Originally posted by interestedalways
Excuse me, but I don't recall having posed a theory, would you like to tell me about my theory because at this point I haven't one.
Your theory that we have altered explanations because “chemtrail experts” have forced us to do so. My explanations have been pretty well the same
since I started engaging in the Chemtrail debate, and are based on my years of working in the airline industry. The only person who ever even came
close to disputing any of my information was the Chemist expert (who I suspect was really from carnicom or some other chemtrail site), who was using
debate tactics to try and control the conversation. I finally gave up debating with him because it became pointless as he wanted to alter reality to
fit his theories (wanted to say that it was possible to have stuff in the fuel, but avoided explaining any of the other Chemtrail related phenomenon
(eg...patterns in skies, the diffusing into clouds, trails starting and stopping, etc)). You all constantly accuse me and other members as being paid
debunkers, and he might have been the first actual one that I have ever encountered on ATS.
Originally posted by interestedalways
As I have said many times I have more questions than answers and don't except all the baby food I am being force fed by the wolf packs around
here.
What baby food? Here on ATS you have some very knowledgeable people from various backgrounds who have told you the truth in relation to their fields
of expertise, yet you simply refuse to hear them. Besides the sheer logistics of such an undertaking, the second best explanation as to why this is
not happening is because aviation is very much based on visibility, and the FAA is certainly not going to allow anyone to intentionally cause a
visibility hazard to run some ludicrous experiment in our sky everyday. Yes, planes can fly IFR, but not all pilots fly on the ATC system and depend
on visibility to watch for traffic and other hazards.
As I have said over the years the best cure for Chemtrailmania is to educate yourself about aviation. You choose to ignore those with that education
in light of what you think you see in the sky.
Originally posted by interestedalways
And for the record, Carnicom isn't where I get my information, I have spent many hours reading many different PDF's and exploring other
information.
Carnicom is just the site I like to pick on the most, because it is the one most quoted on ATS. There are others and what I say applies to them all.
You cannot trust sites like that, which are put up by a private individual and sell things about their topic, including advertising based on web hits.
They have a conflict of interest in that if their pet theory dies, so does their source of income.
Originally posted by interestedalways
As a matter of fact one of my favorite ideas is one expressed by Beachcoma where he stated that the exhaust can't escape the atmosphere hence the
lingering of the "cirrus" looking cloud cover.
Beachcoma, if I recall correctly was very anti-chemtrail.
Originally posted by interestedalways
I still don't own that theory, either. I am a seeker you see, I explore and don't stop at every potential explanation.
If that is the case then why do you open your first post with the remark that “it doesn't take a rocket scientist to tell something is amiss”.
The implication being that those of us who have inside knowledge in related fields are idiots because we don't see this supposed thing that you do,
and what we do see is normal.
Originally posted by interestedalways
And you can pull up that old post I made about the Morgellens like you did before to discredit me if that is all you have in your arsenal, but not to
worry, I did post something stupid, but I moved past those thoughts and regrounded myself so a few bad posts don't define me.
I don't recall what you posted, there, and it certainly was not to discredit you other then to show why you have such a deep seated belief in the
topic. Those trying to find an explanation for a disease are often the hardest to convinces of truth because they tend to self diagnose things based
on their own knowledge and perception (which is more often then not incorrect). I know this from first hand experience in the medical field, and I see
it on a daily basis.
spelling edit
[edit on 1/1/2009 by defcon5]