• Welcome to New Hampshire Underground.
 

News:

Please log in on the special "login" page, not on any of these normal pages. Thank you, The Procrastinating Management

"Let them march all they want, as long as they pay their taxes."  --Alexander Haig

Main Menu

Arkansas game officials probe mystery of falling birds

Started by Raineyrocks, January 03, 2011, 12:34 AM NHFT

Previous topic - Next topic

CJS


I have some good times teasing a couple of friends I know who are into the chem trails because they get so hot under the coller , but the truth is there is some real hard evidence about what kind of toxins are being found well off the beaten path .

Littlehawk should post the links to those people who have done soil sampling . I have seen some stuff that gets my attention. There really is some compelling evidence .

Just like so many soil samples from " ground zero " are full of explosive residue. It gets hard to just laugh stuff off when you start to see reputable professionals all saying the same thing .

Ron's point has always been my main reason for shooting down the chemtrail believers , but the truth is I have no idea how much of what would be necessary to alter our atmosphere .

I will admit I no I longer just laugh at the topic but I am far from jumping on the bandwagon.


MaineShark

Quote from: littlehawk on January 21, 2011, 11:26 AM NHFTLook at the math in regards to the testing of high levels of aluminum in water and snow samples after aerosol sprayings. ie recent Mt Shasta snowfall test data.

Look at the math and data that Rosalind Peterson has done in California and where it is presented on her webpage.

...

Look at the math by an independant biologist who tested several soil samples where heavy aerosol spraying was done.

Let's imagine that those tests were actually done with scientific rigor.  They weren't, but we'll pretend they are, for the sake of amusement.

That still doesn't prove where the stuff came from.  Even if you filled airplane fuel tanks so full of aluminum and whatnot that the engines wouldn't even run, it couldn't explain the claimed numbers in the soil.

So it's not coming from planes.  If it's actually coming from anywhere (and isn't just a fantasy), it's coming from something else.

Quote from: littlehawk on January 21, 2011, 11:26 AM NHFTLook at the math that was admitted in a recent geoengineering conference where the lead speaker openingly admitted to the project of spraying 10-20 million tons of aluminum into the air to combat "global warming."

Yup.  All sorts of things are hypothetically possible.  Do you know that there are two patents on ways to medically create a tapetum lucidum (the thing that gives cats, dogs, and some other animals excellent night vision, and causes their eyes to shine when hit by light at night) in the human eye?  You can read all about the hypothetical possibility.  Doesn't mean any humans actually have eyeshine, unless you could fantasy like the Riddick movies.

Quote from: littlehawk on January 21, 2011, 11:26 AM NHFTAnd no I won't waste my time posting links and citing data. If anyone has a true interest they are free to research the topic. And no I won't debate it either.

Doesn't surprise me.  A rational person would always be interested in data and debate.  But there's no convincing a zealot.

Joe

MaineShark

Quote from: littlehawk on January 21, 2011, 12:12 PM NHFTTherefore, what we do to the earth she will do to us.

The earth is a rock, with some biomatter splotched around on the surface.  It's a thing.  It doesn't have volition.  It doesn't "fight back" any more than the moss-covered rock in my back yard does, if I break it in half with a sledge and a chisel.

Joe

Lloyd Danforth

As I get older the more I find that Science isn't practiced the way I thought it was.

Tom Sawyer

Joe "The earth is a rock" and Littlehawk "We should live like the Amish"

Two extreme ends that are wrong.

While I don't worship Gaia, the earth is composed of very complex interactive systems... push one and others react.

Technology allows us to have less impact per capita than primitive ways.

MaineShark

Quote from: Tom Sawyer on January 21, 2011, 06:23 PM NHFTJoe "The earth is a rock" and Littlehawk "We should live like the Amish"

Two extreme ends that are wrong.

While I don't worship Gaia, the earth is composed of very complex interactive systems... push one and others react.

Certainly systems react in many ways.

But they don't "defend the earth from the evil humans."  Most of the time, tampering with nature is to humanity's benefit.

The earth is a rock.  It has no volition.  It doesn't defend itself, even as much as a dog will.  If we're smart, we'll learn ways to tamper with it, that cause it to react in ways that benefit us, as much as possible.

Quote from: Tom Sawyer on January 21, 2011, 06:23 PM NHFTTechnology allows us to have less impact per capita than primitive ways.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.  Folks love PV panels, for example, but the overall impact of that technology (pollution) is negative; the process of manufacturing them uses so much energy and produces so much waste that they will never offset it by generating "free" electricity over their whole lifespan.

