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.

 

Geo-engineering/Chemtrail forum - success or failure?

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


If the ATS board will decide to close all the forums with conspiracies where no REAL proof has surfaced you can might aswell shut down the site.

An ATS member made a very interesting remark about people who spent a lot of time and energy to debunk certain topics. What drive these people....? Are you one of these people, and if I may be so frank.......what do you like so much about debunking people who have no REAL evidence?




posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Thank you for your civility! Most "chemtrailers", when asked to give evidence, request that the debunkers "prove a negative". I am, however, disappointed that you continue to keep your head in the sand and ignore evidence, instead going on faith that the "chemtrail" conspiracy exists. If your mind ever opens to the evidence, I'll be more than happy to link you.
edit on 5/18/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)


You have an imagined assumption that I keep my head in the sand - that's because I don't see things the way you do, nor do I ignore evidence, nor do I base my beliefs on faith - life has taught me how unwise that is.

I don't discuss chemtrails on ATS any more, nor do I discuss 9/11 on ATS any more. It's like trying to discuss something in a noisy, rowdy bar with brawls going on all over the place.

I respect that your opinions are different from mine, and that you feel strongly about it. I have no wish to insult you by insinuating you are ignoring significant information or keeping your head in the sand. Simply, we are interpreting information differently. I hope you will offer me the same respect. Thanks.
edit on 18-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)


I'm not insulting you, but yes, you are ignoring evidence.

You don't want to be wrong, and that's okay.

The only thing you do by withdrawing from the debate or discussion, is concede to the fact no evidence exists of "chemtrails"



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by zatara
 


I didn't suggest closing it down - I asked whether people think it has been a success or not in its first month, and what criteria they would use to judge that, and I gave my opinion and reasons why I hold it.

Do you think it is a success or not?



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaveTheWolves
I have been to the website contrail science numerous times over the years. Yup, there certainly are contrails, never said there weren't.

Good, so you don't believe that "persitent contrails" or "contrails that spread out into clouds" are chemtrails, if I am understanding you correctly.

Originally posted by SaveTheWolves

However, our government has not exactly been forthright with their use of the general population as guinea pigs. There is a l-o-n-g list of atrocities committed by the US government against it's citizens. Including how US citizens were secretly used as test subjects during the Cold War. Not to mention how the EPA told citizens in NYC just days after 9-11 that it was perfectly safe to go outside onto Wall Street because the air was safe to breathe.

Right, I can agree to this. Not sure about 9/11, but I'm pretty sure the risk was only to those who spent a lot of time in and around the wreckage (like firefighters and cleanup). The government doesn't deny that asbestos is bad for you. I've heard the government sprayed various biological agents over certain cities, I won't go into detail on this since I haven't done the research (but I'm willing to bet it didn't happen from an altitude higher than 5,000 feet).

I hope you aren't suggesting that government denial of chemtrails indicates that they might be occurring (since the same organization that denies them allowed a student to produce a paper that believers tout as proof of chemtrailing).

Originally posted by SaveTheWolves

Whoever controls the world's weather, controls the world.
I think anybody who thinks the major world players are not interested in altering the weather is very naive.

They are most certainly interested, that's why the "owning the weather in 2025" paper was written by students at the Air Force's university, there is interest in controlling weather in the future.

Originally posted by SaveTheWolves
I also think that anybody who thinks the experiments have not already begun is very naive.

I can see why you would hold that opinion, but truth is that nothing has been experimented with on a large scale. Most experiments on weather modification have been thought experiments.

Originally posted by SaveTheWolves
I still find it very odd that some people will spend so much time trying to convince others that they are right and we are wrong...even to the point where they want to close down the discussion. If they don't like the discussion perhaps they should pick a different topic. Because personally, I take the air I breathe very seriously.

Debunking is my hobby. When I see people making claims from ignorance and without evidence on "chemtrails", I like to point out how they are incorrect in hopes that they will learn how to use objective, verifiable evidence in order to form an opinion that isn't based on faith. Can we at least agree that this forum needs to be split into a "Chemtrail" forum and a "geo-engineering" forum?

I also take the air I breathe seriously, that's why I don't want to allow scaremongering over "chemtrails" to occur. If we have people focusing on stopping "chemtrails", they might forget about real threats to our health, like the pollution caused by air traffic (which I must stress, is not "chemtrails") vehicles and coal burning plants.


