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.

 

Chemtrail debunkers and their agenda

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:04 AM
link   
That there are debunkers who really are on that debunks everything goes as we all know about. I am of the opinion that these people do this for more reasons than to satisfy the need to win arguments by a few simple tricks. I think many of these debunkers have as task to spread misinformation, twisting and "dumb down" the most logical and evidence-based conclusions and evidence available. A good example is that of chemtrails, there is no questioning more than just how widespread is the use of chemicals and their impact on us. The same kind of debunking was their agenda when the vaccination operations hazard were discussed. But today they are silent, their job is done and they delayed the truth of God knows how long.

Those who debunks have a few rules to win arguments and get those who claim otherwise to seem stupid and ignorance.

1st By question-how do you know that this is true?

2nd By asking for facts or anything that makes that one is unable to respond to this allegation is even a lie or misrepresentation. Before you can present all the facts needed to research done within the subject matter discussed, but that does not mean that it already is initially could easily confirm that something is dangerous or unhealthy. Chemtrails is a perfect example.

3rd They will refer to different types of manipulated articles or anything that has to do with it, one should remember that these people have that job to argue away our knowledge in every possible way.

4th In short, their reasoning is based on questioning your own factual basis, and your knowledge that apparently must be at the graduate level established by the world's top scientists for you to be believed. There is a religion that has developed this reasoning because they want to discredit all other religions. To win the debates on questions of others' learning is considered to be an incredibly large.
It forgets my way is that their agenda is simply to tear to rags what works for them themselves have no self-will, they are not free.




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:08 AM
link   
I don;t understand how people can debunk when all you have to do is look up. (can I get a star for that rhyme, I did not even intend for that)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by American-philosopher
 


I just gave you your star! And I wanted to add that isn't it odd that all of a sudden there's no more talk about the H1N1 vaccine...nothing this year about it! Why? Because it wasn't as profitable for Big Pharma as they thought it would be. They had to throw away a bunch of left over vaccine because too many people didn't buy into their lies.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by American-philosopher
I don;t understand how people can debunk when all you have to do is look up. (can I get a star for that rhyme, I did not even intend for that)



Uh...yeah, debunk and 'up' don't rhyme....not even close.....so no star for that. Oh yeah, and I've watched the sky since a child...it doesn't look any different than it always has. Contrails of the past look just like they do today...don't take my memory as evidence though, check out my post www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by SaveTheWolves
 


I just gave you a star
The thing is that people will be afraid to get in argument when they feeling attacked by the debunkers. thats the point I was trying to make



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by stavis
 


It isn't hard to *debunk* bunk.

When the "chem" believers have evidence, then there will be attention paid.

So far, there is nothing, at all....but nonsense and "faith" (apparently) in "something".....and, not any of the "chem" believers, the "faithful" can even settle in on ONE aspect to "believe" in!!

This is typical of failed "conspiracy theories", each time. Oh, and BTW.....this myth should have died back in 2000 (or sooner), shortly after it was hatched as a scheme. But, whether knowingly or not, many of them have spread the same ignorance, time and again, now for nearly two decades. NO wonder they *think* (well, they don't really think, logically....they "believe") that "something" is going on.....because of the numbers of equally deluded folks who are going along.

Follow the money, and the sources...all the way back to the beginning. Two names, to start you out:

Will Thomas ---- Cliff Carnicorn.


Charlatans, both. MANY of the "chem"-pushers are shills for them (and others), little doubt. Others, merely patsies. Unwitting dupes.


Back in 2000, on "Chemtrail Central" blog, a post laid it out perfectly:

www.chemtrailcentral.com...



1. The existence of a huge and sinister plot is completely lacking in evidence.

2. The logistics of a massive spraying program would be an order of magnitude higher than the Manhattan Project, the Apollo Moon Landing, or the Vietnam War and simply could not be hidden from any oversight.

