Fake chemtrail evidence: "Tailsprayer infrared proof" is photoshoped!

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: VoidHawk
are you being deliberately obtuse, or are you accusing the author of the article on geoengineeringwatch.com of writing a "false flag" to discredit a myth for which there is no credible evidence in eth first place??

YOU said..

how much more dishonesty has to be evident before chemtrails are just chucked straight into hoax??

Just because YOU can show us a hoax it does not mean everything else automatically becomes a hoax! Yet that is what you are saying, is it not?

Yes that's exactly what this thread is all about. And no, desperate tactics like this wouldn't be required if there weren't something to hide regarding chemtrails. It's a bold project spraying people with poison in broad daylight and telling them "that's normal".

You seem rather confident in this assertion so I hope you're certain. Spraying what poison exactly?

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: VoidHawk
are you being deliberately obtuse, or are you accusing the author of the article on geoengineeringwatch.com of writing a "false flag" to discredit a myth for which there is no credible evidence in eth first place??

YOU said..

how much more dishonesty has to be evident before chemtrails are just chucked straight into hoax??

Just because YOU can show us a hoax it does not mean everything else automatically becomes a hoax! Yet that is what you are saying, is it not?

Yes that's exactly what this thread is all about. And no, desperate tactics like this wouldn't be required if there weren't something to hide regarding chemtrails. It's a bold project spraying people with poison in broad daylight and telling them "that's normal".

Your logic is exactly backwards.

If there was any truth to the chemtrailers' stories then they wouldn't need to keep inventing evidence to keep their sites ticking over, would they?

Blatant fakery such as this:

Here we have a photo of a Boeing 777-240, fitted with ballast tanks for load testing:


In the hands of chemtrail believers, it magically acquires some sloppily done fake signs implying that these are chemtrail "sprayers" containing "Hazmat inside"!

They even thoughtfully provide a close-up of their Photoshop work!



Tell me, why in the world would the chemtrail pushers do that if they didn't know they were lying about chemtrails?

originally posted by: Urantia1111
Yes that's exactly what this thread is all about. And no, desperate tactics like this wouldn't be required if there weren't something to hide regarding chemtrails. It's a bold project spraying people with poison in broad daylight and telling them "that's normal".

pointing out hoaxed evidence is not a "desperate tactic" - it is honesty.

something chemtrail believers have shown time and time again they do not value.

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul

originally posted by: NoRulesAllowed
Nope, that's not what he is saying.

Sure looks like it to me.

However, maybe it's time to think about WHY someone would need to fake such "evidence"...and wonder about a hidden agenda there.
Again: WHY would someone have a website about whatever conspiracy theory, here "chemtrails" and geo-engineering, and promote and publish such hoaxes and sell them as the truth? Just for entertainment sakes?

I don't think so - I think tat these people are so totally wedded to their myth that they believe anything that supports it, and do not actually see any dishonesty in what they put forward.

It is a deep seated cognitive dissonance that is common in cults IMO.

Wow I wish people would apply this line of reasoning to Global Warming/Climate Change as well. Just insert Climate Change wherever you see Chemtrail and a cult will rain down upon you.

originally posted by: Rob48

originally posted by: Urantia1111

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: VoidHawk
are you being deliberately obtuse, or are you accusing the author of the article on geoengineeringwatch.com of writing a "false flag" to discredit a myth for which there is no credible evidence in eth first place??

YOU said..

how much more dishonesty has to be evident before chemtrails are just chucked straight into hoax??

Just because YOU can show us a hoax it does not mean everything else automatically becomes a hoax! Yet that is what you are saying, is it not?

Yes that's exactly what this thread is all about. And no, desperate tactics like this wouldn't be required if there weren't something to hide regarding chemtrails. It's a bold project spraying people with poison in broad daylight and telling them "that's normal".

Your logic is exactly backwards.

If there was any truth to the chemtrailers' stories then they wouldn't need to keep inventing evidence to keep their sites ticking over, would they?

Blatant fakery such as this:

Here we have a photo of a Boeing 777-240, fitted with ballast tanks for load testing:

In the hands of chemtrail believers, it magically acquires some sloppily done fake signs implying that these are chemtrail "sprayers" containing "Hazmat inside"!

They even thoughtfully provide a close-up of their Photoshop work!

Tell me, why in the world would the chemtrail pushers do that if they didn't know they were lying about chemtrails?

