Chemtrails may or may not be "true," but regardless, I don't see why That discussion should be part of this forum.

I would suggest that someone interested in this subject go to "Add New Topic" at

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/add-new-topic.tcl

and start a Chemtrails forum.

That discussion really doesn't belong on this forum. And, yes, same for WTO and many other topics regarding conspiracy and "the role of government," etc.

Let's keep this the "TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000)" okay?

-- joe (joe@adeveloper.net), December 05, 1999

Answers

I second that. I've got plenty to worry about for the next 27+ days without stopping to look up every time a plane flies over. I also can't see any relationship between Y2K and chemtrails. And all you folks that want to explain it to me can save yer breath; I'm too busy prepping for the rollover.

-- cavscout (cavscout@fix.net), December 05, 1999.

And next they should delete any posts by a guy named Joe.

-- Tom Waits (TomWaits@zensearch.net), December 05, 1999.

"Joe,"

A lot of reliable posters are seeing something going on in the skies over our country. Although I havent personally seen it, enough people I respect, as careful researchers and posters here... have. What it is, we dont know for sure.

But its a very strange anomoly... its happening THIS year... the dot govs and dot mils have made no secret that they are highly concerned about terrorist acts coupled with Y2K... and beyond. And their watchword/mantra is... transparency.

Y2K does not operate in a world vacuum... and weve learned to expect the unexpected.

Who knows?

It may or may not be inter-related. Hard to say. Connect the dots. Or not.

Time... and tide... will tell.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 05, 1999.

Many requests have been made of the the sysops to keep this forum on Y2K and cut out all the Chemtrail bull. The sysops have chosen to delete those making such requests. I guess they have been outside staring up in the sky too long themselves.

-- for real (for@real.com), December 05, 1999.

I must say: These chemtrail threads, especially combined with other way-off-topic stuff like UFOs, are starting to give the thread title index a real "wacky" look. Honestly, I would hate to think what someone who has just become aware of Y2K and wants to learn about it would think. It brings every "crazies on the Internet" remark home to roost.

This stuff is doing what Andy Ray and Y2K Pro tried but never could do: Make it look like people who are interested in preparing for Y2K are a bunch of paranoid lunatics. This is absolutely not true.

ENOUGH WITH THIS CRAP!!!!

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), December 05, 1999.

If it's too "wacky" for you, KOS, then don't stay. These are important issues, and the moderators have already spoken on it. You've really been wandering over to the polly camp these last few days. Maybe that's where you belong.

-- (brett@miklos.org), December 05, 1999.

What, the fact that your paranoid makes chemtrails an important issue?

-- for real (for@real.com), December 05, 1999.

What, the fact that you're a stupid polly troll with his head in the sand makes chemtrails a bunch of "bull?"

-- (brett@miklos.org), December 05, 1999.

I agree - delete future chemtrail stuff - enough already.

-- Bill P (porterwn@one.net), December 05, 1999.

But its a very strange anomoly... its happening THIS year...

This BS has been going on for YEARS. Where the hell U Been Diane? You sound like a GN newbie, even if you ARE a moderator. Get your facts straight.

or delete - wuttever

-- byteme (abunch@shit.org), December 05, 1999.

Would it be possible to post one thread every morning titled, "Today's Chemtrail Sightings", and ask that all chemtrail postings go to that thread?

-- (RUOK@yesiam.com), December 05, 1999.

Yeah, until one of these "phantom jets" spells out

"Y2K IS REAL!!!! or "JOHN KOSKINEN IS AN ALIEN"

I don't wan't to hear about another god damn chemtrail. Separate forum for the skywatchers would be much appreciated.

-- Gordon (g_gecko_69@hotmail.com), December 05, 1999.

Why does an Off Topic subject need be banned? The basic rules for topics are mostly observed here already. Although there are a fair share of OT threads posted here, so what? Don't like? Don't read it, it's that simple. Besides, interest in OT threads is high judging from the number of post AND you might learn something if you did bother to read it (and many do).

The issue of Y2K is not isolated to computers, software, telecommunications and more. Many, many issues are also tied into Y2K and if posters are not allowed to SOME degree to express an opinion, share an article or give a thought on OT issues, how do you propose to know the whole truth about the subject you ARE interested in?