3. There is no evidence whatsoever of aircraft modified to perform some of the spraying methodologies that are proposed.

4. Anecdotal "evidence" of any illnesses caused by contrails is not backed up by any reliable data (and is actually contradicted by others).

5. There has never been any evidence of anyone collecting some of this "chemtrail" material in situ, having it tested by any reputable laboratory, and presented to anyone.

6. Every characteristic of chemtrails can be just as logically and rationally explained by normal contrails under normal (but differentiating) atmospheric conditions.



ALSO...it is painfully obvious that this thread was spawned as result of another, in a "tit-for-tat" attempt.

Quite sad, really.......





edit on Mon 16 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:17 AM
link   
Agenda: Showing that no evidence exists that "chemtrails" are anything more than contrails.
contrailscience.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Method: Demanding evidence from the people that claim otherwise, as the burden of proof lay with the person(s) making the claim.


As another example, in debate the burden of proof is placed on the affirmative team. As a final example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data).

www.nizkor.org...


Stance: "Chemtrails" are a hoax. Until evidence surfaces that "chemtrails" actually exist, our stance will not change. www.abovetopsecret.com...

Motto: Deny Ignorance


edit on 16-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (s)

edit on 16-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: redundancy

edit on 16-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: sources




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by stavis
 


Yes, that's just what the debunkers do! They try to make people that don't agree with them look stupid because they have nothing else. They have no evidence that there are no chemtrails. So the only thing they have left is name calling. They could literally be taken aboard a plane that was chemtrailing and they would still say it wasn't happening. I don't know if any of them are getting paid for debunking or not but if they are, I want my tax money back it that's where their pay is coming from! They can't even do their job adequately. They convince nobody that what exists doesn't exist.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by SaveTheWolves
 


thats my point
when they are going on with their debunking agenda all you have to do is to ignore them when you feel things get out of hand. I will not have nothing moore to with these agents.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   
1st That is a reasonable question. Stating a theory and providing no evidence has no bearing.

2nd Some people require actual evidence other than pointing at a contrail and saying it's a chemtrail just because it's different than the other contrail in the sky. Also people like getting "facts" from people that didn't look up a few sites on the topic and think their experts.

3rd People that believe in chemtrails refer to sites that manipulate the information to fit their beliefs on the topic. No matter what facts you show someone, on either side of the argument, if they are set in their way there is no swaying them.

4th If you have a theory, you need to be able to prove it and have actual physical evidence. It is the theorists responsibility to give the evidence and the "debunkers" to show the holes in the evidence given until it is proven wrong or right in some cases.

Instead of posting your gripes about debunkers, spend the time to find actual evidence to prove your theory right.

Moo



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by GringoViejo
 


This thread is made for people like you. byebye



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Look,I am a skeptic. I dont believe in Chemtrails,because NO ONE who claims they are real,has given proof!! No studys,following these airplanes,no high level study of the actual contrails in question,no study on the fuel,NOTHING. How can someone change my mind? All the above. Im willing to listen,willing to give the benefit of the doubt. Just give some proof,thats all. And not from some 2 bit website,promoting something. Especially the idea,to make a Buck!!!

"4th In short, their reasoning is based on questioning your own factual basis"

Definition of Factual:
1. Of the nature of fact; real.
2. Of or containing facts.

If your basing your facts,without proof,you will get nowhere. Its just that simple. I want to believe in UFO's,but just because people see lights in the sky,doesnt mean there are little green men.And yes,I do know Governments HAVE done things to the public without their knowledge,but still, this is a BIG conspiracy. There has to be SOME proof. Where is it?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by stavis

Those who debunks have a few rules to win arguments and get those who claim otherwise to seem stupid and ignorance.

1st By question-how do you know that this is true?

2nd By asking for facts or anything that makes that one is unable to respond to this allegation is even a lie or misrepresentation. Before you can present all the facts needed to research done within the subject matter discussed, but that does not mean that it already is initially could easily confirm that something is dangerous or unhealthy. Chemtrails is a perfect example.

