It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Organised debunking of anything Chemtrail is well oiled

page: 2
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Caver78

The U.S. government has a history of hanging people too.

Using your logic they still do..




posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   
It's a very sensitive subject for the 'voices of reason' that populate these boards. They just can't seem to speak what they profess to be the truth about - what to them - must be an irrelevant subject and then move on. They have to keep trying to ensure everybody accepts their belief. Why? As an act of charity?

If one really believes a subject matter undeserving of discussion: one doesn't discuss it. If chemtrails are real: it's a big deal. If they're not: it doesn't matter.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Robert Reynolds

Let's follow this line or reasoning shall we. People who believe chemtrails will continue to talk about them, while people who don't believe in them will just ignore them. This results in an echo chamber of agreement where no one challenges their beliefs because everyone is agreeing with each other. It's funny how believers constantly complain about skeptics always questioning their beliefs and demanding evidence. Questioning your beliefs and seeking out relevant evidence is how you LEARN as a person.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: LostAndFound2
Ah the fine gentlemen are here to tell me how wrong I am

And yet no one is looking up

The evidence

You want the evidence

Look up

Keep looking up, get your evidence

Seeing is believing

How can a secret program stay secret when it is being utilised in the open ?

It can't, the secret IS out


Have you looked up? Have you looked with high powered binoculars? A tele-photo lens? Wouldn't it be trival to film the spray apparatus? Tell me how to tell the diff between jet exhaust and fairy dust. I really want to know.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: Caver78

The U.S. government has a history of hanging people too.

Using your logic they still do..


We'll they do actually still hang people illegally in jails. And they ignore lynchings. But those are different threads.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Robert Reynolds




They just can't seem to speak what they profess to be the truth about - what to them - must be an irrelevant subject and then move on. They have to keep trying to ensure everybody accepts their belief. Why? As an act of charity?


The motto of this site, sincere or not, is a call to action.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
It's a very sensitive subject for the 'voices of reason' that populate these boards. They just can't seem to speak what they profess to be the truth about - what to them - must be an irrelevant subject and then move on. They have to keep trying to ensure everybody accepts their belief. Why? As an act of charity?

If one really believes a subject matter undeserving of discussion: one doesn't discuss it. If chemtrails are real: it's a big deal. If they're not: it doesn't matter.


But, if the discussion of puffy white lines made by planes is making discussion of the real issue of SRM impossible, is it prudent to try to set the record straight, or just walk away and hope like hell that nobody decides to start spraying the stratosphere?


A better example would be the UFO forum. Should nobody EVER step in and show the string attached to the pie tin? Is it better to believe that every UFO video or picture is proof of little green men?

edit on 17-7-2015 by network dude because: enjoying a discussion with a wall.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: LostAndFound2

Like others I was on the fence about the whole Chemtrail debate until I came to ATS and someone suggested that I download a Flight Radar App which will show live data. I did just that and I can turn on the app and point it at any suspicious aircraft to find out all the data I needed. This made me aware that the aircraft were just normal civilian aircraft that created persistent contrails and I was able to sleep better at night


However..... that all being said we do have an issue with aircraft contrails that has been completely overshadowed by the Chemtrail Theory is that these persistent contrails do block out sunlight and could be a cause of Vitamin D deficiency and other health issues. Perhaps we need to put as much effort into these issues from Aircraft Contrails has on our health as we do discussing the Chemtrail Theory.....


Vapour trails caused by jet aircraft over Britain can cause clouds covering 20,000 square miles, according to Met Office research, reducing sunshine by up to 10 per cent.

Jet contrails above Britain can block sunshine over 20,000 square miles


Vitamin D has been shown to improve a number of brain disorders, including dementia and its most severe form, Alzheimer’s disease,1 the latter of which now affects an estimated 5.2 million Americans.2

Link Between Vitamin D Deficiency and Dementia Confirmed



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Robert Reynolds

Let's follow this line or reasoning shall we. People who believe chemtrails will continue to talk about them, while people who don't believe in them will just ignore them.

