Hashing it out with a shill can be one thing, but when the information (in this case links provided) become altered to misdirect people to garbage. It becomes a whole new game.
Here is how it went:
SHILL@beforeitsnews.com Posted by
AntiPoA21 on January 1, 2011 4:26
Mr. Pilot
COINTEL shills such as yourself will have to soon find a new work once direct in flight plume samples from several independent investigators are provided as legally sound evidence.
Oh, and if you don't think it will not be to your standards why don't we use the guidelines that have been provided by certain involved parties:
Here is what was messed with - you can go to SHILL@beforeitsnews.com and see where the fudged links take you. I have posted below (at the very bottom of the post), the intended links that I originally submitted on beforeitsnews.com.
ftp://ftp.wmo.int/Documents/PublicWeb/arep/gaw/gaw153.pdfhttp://www.undeerc.org/catm/pdf/Volume13Issue2.pdfJP8 fuel testing for "anti-static additives" used through D2's inflight injection systems.
http://info.ornl.gov/http://journals.ametsoc.org/doihttp://www.ofcm.gov/atd_dir/pdf/aqpac.pdfContacted for contract in a professional manor (no mention of geoengineering or chemtrails in discussion nor anything else to "scare off" Mr. Brown) and also requested the results and procedure guideline. No response - of course and no guideline forwarded.
Was later discovered - NRC funding links to several other involved "stakeholders" -- but good info at web site proving that plume sampling can be done safely. Thanks anyhow NRC and Mr. Brown! see link below.
http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/eng/news/iar/2006/07/17/vortex-flows.htmlOh ya, what are we testing for?
"CREATE/DAEDALUS
Report on existing technology and expected operationalization for a daily aerosol product - - - An assessment of assimilation techniques presently available, as well as an assessment of the requirements for a fully functional aerosol assimilation system"
http://macehead.nuigalway.ie/create/workplan.htmhttp://www.gse-promote.org/docs/Service_Validation_Protocol.pdfSo Mr. Pilot, I would say that your days spent passionately dedicated to pissing people off that simply want answers and the truth are coming to a close.
And PS: may you be facked in your next endeavor/sheep herding assignment!
Posted by Anonymous on January 1, 2011 9:01
Wow, nice straw men (again). I went to every link you posted above (several are broken - need to work on your copy/paste skills there, pal. I know it's hard but if you work at it someday you might just get it.)
Those data in those links are proof of nothing. They are are nothing but a bunch of unrelated things, several of which look to be manufactured items with no basis in reality. They contain technical terms which I am sure most chemtrail believers, having no understanding of Science, would find convincing. Please note the diversion/distraction tactic
- Proof that through this information, a procedure has been developed to gather in flight chemtrail samples. That is what I was intending to convey. Some are PROPOSALS to do things, others are just methodologies for sampling the atmosphere for it's aerosol content. So what?
There are lots of sources for atmospheric aerosols - and monitoring them makes perfect sense to me.
http://aerosols.wustl.edu/education/atmos_aerosol/section01.html
Again, there is not ONE link there that gives scientific proof of chemtrails from a known good source. The links you posted are just a hodgepodge of unrelated data which are stitched together by your obsessive paranoia.
And calling me insulting names doesn't alter the fact that I am right. You have been reduced by reason and logic to continual ad-hominem attacks against me (and by extension you are attacking the truth).
Speaking of truth, here ya go:
http://asd-www.larc.nasa.gov/GLOBE/contrails/
http://www.nmsr.org/mkjrept.htm
http://contrailscience.com/
http://www.iangoddard.com/contrail.htm
http://www.iangoddard.com/contral2.htm
http://goodsky.homestead.com/files/index.html
Read 'em and weep.
Oh, and about the U.N? Here ya go:
http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?q=1853.782.0.0
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331106,00.html
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-253.html
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2008/oct/more-united-nations-corruption
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/inde...;view=article&id=1348&Itemid=368
http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/corruption-plagues-the-un/
http://www.qando.net/?p=6502
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/blowing-the-whistle-on-un-corruption/
And the list goes on and on, 16.9 million hits on Yahoo for the phrase "U.N. corruption". Maybe you have time to read them all, I sure don't.
Now if you could post some links from a peer-reviewed, widely recognized science journal (any will do) with proof that chemtrails exist, I'd really appreciate it.
OK, flame away again and attack me personally, then again post uncorrelated data with paranoia for binding and maybe you can convince your audience to continue believing in something that doesn't exist.
Do you have any idea of the LOGISTICS of an operation that size? Take a look at the logistics for a large airline and tell me that any black funds could be hidden for this long to fund a global supply of tanker aircraft dumping megatons of chemicals all over the Earth. Of course this guy eludes to the concept of compartmentalization - I doubt he is dumb enough to not be aware of how it works. Again, just because someone's written a PLAN to do something is NOT PROOF THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE SO. NOT IN ANY WAY, MANNER, SHAPE OR FORM IS IT PROOF. Boy is he going to be in for a surprise. PROOF consists of FACTS and you have precisely NONE to back up your wild paranoid claims. Diversion again, what am I trying to claim? - that I have along with others, sourced out the information needed to gain solid, in flight samples? Prove me wrong. Post evidence form a peer-reviewed science journal or have your "Doh!" moment and apologize to all the people you are trying to mislead in order to inflate your pathetic ego by being the High Priest that KNEW Doom Was Upon Us Before Anybody Else Did. Really, how pathetic.
Posted by
AntiPoA21 on January 1, 2011 11:56
Nice work!
Shame that the links didn't work out, not so much for you, but for others.
Regardless, the information and procedure required for implementation has already been documented and posted elsewhere as well, where it is less prone to tampering.
Once again, your career/part time income is the only thing "doomed"
In the meanwhile, go out and get some fresh air - shill.
-----------------------------------------------------
Intended links: WHO aerosol measuring guideline and proceedure Center for air toxic metals this one was left alone and worked last time I checked on beforeitsnews.
JP-8 fuel (no additives) - close up examination: Note: these two were not included in original post but should have been due to relevance.
Octel's r-STADIS 450 (conductive additives) A company called d-2inc. Small craft samplers TLV — Threshold Limit Value Anthony Brown National Research Council PILOT CREATE/DAEDALUS lead 1 CREATE/DAEDALUS lead 2 these two were also left alone and worked last time I checked on beforeitsnews.
It is a good idea to go back and check your links or quoted sources if using such. The last thing you want is for some clown to discredit you by dirty tactics as was shown to have happened here.
