--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mar 13, 2008, at 7:40 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 13, 2008, at 4:30 PM, authfriend wrote: > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 13, 2008, at 3:02 PM, endlessrainintoapapercup wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Vaj, I'm surprised to hear about the grade school science > > > > > > explanation of chemtrails. I've heard for years that > > > > > > investigations of this world wide phenomenon could get no > > > > > > official acknowledgement that it was taking place > > > > > > > > There is none. Vaj is, um, exaggerating a bit. > > > > The textbook supposedly talks about possible ways > > > > to stop global warming, one of which is for planes > > > > to use "richer jet fuel." There's nothing about > > > > ongoing experiments or anything similar in what the > > > > guy quotes from the textbook. > > > > > > The exact same section is actually quoted by an environmental > > > think tank which acknowledges not only the specific quotes, but > > > their intent and sources! : > > > > But the textbook is *not* teaching kids that such > > experiments are being done, as I said. > > Never the point.
Now that I've made it clear, you mean, after you tried to obfuscate. Hmm, you appear to have snipped this part: > And the whole first part of what you quote below, > BTW, is from an anonymous comment to the article, > not the article itself. Hard to understand how you > could have missed that, given that it's in a > different color and all. > > As long as we're talking conspiracy theories, it's > a good idea to get our facts straight, don't you > think?
