Well sweetie, I am not the one who will agree
with you since I do not. I know a contrail
and I have seen the chemtrails. You would have
to steer me to a ton of articles which support
what you say as I have seen a ton of articles
which support my contention and the contention
of others. I imagine you might change your mind
if you read enough of them too. This is not to
dismiss your allegations either as what you say
may be true but what I say may be true also.
Of course, I also believe in ufos although
like the government says, there are no ufos
and that technically is true since they know
what they are so cannot actually be unidentified.
Likewise, perhaps the semantics of this issue
are cloudy but the reality is that we are
being sprayed from above with something that
is not healthy to human beings...

Also, please do not take this personally, but
this is the support forum of the chemtrail issue.
There is a debate forum for the same issue and
if you post there, your argument will be more
appreciated than if you post it in this forum.

//www.curezone.org/forums/f.asp?f=589

best wishes,
Zoe

-_-

The thing I do not understand is the reason WHY anyone would do this to their own people, and who supposedly provides the funding for such lunacy.

--"it’s lost in a sea of inconclusive theory, conjecture and photos of normal contrails and meteorological events."

This is exactly what I get from the few pilots I know and trust. That statement is also why its nearly impossible to visually differentiate some contrails from chemtrail. Take a look at WWII skies from the US airforce squadrons. Most chemjet theorists would say those are chemtrails, yet most of these activists also state the Conspiracy began a long time after the 1940s.

I always thought the most significant thing that we ever found on the whole goddamn Moon was that little bacteria who came back and lived and nobody ever said shit about it. — Pete Conrad (1)

On April 20, 1967, the unmanned lunar lander Surveyor 3 landed near Oceanus Procellarum on the surface of the moon. One of the things aboard was a television camera. Two-and-a-half years later, on November 20, 1969, Apollo 12 astronauts Pete Conrad and Alan L. Bean recovered the camera. When NASA scientists examined it back on Earth they were surprised to find specimens of Streptococcus mitis that were still alive. Because of the precautions the astronauts had taken, NASA could be sure that the germs were inside the camera when it was retrieved, so they must have been there before the Surveyor 3 was launched. These bacteria had survived for 31 months in the vacuum of the moon's atmosphere. Perhaps NASA shouldn't have been surprised, because there are other bacteria that thrive under near-vacuum pressure on the earth today. Anyway, we now know that the vacuum of space is not a fatal problem for bacteria.

What about the low temperature and the possible lack of liquid water in space? The bacteria that survived on the moon suffered huge monthly temperature swings and the complete lack of water. Freezing and drying, in the presence of the right protectants, are actually two ways normal bacteria can enter a state of suspended animation. And interestingly, if the right protectants aren't supplied originally, the bacteria that die first supply them for the benefit of the surviving ones! English microbiologist John Postgate dIf the liquid were used as a medium for biological agents, the temperature required would most likely kill the microbes. If the high vapor temperature didn’t do the job, then the extremely low temperature of the surrounding atmosphere just might. Assuming these biological agents survived the hostile environment, they would tend to have a very slow rate of descent back to earth due to their microscopic size. (Microscopic dust from volcanoes is known to remain in the upper atmosphere for years after an eruption.) In all likelihood, atmospheric disturbances would scatter them and they wouldn’t even land in the area they were released. All in all, this seems an inefficient method of “bombing” the population with any type of harmful agents, if that is the intent.iscusses this fact in The Outer Reaches of Life (2):

Hey Wombat, so much for this from your link



If the liquid were used as a medium for biological agents, the temperature required would most likely kill the microbes. If the high vapor temperature didn’t do the job, then the extremely low temperature of the surrounding atmosphere just might. Assuming these biological agents survived the hostile environment, they would tend to have a very slow rate of descent back to earth due to their microscopic size. (Microscopic dust from volcanoes is known to remain in the upper atmosphere for years after an eruption.) In all likelihood, atmospheric disturbances would scatter them and they wouldn’t even land in the area they were released. All in all, this seems an inefficient method of “bombing” the population with any type of harmful agents, if that is the intent.


Just Google bacteria on the moon. Sorry daytona flyer, I think you are brainwashed. Take note of the sky, note how many of your family members and friends are having sinus trouble, skin problems or just not feeling too good. See how you feel, the third day after heavy contrails(chemtrails). Personal I think there was someone paying attention to the bacteria that survived on the moon. It was our government.

That guy is full of it
are chemtrail real please!!!!IF there not real. i am sanata clause and there just my tracks in the sky from my sleigh.people are ethier naive or just plain lying.
well each opinion to his own