Furthermore, this forum attracts an awful lot of very informed visitors and posters. I'd really, really hate to lose that extremely valuable source of information. Ten researchers are better then one, and a ten thousand are better then a hundred. You and I can only assimilate so much, spend so much time on the Net to find subjects of interest. This forum is a great place to find a great deal of information. I have learned much from being here and encourage posters to abide by the general rules, but subjects that might be of interest ought not be banned because they don't meet somebody's narrow definiton of Y2K.

Personally, I read most OT threads, so my comments of course are biased. But I am very curious and very inquisitive. I spend hours on this forum each and every day. I happen to work at home, for myself and can afford to do so. But skipping certain posters or subjects is just as easy for me with hours of time as it is for the surfer who has only a few moments to look.

That's what "threads" are for - to allow you to puruse and pick and choose one that is of interest to you - otherwise don't read it!

Furthermore, it has been my experience that most who prepare ARE far more paranoid then others. Fear that you will be deemed "whacked" is utterly groundless. If you even read this forum you are considered "whacked". So what? Afraid of a little association with the right wing paranoid tinfoil bunch? Big deal. There's been enough said on this forum about Project Echelon, Meggido, and more to identify any and everyone that has ever turned on a computer what there personal, political and religous persuasions are. Anonymous posters are NOT anonymous, no matter what you think. LIVE WITH IT. Quit trying to hide that you are something other then what you really are (in the eyes of the sleepy world, you indeed are whacked). Our government gets away with an awful lot of shit because of this very attitude, because people have been taught to be AFRAID.

'Nuff rant (for this post). OT subjects are often informative, interesting and lead the curious to investigate the issues further. Since this is a Y2K forum, this is generally respected, but once again, Y2K is not a single issue subject, no matter what you think. It affects every single aspect of our lives. OT subjects may or may not tie in directly, but nothing in this life is isolated and unrelated. NOTHING. Not even the Tinfoil Doomer predictions of Aliens Inhabiting Bill Clinton's Nasal Cavity or some such truly whacked subject. Come to think of it, that might explain his odd behavior...

-- Keep This Forum As It Is (Forums@r.us.com), December 05, 1999.

We just noticed them a week ago. Sure, we can stop posting about it.

Y'all don't care that it is actually happening and that it is REAL?

Hhhhmmm, that sure sounds familiar :-)

The reason we know Y2K is going to be worse than it had to be is precisely because of humanimal reaction, including scoffing and ridiculing that with which one is not familiar.

Oh, and not even wanting to hear about it.

In WWII, nobody wanted to hear about the gas chambers either.

Hint and warnings, lessons, from the past. Learn and heed, look and learn.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), December 05, 1999.

I have been lurking on this forum for a year and a half. Wow, has it ever changed! I have responded to this topic before, but logic has gotten nowhere. First, it started out as contrails. I tried to explain what contrails are and invited people to check the definition out for themselves, but with no success. Now, chemtrails is the buzzword. Of course, no fact, just speculation. I remember seeing these things in the sky as a little boy 35 years ago. And,since I have experience flying in the military, what you are seeing is jet exhaust. I am not aware of any "spraying" from a military aircraft, just as others can not proove that spraying is happening. Do military aircraft dump fuel...ocassionally yes, with strict regulations. And, what are they spraying. Nobody has done any chemical analysis on this? I agree, sysops delets this stuff unless proven. Get back to y2k issues with only days left. To buy in to this stuff just lumps y2k with other paranoid ideas. Then again, maybe y2k is just that?

-- lparks (lparks@eurekanet.com), December 05, 1999.

So, A & L: saying that Chem/contrails should have a separate forum equates to people not wanting to hear about Nazi genocide? And I, it seems, am now lumped into that camp?

Hello???

I'm anything but a "polly," but posts like that make me understand why some pollies consider people who are justifiably concerned about y2k to be a bit (or a lot!) "over the edge." That post certainly was.

Let me put it another way. When a critical mass of "OT" posts on any given "non-y2k" subject is reached, the topic should have -- and deserves -- its own forum.

Diane tried to make the "but it may be connected to y2k!" point. Well, gee, damn near anything can be connected to y2k if you work hard enough at it.

My opinion: This should have it's own forum. Hope that opinion doesn't make me genocidal Nazi...

-- joe (joe@adeveloper.net), December 05, 1999.

