reply to post by neformore
I apologize for not being clearer in my previous post. I was merely attempting to gain concurrence on the point that what you've said about proof,
both in this thread here and on the show last night realistically applies to any conspiracy theory
discussed on these boards.
If we can agree there, it might follow that we have a few non-issues in what you may have assumed (based on the bulk of your response to me) I was
attempting to say.
Understood and obvious is that the chemtrail theory just happened to be the conspiracy topic selected for commentary last night. And no worries or
disclaimers necessary here...it was abundantly clear that the opinions expressed by the moderators were their own and not those of ATS.
Understood and obvious that it goes without saying that not everyone believes everything. If that were the case there would be no ATS.
Also understood is that the staff is not in the habit of playing devils advocate just for the sake of it. That's up to the staff and is a matter of
style. I'm sure the staff is aware of the pitfalls, ramification, and potential consequences of this style and did not mean to imply at all that it
was expected for you to play devil's advocate.
And, yes, thank you. As a supporter and frequent listener of the show, I'm aware of the fact that I can call in. I hope to take advantage of this in
But no, thank you, I did and do not wish to call in to debate these particular opinions and anecdotal stories. It is not a need of mine to convince
anyone of anything, nor would it have been productive, added any value, or been the slightest bit interesting. We all have opinions, and while ours on
this particular topic may or may not happen to differ slightly, this is not my issue with what transpired on the show.
To get to my point, my issue is twofold.
First, some of the opinions came across as ridicule, derision, and even anger and borderlined on outright insulting at times to those who might
believe differently. This may well just be personalities I'm not accustomed to or may have been born out of ethusiasm and was probably not
intentional. It also may well be true that even if the topic were different, the level of treatment and tone would not have been any different...that
this treatment might well have been applied to any number or variety of theories that appear on the ATS boards. So, again, the topic is not the issue.
However, the style may well be and might serve more to alienate posters and listeners, and while it might be entertaining to some it might not foster
the spirit of productive and interesting discussion.
Second, to be honest, I found myself wondering why the standards for the show were apparently different than those for the boards. Topic aside again,
a few of the broadcasted opinions were presented probably never would have been tolerated on the boards. It surprised me only because,
given the standards of mutual respect and civility that are so strongly enforced and appreciated here at ATS, it didn't appear to me that these same
standard was demonstrated on the air last night by the leaders of the board. Perhaps the broadcast world is different, but it seemed a bit
hypocritical to me.
My most important statement of all here, even though it may well negate much of what I've said so far, is that I realize that upon one listen, I may
be way, way, way off the mark. To that end, I am more than willing to listen to the segment again if it is made available as past shows have been. I
am not thin-skinned or typically overly sensitive, but if upon listening to the segment another time or two, it seems that I misheard, focused
improperly, or misinterpreted for whatever reason, you will have my deepest and most sincere apologies.
If my expressing this opinion here offends anyone or if anyone views it as being erroneous or off the mark, I do apologize. It is not an attack, and
there is no need to get defensive. I only offer in the spirit of improvement and as constructive criticism, or at the very least, food for thought.
Thanks for reading.