Now if only your links were supporting your overall message. I think the only thing we agree on is that people should read the material themselves. Most of them will not see that as strong evidence for chemtrails, I’m afraid.
Now if only your links were supporting your overall message. I think the only thing we agree on is that people should read the material themselves. Most of them will not see that as strong evidence for chemtrails, I’m afraid.
Varyk@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
the supporting links for this post are from verified government and news sources, comprised entirely of official evidence, documentation and recordings.
Verified historical fact.
Carrolade@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
No, this is why you keep changing your tune. A few posts ago you were talking about “biological attacks!”. Now it’s “biological experiments!” after I pointed out that you were wrong. What ever happened to radiological? You haven’t mentioned that one in awhile after including it in your earlier message, have you? Weak, op. Very weak.
Varyk@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
you trying to twist the words of the 1976 Senate committee hearing isn’t going to work, it’s a 50-year-old completely verified set of proof.
chemtrails were real and the US government experimented with biological weapons on people, as noted in the post.
your confusion over the evidence is completely immaterial.
Carrolade@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
My issue is your words not matching the committee’s words. Your words are the problem, and your words are what you need to defend. This careful pivot to “but the committee!!!” isn’t fooling anyone op. Defend your words. Where did the committee discuss radiological? Did I miss it somewhere perhaps?