An over-simplification, but one that's necessary in order for you to make your point. You are legitimising the subject by entering into these discussions.


This results in an echo chamber of agreement where no one challenges their beliefs because everyone is agreeing with each other.

Are you claiming that you're here to encourage critical thinking for the betterment of mankind? I think that your concerns are misplaced: if some people are under the misguided impression that chemtrails are real - where's the harm in that? Would you enter a discussion about Unicorns if someone claimed to have seen one?


It's funny how believers constantly complain about skeptics always questioning their beliefs and demanding evidence. Questioning your beliefs and seeking out relevant evidence is how you LEARN as a person.

How should I interpret this? Are you here to question your beliefs? Or are you seeing yourself as a concerned teacher?


You can't definitively vouch for every vapour trail in our skies, so why would you try? This is ATS.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: InverseLookingGlassSays who? People that believe that must be very busy people.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
An over-simplification, but one that's necessary in order for you to make your point. You are legitimising the subject by entering into these discussions.


The subject exists whether I enter into the discussion or not. Every day there is some new bozo who clicks on a chemtrail conspiracy website or sees something on Facebook and becomes a believer. These people then turn around and try to tell everyone they know about their newfound "insight" into how things work whether they want to hear it or not. Most just disregard it as nonsense, but still they didn't want to hear it in the first place. Thus the ignorance is already spreading. I may not like the subject, but the believers pushing their views outnumber the skeptics willing to engage them and tell them they are wrong, and this is a subject where believers don't have the tendency to seek out conflicting opinions or to question their beliefs.


Are you claiming that you're here to encourage critical thinking for the betterment of mankind? I think that your concerns are misplaced: if some people are under the misguided impression that chemtrails are real - where's the harm in that? Would you enter a discussion about Unicorns if someone claimed to have seen one?


I consider the spreading of ignorance as truth to be QUITE harmful to society, yes. So, yes, if someone started a discussion on unicorns being real, I'd probably enter and say they aren't. Then show some proof on why they aren't.


How should I interpret this? Are you here to question your beliefs? Or are you seeing yourself as a concerned teacher?


I question my beliefs all the time. It's why I came to ATS in the first place. I saw Ancient Aliens, became a believer and wanted to see why that idea wasn't a mainstream idea. So I joined ATS and looked up the skeptic opinion on the matter. I now know that hypothesis is just a load of crap thanks to that. I've also changed my mind on man-made climate change, ghosts, aliens in general, reincarnation (kind of, I'm still up in the air about this one), oh and the 2012 Mayan Prophecy.


You can't definitively vouch for every vapour trail in our skies, so why would you try? This is ATS.


I don't have to do that. There are more reasons than just the lack of chemicals in vapor trails that show that chemtrails is a silly conspiracy. Cost for one. Motive for another. The way physics work for a third. Plus, have you ever studied logic? While you can't ever disprove an all inclusive statement, you CAN prove its counterpositive. So, all YOU need to do is find one vapor trail that DOES have chemicals in it, yet none has ever been produced.
edit on 17-7-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   

But, if the discussion of puffy white lines made by planes is making discussion of the real issue of SRM impossible, is it prudent to try to set the record straight, or just walk away and hope like hell that nobody decides to start spraying the stratosphere?

Is it making the serious discussion of SRM's (whatever they are...) impossible? Is the serious discussion of SRM's a personal desire of yours?


A better example would be the UFO forum. Should nobody EVER step in and show the string attached to the pie tin? Is it better to believe that every UFO video or picture is proof of little green men?

If people are discussing pie tins on strings, I'd suggest it should be ignored. Even more credible photographs are merely pictures and of no significant value.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   

The subject exists whether I enter into the discussion or not. Every day there is some new bozo who clicks on a chemtrail conspiracy website or sees something on Facebook and becomes a believer. These people then turn around and try to tell everyone they know about their newfound "insight" into how things work whether they want to hear it or not. Most just disregard it as nonsense, but still they didn't want to hear it in the first place. Thus the ignorance is already spreading. I may not like the subject, but the believers pushing their views outnumber the skeptics willing to engage them and tell them they are wrong, and this is a subject where believers don't have the tendency to seek out conflicting opinions or to question their beliefs.