Joe, please work on your reading comprehension.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), December 05, 1999.

lparks said: "delete this stuff until it is proven." Unf*cking believable!!! Have you got a CLUE to what you just said? Even an INKLING? Somehow I doubt it, so I'll ENLIGHTEN you.

A great deal of what is discussed on this forum is "unproven". Look at who you are implying to "prove" the reality to you - the Sysops!

Are they more uniquely qualified then the rest of us to verify the facts? To prove to the rest of the world that these stories may or may not be true? Just like Y2K, there are camps on BOTH sides of the fence. I'm not defending Chemtrails, but the simply fact that open discussion is the only way to air an issue. This forum is reasonablly well moderated as it is - further encrouchments against poster who post OT subjects is NOT welcome. As stated earlier, DON'T READ IT if it doesn't turn your crank.

My God, people, THINK! You are willingly begging for a restriction on free speech, do you realize that? I've already stated that I encourage the moderation of this forum in my earlier post, so I won't reiterate, but to flat out BAN certain subjects because YOU don't think they are PROVEN? Unf*cking believable.

One of the last bastions of FREEDOM you JERKS even have is FREE SPEECH. Either EXERCISE IT WITH SOME WISDOM or REALIZE YOU WON'T HAVE A POT TO PISS IN TO COMPLAIN WHEN YOU are BANNED or YOUR PET SUBJECT.

Use it or Lose it, you jerks.

-- Keep this forum as it is (Appalled@lala.land.com), December 05, 1999.

OK, how about if we all compromise on the following:

The chemtrails are a GOVERNMENT PLOT to get the attention of Y2Kers so that they become immersed in sky gazing. This results in decreased attention to what is coming in 27 days, PLUS makes them appear like loonies to everyone else, thus confirming to anyone who ever thought that they were wacky in the first place. The righteous thing to do is to IGNORE the stupid things, thus foiling the GOVERNMENT PLOT, and focusing on the reality of broken computer code and what it's impact will be.

There now, everybody gives a bit and gets a bit.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), December 05, 1999.

Y2K has not been proven yet.
Nor has January 1, 2000 arrived.
Almost.

-- hang on (terrible@times.coming), December 05, 1999.

The Y2K problem is not in dispute by anyone. Only its predicted effects. Now chemtrails on the other hand...... It just occurred to me, if you do not have enough basic computer knowledge to understand the difference.... please slowly and carefully back away from your keyboard. Next, pick up your Steven King novel and ........

-- for real (for@real.com), December 05, 1999.

Well, I certainly agree that my intention was not to delete unproven issues. Rather, to support the notion that it should be deleted from this forum and placed on a different forum. But, to be called a jerk, unenlightened, and unsupportive of freedom! Now, that's civility.

-- lparks (lparks@eurekanet.com), December 05, 1999.

Get rid of all chemtrail posts. Stick to Y2K.

Whether chemtrials are contrails or not, Whether chemtrails are good for us or bad for us, There ain't a thing we can do in the time remaining.

It takes corroners weeks to determine cause of death sometime and over a year for the FAA to investigate a plane crash.

I am too busy to look up.

-- woody (woody11420@aol.com), December 05, 1999.

As usual, I vote to delete all chemtrail blather. Chemtrails are not Y2K related unless every conspiracy theory is also Y2K related. Andy Ray would be proud of these folks.

Sincerely,

-- Uhhmm.. (JFCP81A@aol.com), December 05, 1999.

Hey, are you the same whiner that was complaining a couple of days ago?

Here's a clue... if you don't like "chemtrail" threads, don't click on the threads that contain the word "chemtrail."

Get it?

Got it?

Gooood!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 05, 1999.

The moderators have already spoken on this issue and most people agree with their reasoning. If chemtrail posts bother you, put your head back in the sand with the rest of the pollys and stop reading this board.

-- (brett@miklos.org), December 05, 1999.

Hawk,

I am the whiner that agreed with you just a few threads below in regard to gun confiscation. I actually liked your arguement regarding the best way to undermine the PTB. Kind of surprised me because I never thought of you as having a real solid background in reality. If you don't like my ideas, please take Will Continue's advice.

Sincerely,

-- Uhhmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), December 05, 1999.