3rd They will refer to different types of manipulated articles or anything that has to do with it, one should remember that these people have that job to argue away our knowledge in every possible way.

4th In short, their reasoning is based on questioning your own factual basis, and your knowledge that apparently must be at the graduate level established by the world's top scientists for you to be believed. There is a religion that has developed this reasoning because they want to discredit all other religions. To win the debates on questions of others' learning is considered to be an incredibly large.
It forgets my way is that their agenda is simply to tear to rags what works for them themselves have no self-will, they are not free.


1. How DO you know its true? What is possibly wrong with that question?

2. Yeah.....facts are generally a good thing. Thats certainly where I start. Asking for facts is a completely valid and logical thing to do....sorry if the facts don't fit your blind faith.

3. 'Manipulated articles'?......if your definition of 'manipulated' means filled with facts, then sure.....those are the types of articles you WANT. I've noticed the believers in Chemtrails tend to use articles filled with wild speculation, and opinion....I'll go with factual articles any day. And as for it being my 'job'? Dear Lord I wish someone would pay me to debunk chemtrail nonsense!!! Where are those NWO overlords with my paycheck anyway?!?!


4.Yes my reasoning is most certainly based on questioning your factual basis....thats generally how science works. If you have no factual basis then you have nothing but speculation and blind belief....thanks for really hitting the nail on the head...that is indeed what this all comes down to! You'r pretty good at knowing this debunking stuff! Perhaps you should sign up with the NWO and get the monthly paycheck!!!



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by stavis
 


It really is better to ignore them like you say because they are not worth our time. They believe what they want to believe. The crap could be falling in their faces and they would sit there like a turkey in the rain with their noses turned up inhaling it.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Boston1023
 


I am a living proof of that chemtrails is very real
nuff is enough. mooo



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaveTheWolves
reply to post by stavis
 


Yes, that's just what the debunkers do! They try to make people that don't agree with them look stupid because they have nothing else. They have no evidence that there are no chemtrails. So the only thing they have left is name calling. They could literally be taken aboard a plane that was chemtrailing and they would still say it wasn't happening. I don't know if any of them are getting paid for debunking or not but if they are, I want my tax money back it that's where their pay is coming from! They can't even do their job adequately. They convince nobody that what exists doesn't exist.


The lack of evidence is the evidence. Until chemers get some actual evidence, not that there is any, then that statement will always ring true.

edit on 5/16/2011 by Boston1023 because: moo



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by SaveTheWolves
 


there is one funny thing about this thread that I guess you understand when you give a minute
mean time I am back to work. cheers



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by stavis
reply to post by Boston1023
 


I am a living proof of that chemtrails is very real
nuff is enough. mooo


I don't suppose you would have any evidence to support your claim?

2nd



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Boston1023
 


There is evidence but you choose to ignore it. The only thing you people say is that there are contrails. We know there are contrails. But there are also chemtrails.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by stavis
 



A good example is that of chemtrails, there is no questioning more than just how widespread is the use of chemicals and their impact on us. The same kind of debunking was their agenda when the vaccination operations hazard were discussed. But today they are silent, their job is done and they delayed the truth of God knows how long.


You are obviously posting this, with the provocative title, then the mealy-mouthed back-pedaling quoted above, as an act of trolling.

The nearly one-line post, just above.....ending in "mooo"....is a sign of such behavior.


You used the word, "chemtrail" in the title, in this Forum.....then, above, you weaseled out with "widespread use of chemicals and their impact on us." which could include any number of chemical sources...pesticides on crops, in our food, etc.

You are merely playing games....UNLESS you fess up, and take a stand, your thread is not worth the elections it uses up.....

There are other Forums for this sort of psychological point, to make.....since it seems evident that, if not a casual poorly-thought-out flippant thread, you were actually going for something along those lines. of mind games....



edit on Mon 16 May 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join