Message from @Citizen Z

Discord ID: 662811118686699548

RadRhys
2019-12-31 15:32:09 UTC  

“Clean” coal

RadRhys
2019-12-31 15:34:33 UTC  

That’s only a term used relative to unprocessed coal. It still is far worse than oil, natural gas, and especially wind or nuclear

Citizen Z
2019-12-31 20:39:09 UTC  

Seems fine to me when i turn my lights on

Citizen Z
2019-12-31 20:43:49 UTC  

1960's - Oil gone in 10 years

1970's - another ice age in 10 years

1980's - acid rain will destroy all crops in 10 years

1990's - The ozone layer will be destroyed in 10 years

2000's - The icecaps will be gone in 10 years

None happened, but all resulted in more taxes.

Citizen Z
2019-12-31 20:52:26 UTC  

The new world

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/551433518991933442/661673042006638622/ENHNKpCWwAEUxym.jpg

Mee6
2020-01-01 00:21:19 UTC  

RadRhys
2020-01-01 00:21:31 UTC  

India is a superpower

RadRhys
2020-01-01 00:21:41 UTC  

Brace for nuclear war, they’re coming

RadRhys
2020-01-01 00:22:44 UTC  

@Citizen Z are any of these claims from a published, peer reviewed paper?

Citizen Z
2020-01-01 01:37:46 UTC  

peer review doesnt mean anything

Citizen Z
2020-01-01 01:39:36 UTC  

nuclear war threat is just more power they have over you. they arent going to nuke you. nukes dont exist.

RadRhys
2020-01-01 03:42:30 UTC  

This does not say peer review is meaningless in any possible understanding

RadRhys
2020-01-01 03:42:56 UTC  

In fact, the paper explicitly states that it’s useful

Wretch
2020-01-01 06:21:40 UTC  

Scientists are human. Scientists have a vested interest in promoting their work, often for status and further research funding, although sometimes for direct financial gain. This can lead to selective reporting of results and occasionally, exaggeration. Peer review is not infallible: journal editors might favor positive findings and newsworthiness. Multiple, independent sources of evidence and replication are much more convincing.

RadRhys
2020-01-01 13:45:26 UTC  

Nobody ever said peer review is infallible, it is merely another barrier to weed out as many false conclusions and mistakes to an arbitrarily decided threshold deemed acceptable

RadRhys
2020-01-01 13:53:02 UTC  

The article you put up is literally just a single dude, and it can’t even be verified if any of this happened

RadRhys
2020-01-01 13:56:34 UTC  

There’s a link in the article talking about finding out what’s in the chemtrails themselves (which they only show lab results, not collection or anything else), and it uses the consistent results of 2 samples from 2 different locations as an argument in favor of chemtrailsl, and then with a third sample that has wildly different results, they say that’s more representative of what’s actually being sprayed. There isn’t even a control. Humansarefree is a joke.

https://humansarefree.com/2018/04/rain-tests-confirm-yet-again-geoengineering-aluminum-barium-titanium-iron-sulfur-pour-from-the-sky.html

Citizen Z
2020-01-04 00:14:45 UTC  

NASA has a section on their website and they talk about chem trails. Sometimes they call them "Vapor Tracers".

Citizen Z
2020-01-04 00:16:48 UTC  

Chems used are said to be aluminum, lithium amd barium.

Citizen Z
2020-01-04 00:16:55 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/551433518991933442/662811666576310292/Screenshot_20200103-161555_Chrome.jpg

RadRhys
2020-01-04 12:59:23 UTC  

It’s tracers, so that means it’s rapidly oxidizing in the atmosphere (or it emits a specific wavelength of lightit’s own, I didn’t even think about that). https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sounding-rockets/tracers/metals.html

indio007
2020-01-14 17:31:26 UTC  

😂

Citizen Z
2020-01-14 18:07:40 UTC  

LOL

Citizen Z
2020-01-22 03:01:30 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/551433518991933442/669376063486296075/EO0krXhWAAElOGA.jpg

Citizen Z
2020-01-28 22:02:45 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/551433518991933442/671837596334161934/EPZkeLSX0AE8TPK.jpg

indio007
2020-01-29 04:59:43 UTC  

HAHAHAHAA!