Uhhmm,

That's cool, but I was speaking to the original poster joe. As far as my background in reality, reality is what you make it. You may want censorship to be a part of your reality, but I don't want it to be part of mine, so I do not choose it. At this point in time, the combined consciousness of the masses would seem to be weighing in on my side, choosing freedom over censorship. And no, I will never take advice from Will the farmer, the guy is a moron.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 05, 1999.

Hawk,

The censorship battles ended week before last. I thought that we all agreed that the forum is Y2K, the sysops can/will/do delete some off topic responses, and this deletion is not considered censorship.

This fourm is not a street corner - it is more like a radio station. Radio would be impossible should all frequencies be reduced to one, and all stations be forced to share bandwidth - pure static. Similarly, forums like this one would be impossible if all ideas are presented without regard to the purpose of the forum. Sysops provide the necessary filter to permit the chosen topic (Y2K) to be heard. There are other forurms (stations?) for other topics.

Many people pelieve that chemtrails are not Y2K related, that the topic inlcuded on this forum reflects poorly upon those who believe Y2K a serious problem, and its deletion from these threads would not be censorship, but rather a welcome breath of fresh air.

I have for long believed these topics and many others of type diverse were Y2K unrelated. Perhaps we can agree to disagree on this topic? For now, the sysops side with you.

Anyway, at this late hour and this deep on the page, few will notice. So I will note that, if memory serves, I do not belieive Will to be a guy. My memory is not very good, though. I am just too old.

Sincerely,

-- Uhhmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), December 05, 1999.

Uhhmm,

The decision to delete disruptors was based on behavior, not subject matter. They were intentionally antagonistic, inflammatory, and derogatory towards like-minded participants in Y2K discussions.

These chemtrail threads are not harming anyone, and not preventing anyone from discussing Y2K issues. In the year and a half I've been reading this forum, I've never once seen the number of threads limited to any maximum quantity. Make no mistake about it, if these threads were deleted, that would be a form of censorship.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 06, 1999.

Y2K is not simply about updated embedded chip reports. It is about the truth. How serious is the problem? Who is reporting and testing honestly? Will the problems be manageable, or will the attempted solutions and efforts to cope be sabotaged by those who see Y2K as an opportunity for power? Who can be trusted? If problems are serious, who will survive? In this vein, we discuss families, marriages, children, siblings, neighbors, emotions, plans, dreams, hopes, heartbreaks, fears, ideas, resources, current events, historical lessons, skills, and if I searched the archives, there is probably a thread on the kitchen sink. The poster who advised long ago to "kill your mouse" was the most wise. If you think the topic is redundant or useless clutter, take control of your mouse and move on. KOS, it seems strange that the Ruler of Mud Paradise would criticize someone for making this forum seem a little wacky...hmmm. I seem to remember more than one newbie being thrown by your...quirky appreciation for wet dirt gymnastics. Don't misunderstand, I enjoy you personally. Just my opinion.

I like to have all the pieces in front of me, and decide for myself what is relevant, what is disinformation, what is entertainment, and what is a waste of time. I understand the deletions of senseless profanities, mindless insults, and graphic obscenities, and do not really consider that censorship as much as litter control.

lpark: "Nobody has done any chemical analysis on this? "

http://ens.lycos.com/ens/apr99/1999L-04-22-01.html

Sky Samples Analyzed

By William Thomas with Erminia Cassani

VICTORIA, British Columbia, Canada, April 22, 1999 (ENS) - As unmarked tanker-type aircraft continue spraying sky-obscuring chemtrails over regions of the U.S. and Canada, this writer and American journalist Erminia Cassani have obtained laboratory tests of fully-documented samples of aerial fallout. The samples were tested by a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) licensed facility.

The two samples were taken from aluminum-sided structures in separate states nearly a year apart after their respective owners went outside in the wake of low-flying aircraft to find dwellings and outbuildings splattered with a brown, gel-like substance.

Vapor trails January 1999 (Photo courtesy W. Thomas) Trained in the health sciences, Cassani carefully took samples from the second incident which occurred at 2:00 pm on November 17, 1998. The samples were taken from property directly under the flight approach path to Thomasville airport, an old airport once used for commercial flights but now used only for small planes. However, the woman whose house and property the sample substance fell upon, observed that military aircraft have recently been using this airport for "test runs" circling the immediate area and returning to the Thomasville airfield. This facility is located a 45 minutes drive from the Harrisburg International Airport in Pennsylvania. Noting nearby military hangars filled with big helicopters, Cassani videotaped a house splattered on all sides, as well as the driveway. The reporter also interviewed a man living near the main runway who claimed that a similar goo had hit his house the previous October.