What these are pressurized beer kegs to refuel the party aboard Air Force One during flight. It only looks like a chemtrail during disconnection for a short period. The real conspiracy is rather it's domestic or import beer.

a reply to: VoidHawk

ok - lest kick the burden of evidence on to you :

what is you # 1 unimpeachable piece of evidence of a chemtrail conspiracy ?

a reply to: Urantia1111

its a bold claim , screaming :

" they are spaying poison in broad daylight "

got evidence ? - I mean REAL evidence

originally posted by: VoidHawk
First, I'm not a "chemtrail believer", I'm open minded!

I hope so. Sorry to be another piling on, but you showed up kind of alone. (as in the only one here interested in discussion)

I do have a question for you. Looking into all the "evidence" that has been posted by the chemtrail sites, can you think of 1 thing that has not been a lie or a blatant photo shop job? All the "evidence" seems to have been explained as misrepresentation at the very least, and outright LIES in reality.

How many times do you need to be lied to before you start to question the motives of THE OTHER SIDE?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: VoidHawk
First, I'm not a "chemtrail believer", I'm open minded!

I hope so. Sorry to be another piling on, but you showed up kind of alone. (as in the only one here interested in discussion)

I do have a question for you. Looking into all the "evidence" that has been posted by the chemtrail sites, can you think of 1 thing that has not been a lie or a blatant photo shop job? All the "evidence" seems to have been explained as misrepresentation at the very least, and outright LIES in reality.

How many times do you need to be lied to before you start to question the motives of THE OTHER SIDE?

You don't take sides, you do question everything.

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: VoidHawk
First, I'm not a "chemtrail believer", I'm open minded!

I hope so. Sorry to be another piling on, but you showed up kind of alone. (as in the only one here interested in discussion)

I do have a question for you. Looking into all the "evidence" that has been posted by the chemtrail sites, can you think of 1 thing that has not been a lie or a blatant photo shop job? All the "evidence" seems to have been explained as misrepresentation at the very least, and outright LIES in reality.

How many times do you need to be lied to before you start to question the motives of THE OTHER SIDE?

You don't take sides, you do question everything.

I question everything. And pretty much everything chemtrail pushers says turns out to be rubbish.

Whereas the science, dating back to the middle of the last century, that shows that "chemtrails" are nothing but the 20-year-old figment of a criminal mind is perfectly sound, whichever way I slice it.

And, while I do not claim to be qualified in atmospheric physics, I do have a masters degree in chemistry and a pretty keen amateur interest in meteorology, so I can certainly understand what I am reading.

I have yet to see one single piece of evidence from chemtrailers that hasn't turned out to be either deliberately deceptive or based on a forehead-slappingly basic misunderstanding.

originally posted by: smurfy
You don't take sides, you do question everything.

Could you clarify that a bit?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: smurfy
You don't take sides, you do question everything.

Could you clarify that a bit?

Nope.

a reply to: smurfy

Yea, I didn't think so. Since you don't take sides and all.

Lie to me once, shame on you. Lie to me 400 times, and you do nothing but make me smile.

But hey, thanks for not taking sides.

originally posted by: MarlinGrace
What these are pressurized beer kegs to refuel the party aboard Air Force One during flight. It only looks like a chemtrail during disconnection for a short period. The real conspiracy is rather it's domestic or import beer.

In other news, the geoengineering watch page that contained this drivel has disappeared.......maybe the echoing sounds of laughter from all over the 'net got too much for them?

ETA: Unfortunately for their blushes the page is archived

Oops!

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

For all the smoke and mirrors misdirection that we are subjected to about concerns 'really' being about SRM experiments and other 'sophisticated' interpretations, pages like that, on a site called geoengineeringwatch, no less, shows us the meat and gravy of what the chemtrail conspiracy is really all about. Just like some us on here have always said and get abused for.

For every attempt to legitimise the term by trying to link it to serious scientific research, there are many more pointing at contrails in the sky and, as there are on there, declaring ballast test planes to be sprayers as if they know it for a fact. But of course, THEY are not the idiots. No siree.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

Not everything no

Well if it's coming from Dane Wigington the answer would have to be yes.

But that's just my opinion.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

ETA: Unfortunately for their blushes the page is archived

Here you go...



Now that's using the ol' grey matter.

a reply to: Urantia1111

Yes that's exactly what this thread is all about. And no, desperate tactics like this wouldn't be required if there weren't something to hide regarding chemtrails.

So it's better to believe a blatant lie over the truth, and how do you hide something that doesn't exist?

a reply to: MarlinGrace

What these are pressurized beer kegs to refuel the party aboard Air Force One during flight. It only looks like a chemtrail during disconnection for a short period. The real conspiracy is rather it's domestic or import beer.

That would explain the behavior of the secret service as of late.