The lousy woodstove that came with my current house is horribly inefficient.  It still has less impact on the environment than heating with the top-of-the-like, 98%-efficient propane furnace that I installed in the last house.  That furnace was bordering on total energy capture, but it doesn't matter, given the energy expended to produce and distribute that fuel.

On the other hand, I'm burning some "high tech" logs in that simple woodstove.  They're compressed from waste sawdust by a local company, using electricity generated from bio-fuels (they have an on-site diesel generator, converted to run on waste vegetable oil).  They burn extremely cleanly (running for a week, solid, I finally had enough ash built up to justify cleaning it out of the stove), aren't transported of thousands of miles to get here, and are produced using energy recovered from waste.  Compared to regular cordwood, even, they come out pretty good, and are much more user-friendly.

I'm all for taking care of the environment, but because it benefits us to do so, and only in ways that it benefits us to do so.  If people will benefit more by leaving something untouched for recreation, than they would by mining it, we should leave it untouched.  If people will benefit more by mining the valuable ore, good for them.  The planet won't care; it's just a rock.

Joe

littlehawk

I got tired of spoon feeding people who have no real concern for the issue at hand.  It's never good enough for these types.

I do not teach people who choose not to learn. I have better things to do.

I choose not to post oodles of data, stats, links, etc  to support my opinion because I do not care what others think...and basically, I'm lazy. Here on NH Forum, I posted an informative documentary "What in the World Are They Spraying" which is a terrific overview of chemtrails. That's about as far as this zealot will go.  :)

Over the years I have found that  the ones who are TRUELY interested in a topic they always find a way to find the information they need and then they can make their own decision. 

Littlehawk Amishboy


MaineShark

Sounds like the anti-gun folks.  "I just know guns are evil; I don't need to provide evidence."

Sorry, but rational adults require legitimate evidence before they decide to believe something.  They don't decide what they believe, then accept only evidence which agrees with their beliefs, and ignore evidence that refutes their beliefs.

What you're claiming is happening, is physically impossible.  The amounts they claim are dumped, exceed what could physically be dumped by airliners.  It's like claiming that a gallon of milk was spilled from a quart container.  No rational adult will accept such a nonsensical claim.

It's not that "it's never good enough."  You haven't posted reams of evidence backed by hard science, and we won't accept it, anyway.  You've posted nonsense that's false on the face of it, and complained that we won't accept the obvious falsehoods as truth.

Personally, I love to learn.  Provide something I can learn from, if you like.  Even when you provide propaganda, I learn from it, but it only teaches me that you do not value truth.

Joe

littlehawk


MaineShark

Quote from: littlehawk on January 21, 2011, 10:14 PM NHFTYou are right, Joe. You are very intelligent.

Intelligence has nothing to do with it.

There are plenty of intelligent folks who do not grasp basic physics.  There are plenty of folks who are certainly nowhere near being called "intelligent," who do.

Joe

littlehawk

#55
You are my hero. I want to be just like you.

What are your thoughts in regards to Rosalind Peterson's work?

KBCraig

Quote from: littlehawk on January 21, 2011, 10:40 PM NHFT
You are my hero. I want to be just like you.

MaineShark asked for actual facts. You gave names of people you said had facts, instead of giving facts.

He asked again for actual citations, and said he would even be willing to read propaganda that he didn't believe.

You respond with sarcasm.

You're not helping your argument here, littlehawk.

littlehawk

#57
You missed my above posts, KB.

I have no argument. I have no intent to prove anything to closed minds on the topic. If someone has an true interest in the topic they can search it out for themselves.   

15 years ago I talked to people and voiced my opinion about plans for a new world order and was laughed at. About 10 years I talked about the plans for EU and NAU and was laughed at. 15 years ago I talked about the collapse of our fiat currency and was laughed at. I opposed vaccines and spoke up about 40 years ago when 99% of the people thought they were better than sliced bread.  I never bought the bullshit lies when they conedmend one of the perfect foods, the egg and I never bought the bullshit when they tried to convince the masses that hydrogenated margarine was a more healhier choice than real butter. 30 years ago I spoke of the dangers of laboratory made sweeteners like aspartame and was scoffed at as well. 15 years ago I talked to peope and voiced my opionions about the USA becoming a police state and was riducled as well.

Nowadays I choose to throw my opinions around but I am getting to old and I too lazy to waste my time proving a case. As I repeat, if one is interested, one finds a way to get the information. It's pretty easy nowadays with internet.

KBCraig

To wit: you have nothing, other than an insistence that others research to see if they agree with you.

littlehawk

#59
Incorrect. I have something.    ;)

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered: the point is to doscover them. Galileo