Originally posted by SaveTheWolves
I did not come here to constantly be called childish names or to have my words twisted by people who have their own agenda.

Sorry about the chemie comments, I understand where you are coming from, when I created my first thread, the second response didn't even relate to it, it was asking if I had an assignment on using the word "hoax".

As for the agenda, I have no agenda other than to deny ignorance, isn't that the very essence of this website?
edit on 5/18/11 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

reply to post by wcitizen
 



I apologize for insulting you. From here on out I will respect your right to ignore any evidence you want.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Guys it's been interesting reading your too and fro, but your discussion is entirely OT - would you care to comment on whether you consider the forum a sucess or not?



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


There is nothing to post about. If a subject is Imagined then all that can
be presented is Imaginary evidence, don't you think.

It is up to ATS Owners and Mods whether the Forum is moved or shut down,
not us.
Personally I think it should have stayed in the Skunk Works Section.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


True

Successful insofar as it has allowed this hoax to spread.

Unsuccessful in the way of denying ignorance.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   


Good, so you don't believe that "persitent contrails" or "contrails that spread out into clouds" are chemtrails, if I am understanding you correctly.
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Nope, that is not what I said. I said contrails exist. I did not say they are the same thing as chemtrails.



I'm pretty sure the risk was only to those who spent a lot of time in and around the wreckage (like firefighters and cleanup).


Sadly, that was not the case.

a report by the EPA’s Office of the Inspector General released on Aug. 21 states, among other criticisms, that the White House reviewed and even changed EPA statements about public health risks to make them sound less alarming. The report charges that the White House Council on Environmental Quality influenced “the information EPA communicated to the public through its early press releases when it convinced EPA to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones.” The report cites “reopening Wall Street” and “national security” as reasons for the spin.




I hope you aren't suggesting that government denial of chemtrails indicates that they might be occurring


No, it's not the government's denial that makes me believe chemtrails are occurring.




They are most certainly interested, that's why the "owning the weather in 2025" paper was written by students at the Air Force's university, there is interest in controlling weather in the future.


So you think they are just sitting around waiting for some unknown date in the future to begin?





Debunking is my hobby. When I see people making claims from ignorance and without evidence on "chemtrails", I like to point out how they are incorrect in hopes that they will learn how to use objective, verifiable evidence in order to form an opinion that isn't based on faith. Can we at least agree that this forum needs to be split into a "Chemtrail" forum and a "geo-engineering" forum?



Why is it so important to you that people think the way you do? After all, you're just sharing your opinions the same as the rest of us. You are cherry picking things that support your belief that chemtrails do not exist and when you cannot come up with anything you name call and twist words. How is that objective?

No, I think they belong together in the same forum. At least at this point in time they belong in the same forum.




Sorry about the chemie comments, I understand where you are coming from, when I created my first thread, the second response didn't even relate to it, it was asking if I had an assignment on using the word "hoax".


Touché




As for the agenda, I have no agenda other than to deny ignorance, isn't that the very essence of this website?


I think you would have to ask the website creator what his or her "very essence" was in creating this website. However, I seriously doubt that everybody that joins has the exact same reason for joining. Your reason is not going to be the same as everybody else's reason. We are all individuals.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:49 PM
link   


I apologize for insulting you. From here on out I will respect your right to ignore any evidence you want.
reply to post by adeclerk
 


Wow! That was a backhanded apology. Geez!



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I've posted about 15 alerts for OT comments .......and then another jsut saying most of hte posts here are OT so could "they" please remove them.

We'll see if the mods will keep this topic, at least, ON topic!



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   


Guys it's been interesting reading your too and fro, but your discussion is entirely OT - would you care to comment on whether you consider the forum a sucess or not?
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



The forum itself is a success as it is concerning a topic of interest and has both pro and con 'evidence'. And it is of a conspiracy nature.

Does that meet with your approval as an appropriate answer?



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by wcitizen

reply to post by wcitizen
 



I apologize for insulting you. From here on out I will respect your right to ignore any evidence you want.


And I will respect yours to continue to insult even though you say you aren't. Lol!