I don't think we need to worry about the rise of the 'bozos' just yet. It's a non-issue outside of internet discussion and I'm sure you could make a more valuable contribution to society if you really wanted to.


I consider the spreading of ignorance as truth to be QUITE harmful to society, yes. So, yes, if someone started a discussion on unicorns being real, I'd probably enter and say they aren't. Then show some proof on why they aren't.

You'd be wasting your time and indulging yourself if you were to discuss the existence of Unicorns - it would serve no purpose. Have you studied logic? How would prove that Unicorns don't exist?


I question my beliefs all the time. It's why I came to ATS in the first place. I saw Ancient Aliens, became a believer and wanted to see why that idea wasn't a mainstream idea. So I joined ATS and looked up the skeptic opinion on the matter. I now know that hypothesis is just a load of crap thanks to that. I've also changed my mind on man-made climate change, ghosts, aliens in general, reincarnation (kind of, I'm still up in the air about this one), oh and the 2012 Mayan Prophecy.

You sound like a very easily influenced person.


There are more reasons than just the lack of chemicals in vapor trails that show that chemtrails is a silly conspiracy

How many vapour trails have you personally tested?.


Cost for one.

Without knowing the purpose of the supposed chemtrails how could a possible economic viability even be discussed?


Motive for another.

We'd need to know the desired effect before discussing motivation.


The way physics work for a third.

That's a very broad statement.


Plus, have you ever studied logic? While you can't ever disprove an all inclusive statement, you CAN prove its counterpositive.

No, I've never studied logic, I wouldn't waste my time. Nice cut 'n' paste job of somebody else's words though. Could you prove the non-existence of Unicorns now?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:39 AM
link   
I'm pretty sure my brother in law who's a jet engine mechanic would notice spray nozzles or barrels of chemicals around his hanger. As previously said in another topic, it can't just be added to the fuel because they test the fuel periodically, and tolerances on engines are very tight -- any additives would mess with them.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds


But, if the discussion of puffy white lines made by planes is making discussion of the real issue of SRM impossible, is it prudent to try to set the record straight, or just walk away and hope like hell that nobody decides to start spraying the stratosphere?

Is it making the serious discussion of SRM's (whatever they are...) impossible? Is the serious discussion of SRM's a personal desire of yours?

If you are posting on a chemtrail thread, and you don't know what SRM is, you may want to ask, "have I done enough research into this topic to make an intelligent reply?"



A better example would be the UFO forum. Should nobody EVER step in and show the string attached to the pie tin? Is it better to believe that every UFO video or picture is proof of little green men?

If people are discussing pie tins on strings, I'd suggest it should be ignored. Even more credible photographs are merely pictures and of no significant value.


that's funny, because it's pictures that keep being bandied about as proof of chemtrails. And on that, I agree, they are of no significant value.

But then, if I can educate 1 person and help them not live in fear of clouds, I feel like I made a difference in this world.

And Luckily, I don't need your permission to do it.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: LostAndFound2 Nice to see you Bruce



that's a first.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Robert Reynolds

It's good to know that it's a non-issue outside the Internet. That means all those anti-chemtrail billboards I drive past aren't really there.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58Your driving by these boards is much of an issue?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: network dudeYou don't want to tell me what SRM's are? Strange - you claim you like to educate.

I have no interest in making a religion of chemtrails, whether for or against and entering into debates with terminologies at my disposal is largely irrelevant as the real evidence for this seemingly huge concern of yours is flimsy on both sides.

Would you like to answer my questions or not?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroomIf your brother - the mechanic - hasn't come across it, then it simply can't be real?


edit on 17-7-2015 by Robert Reynolds because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-7-2015 by Robert Reynolds because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join