Cassani became ill with flu-like symptoms and was sick for four days after obtaining the sample. When a marine biologist at a nearby university started working with the gel material, he too immediately developed upper respiratory symptoms. The woman whose house had been struck also caught the"flu." Two weeks before Christmas 1998 she suffered a heart attack.

Coliform tests by the state Department of Health were negative. But when the university Ph.D. biologist turned his microscope to high power, he found the glass slide teeming with a protozoan life form he said was "very resilient to very cold temperatures."

The laboratory staff who eventually received our sample for a complete analysis had never seen cell cultures bloom so fast. Cell cultures normally take several days to grow; ours flowered into brilliant colors within 48 hours of being placed in petri dishes.

Exclaiming that, "It was all over the plate," the biologist who examined our first sample wanted to know where we had obtained this "bio-hazard" material.

Vapor trail dispersed by wind, January 1999(Photo courtesy W. Thomas) No markers for jet fuel were evident. But the TNT and fuel-eating Pseudomonas fluorescens found in our sky sample is listed in 163 Pentagon patents for bioremediation. Sometimes employed against oil spills, Pseudomonas fluorescens can consume jet fuel as a primary food source. This bacteria can cause upper respiratory illness and serious blood infections in humans.

Unlike P. flourescens, the streptomyces present in our sample is rarely found in outdoor samples. Used to make several antibiotics, this fungus can cause severe infections in humans.

Also isolated in our sample was a fluorescent-type of bacteria found in distant coral reefs, which can be used as a "marker" in lab tests.

Another bacillus contained a "restriction enzyme" used in research laboratories to "restrict" or cut DNA material for transfer to other organisms. A computer search for this usually benign bacteria turned up Streptomyces and P. flourescens on the same reference page - as well as the American Type Tissue Culture Corporation. U.S. Senate documents show that this Maryland company made at least 72 shipments of germ warfare cultures to Saddam Hussein's scientists between October 1984 and October 1993.

Our second sample was obtained from the U.S. eastern seaboard after Cassani tracked down a woman whose house, barn, cars, lawn and driveway were covered by a similar brown gel on January 17, 1998. This homeowner noticed planes making "tic-tac-toe clouds" and "weird designs" in the sky before the goo fell - possibly from clogged spray nozzles.

She had been at church while neighbors watched a large aircraft circling so low it rattled windows and almost hit a barn, before climbing toward a disused commercial airfield recently renovated for military flights. When the homeowner took a scraping into the local lab, she was told of similar incidents in the vicinity.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) dismissed the substance - which resisted power-washing and months of weathering - as "corn meal."

Vapor trails over northwest Arkansas (Video still frame by James E. Gribble III) But despite being stored for a year at room temperature, our EPA registered lab found this second batch of dried-out gel teeming with the same bacilli present in our more recent sample. Streptomyces was again found, as well as a bacteria capable of causing a painful ear infection. Three other molds in this second sample included a "black yeast" stockpiled by the U.S. Army as a "bioremediation organism" that thrives on TNT and petroleum spills. This black yeast can also cause a nasty upper respiratory infection - as Cassani discovered when her left lung became painfully infected with black mold that could have come from the sample she handled.

We decided to withhold the name of our testing facility after an environmental lab in Ohio was besieged by calls from a militia organization claiming that a jet fuel additive identified by Aqua Tech Environmental Inc. was part of a conspiracy to cull the population.

Larry Harris brought the controversial sample to Aqua Tech for analysis. A registered microbiologist who once worked on top U.S. biowarfare projects, Harris says that a lab technician immediately identified his sample as JP-8 aviation fuel similar to dozens of samples being brought in by sick pilots and ground crew.

But after the harassing phone calls began, another chemtrails investigator who was with Harris when he submitted the fuel sample to Aqua Tech told ENS that the "lab went cold" and would no longer confer with them.

A copy of Aqua Tech's report on Harris' sample has been obtained by this reporter. Submitted on September 17, 1997 and labeled "Jet Fuel," lab report number MEL 97-1140 identifies more than 15 toxic petroleum products - including toulene and styrene, as well as traces of the banned pesticide ethylene dibromide (EDB). Currently used as a JP-8 jet fuel additive, EDB was banned by the EPA in the late 1970s as a known carcinogen capable of causing severe upper respiratory reactions at repeated low-level exposures.