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   


And I will respect yours to continue to insult even though you say you aren't. Lol!
reply to post by wcitizen
 


I wish I could give you more than one star! ***** LOL



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by GringoViejo


I'm not insulting you, but yes, you are ignoring evidence.

You don't want to be wrong, and that's okay.

The only thing you do by withdrawing from the debate or discussion, is concede to the fact no evidence exists of "chemtrails"


Tjhis is exactly the obtuseness which is common to debukers. So many of you just HAVE to resort to ad hominem's.

How do you know what I want? That is incredibly arrogant and so typical of so many debunkers. So many of you are so incredinly arrogant that you claim to know what others think, believe and want better than they do themselves. You impute motive, belief, etc. on no basis at all except prejudice. For me, that means that your point of view is of no interest whatsosever.

You know, I would love to be wrong. I would love to know that they aren't spraying toxins on us. In your arrogance you will not believe what I say, but that's of no importance to me either.

As I've already said, I don't join discussions about chemtrails on ATS, it's like trying to have an interesting conversation in the middle of a cheap bar with people brawling all around.


edit on 18-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 

I'd say all this forum has been successful in doing is making the distinction between "chemtrails" and legitimate "geo-engineering" non-existent.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by GringoViejo


I'm not insulting you, but yes, you are ignoring evidence.

You don't want to be wrong, and that's okay.

The only thing you do by withdrawing from the debate or discussion, is concede to the fact no evidence exists of "chemtrails"


Tjhis is exactly the obtuseness which is common to debukers. So many of you just HAVE to resort to ad hominem's.

How do you know what I want? That is incredibly arrogant and so typical of so many debunkers. So many of you are so incredinly arrogant that you claim to know what others think, believe and want better than they do themselves. You impute motive, belief, etc. on no basis at all except prejudice. For me, that means that your point of view is of no interest whatsosever.

You know, I would love to be wrong. I would love to know that they aren't spraying toxins on us. In your arrogance you will not believe what I say, but that's of no importance to me either.

As I've already said, I don't join discussions about chemtrails on ATS, it's like trying to have an interesting conversation in the middle of a cheap bar with people brawling all around.


edit on 18-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)


Yet you're in a discussion about "chemtrails"



You impute motive, belief, etc. on no basis at all except prejudice


I could not have said it better myself. Why do the "chemtrailers" do this to people that refute their "evidence?"

I would add fear and ignorance to the quote as well.

If you truly have no interest in this topic or the discussion, you wouldn't have responded anyways.

If you are attempting to "enlighten" us, your talk of arrogance is painfully ironic.

This forum is a failure. "Chemtrailers" have had every piece of evidence refuted, and can only resort to passing judgment on "debunkers" and their alleged motives.

If you have no interest, I'm sure you can find the door.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   


"Chemtrailers" have had every piece of evidence refuted, and can only resort to passing judgment on "debunkers" and their alleged motives.
reply to post by GringoViejo
 


That's the pot calling the kettle black!



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by SaveTheWolves
 


At least we know the difference between a pot and a kettle.




posted on May, 18 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by GringoViejo
[

Yet you're in a discussion about "chemtrails"



Actually I'm not. I haven't discussed chemtrails on this thread at all.


You impute motive, belief, etc. on no basis at all except prejudice


I could not have said it better myself. Why do the "chemtrailers" do this to people that refute their "evidence?"

I would add fear and ignorance to the quote as well.

If you truly have no interest in this topic or the discussion, you wouldn't have responded anyways.




There you go again, assuming motive and asserting it as fact. I have never said I have no interest in the topic. I have said I don't discuss chemtrails or 9/11 on ATS.



[quote[

If you are attempting to "enlighten" us, your talk of arrogance is painfully ironic.



You really do seem to have a problem with comprehending what is written. I haven't discussed chemtrails at all, so there is no basis whatsoever for you to imagine that I might wish to enlighten anyone.



This forum is a failure. "Chemtrailers" have had every piece of evidence refuted, and can only resort to passing judgment on "debunkers" and their alleged motives.



You're entitled to your opiinon about the Geo-engineering forum, just as I am entitled to mine. I have not ascribed motives to debunkers at all, once again, you seem unable to accurately comprehend what is written.




If you have no interest, I'm sure you can find the door.



Again, wrong interpretation. No matter. When I wish to stop posting on this or any other thread that will be my decision not yours.


edit on 18-5-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join