quantities of aerosol particles into the upper atmosphere.....

....or continue to look like a fool.

Thread-killing....

Mircea



I know...how the hell are you supposed to respond to something as stupid as that?

I've been slandered and libeled as a liberal.

Commiserating...

Mircea



Are you a graduate of the Reverend Jim Jones Academy of Brain-Washing?
Or did you take the David Koresh Speed Brain-Washing Course?

Not amused...

Mircea[/quote]

I'm not going to read let alone respond to all that crap you wrote. I won't waste my time. You are obviously a fraud and provide no credible proof like I have. Just the fact that you claim "I debunked that" is enough proof for me to show you are amateur, a fraud and nothing but an internet spammer. Your logic and attempt to sound like you have an engineering/scientific background is ridicules and pathetic. You might be able to fool some of your yahoo uninformed followers with your doubletalk but I see right through it and expose you for who you really are.

Last edited by Vascodagama; 08-30-2012 at 05:38 PM..
 
Old 08-30-2012, 05:31 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,443,515 times
Reputation: 7641
Mircea, you don't seem to understand don9 can't grasp nor understand the concept of hypothetical possibilities. He has stated on numerous times what he depends on as a scientific person is his eyesight, that to him is the ultimate truth....
 
Old 08-30-2012, 05:34 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
9,033 posts, read 8,765,058 times
Reputation: 5666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
Thread-killing....
We can only hope.
 
Old 08-30-2012, 05:35 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,443,515 times
Reputation: 7641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
I'm not going to read let alone respond to all that crap you wrote. I won't waste my time. You are obviously a fraud and provide no credible proof like I have. Just the fact that you claim "I debunked that" is enough proof for me they you are a fraud and nothing but an internet spammer. You logic and attempt to sound like you have an engineering/scientific background is ridicules and pathetic. You might be able to fool some of your yahoo followers with your doubletalk but I see right through it and expose you for who you really are.
Mircea, a person who seems to be quite a bit more in touch with reality and facts than you my friend.....

Sooo, hows the guys and gals overseeing these chemtrail flights at Area 51 don?

Yaknow I spent quite a bit of time last night going over Google Earth to find these secret chem bases that you, don9 say are easy to spot and darn, I couldn't find not even one....
 
Old 08-30-2012, 05:46 PM
 
6,637 posts, read 4,613,164 times
Reputation: 13351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9 View Post
Its more like exposing the ignorant ...
I agree. Your ignorance has already been exposed repeatedly.
 
Old 08-30-2012, 05:47 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,443,515 times
Reputation: 7641
For all chemtrail conspiracy people:

The psychology of the chemtrail conspiracy...

Quote:
It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false, it is "generally accepted" (or vice versa).
Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And we see the "generally accepted" phrase in almost every single post they make don't we......
 
Old 08-30-2012, 05:51 PM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,443,515 times
Reputation: 7641
For anyone who hasn't seen chemtrail/geoengineering shown as an idiots farce:


Debunked: KMIR6 Geoengineering the Skies (chemtrails) - YouTube
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:27 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top