Harris charges that Aqua Tech altered its test results to "almost undetectable amounts" of EDB in order to fend off crackpots, protect government contracts and discredit his investigation.

Aqua Tech insists its report is accurate.

Despite efforts to protect her identity, our own friendly biologist turned edgy and cold after finding few references to our toxic samples in medical books or Internet databanks. When Cassani suggested that this lack of information seemed strange, the microbiologist laughed uneasily and said, "Well, the whole thing is strange, the samples, where they came from. So I'm not surprised."

Similar encounters with a gel clinging tenaciously to porches, pick- up trucks and patrol cars have been reported across the USA - from Arizona's remote Mogollon rim to Aptos and Fresno, California and North Seattle, Washington.

Vapor trails March 3, 1999, location unknown The most publicized incident occurred in August, 1994, when gelatinous globs began raining on Oakville, Washington about 80 miles southeast of Seattle. After local residents became sick with vertigo, lethargy and severe shortness of breath, a lab technician found human white blood cells in the sky goo. At the Washington State Department of Health, registered microbiologist Mike McDowell also discovered the sample swarming with Pseudomona flourescens and Enterobacter cloacae.

Serratia marcescens was found in yet another gel sample obtained in Idaho in late March, 1999. Often causing upper respiratory infections resulting in pneumonia, Serratia marcescens was sprayed into the New York subway system in 1953, and over Dorset, England from early 1966 to 1971 by the military in both countries. Serratia marcescens was supposedly withdrawn as a biological warfare stimulant in the 1970s when this infectious agent was deemed too hazardous for use on friendly "test populations."

E. coli, Serratia marcescens, and Bacillus glogigii were sprayed over UK population centers to stimulate biowarfare attacks in the 1960s and 1970s, the London Telegraph reported in May of 1998. All three agents can cause disease in humans including pneumonia and chest infections. According to recent admissions by the British Defense Ministry, a Canberra jet bomber was modified with spray tanks to "act as a spray aircraft for research into defence against biological warfare."

Microscopic examination of spider web-like fallout obtained in Sallisaw, Oklahoma in October, 1997 also turned up enterobacteria, which can cause gastrointestinal illness.

Despite these findings, microbiologists caution that the Oakville, Idaho and Sallisaw samples could have been contaminated by "background" bacteria present in the soil.

Experimental lab material found in our samples remains unexplained. As outbreaks of staph, recurrent pneumonia and meningitis continue to be reported in hospitals by newspapers across the USA, Cassani and I note that staph-related organisms turning up in test samples of airborne spray can cause pneumonia and meningitis.

Our investigation continues.

) Environment News Service (ENS) 1999. All Rights Reserved

-- Mumsie (shezdremn@aol.com), December 06, 1999.

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California My Chemtrails Page

Why Chemtrails are Not Off Topic

Will Continue is a mom, for those above who keep asking.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), December 06, 1999.

Dancr,

Thanks, I am always gratified to find my memory still clanks and clonks along - even when I am not wathcing.

Sincerely,

-- Uhhmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), December 06, 1999.

I have never seen a "chemtrail" and when I first started seeing the threads I thought it was a bunch of BS. But then I started seeing more and more of them with more convincing evidence and pictures. Does this mean they're real? What is real with Y2K? It's ALL hypothesis and conjecture because it's so large and complex - one person cannot possibly comprehend all its aspects.

I believe the people seeing chemtrails believe they are something out of the ordinary - the jury is still out regarding if they are dangerous or not. I can't explain why the media hasn't covered any of it, but I'm not ready to dismiss it out-of-hand because I don't have any FACTS to do that. As a former helpdesk consultant, nothing bugs me more than someone (e.g. a system administrator) saying that something isn't happening WHEN YOU ACTUALLY SEE IT THERE WITH YOUR OWN EYES.

As far as chemtrail threads: keep 'em. I like the suggestion of one thread a day (boy would that be great about a lot of topics). If a category isn't already out there for them, I would suggest to sysops to create a CHEMTRAIL category. If you don't want to read them, skip them.

-- Jim (x@x.x), December 06, 1999.