Its happend before, so why not now?

So he's selling some videos and books, that's your 'follow the money'!! ROFL.

Now please also provide evidence that he's a hoax.

Originally posted by adeclerk
And you can't trace any of that money to 'chemtrails'

I wouldn't expect to, since we are still talking about covert military operations, such as Operation LAC.

Operation LAC alone would have had more vested interests and financial opportunities for chemical manufacturers than any book sales would.

Do you know how much money authors actually make from selling books? Piddy squat, unless you're constantly topping the NYT Bestsellers list. Do you know how much money goes through the Pentagon, or to black budgeted programs? We wouldn't even begin to count it.

Originally posted by FreeSpeaker

Originally posted by firepilot
Actually altitude does play a part, because the thinner the air is, the less water it can hold, before it becomes saturated.

However, since the air density at a given altitude can change with fluctuations in air pressure, you really have to know the true air pressure at that altitude, which gets plugged into the contrail prediction chart.

asd-www.larc.nasa.gov...

Its still not an exact tool because even the type of jet engine can have an effect too

Forgive my not understanding but does this mean what Unicus said was inccorect?

No, it just means it takes less water to get ice-supersaturated air at higher altitudes. You can still get it at ground level. It's what causes "ice fog"

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by wcitizen


So he's selling some videos and books, that's your 'follow the money'!! ROFL.

Yes, if he was really concerned about people this information would be free. He wouldn't need to make statements that cause people to be afraid and buy his books, videos (and probably remedies).

Originally posted by wcitizen
Now please also provide evidence that he's a hoax.

He speaks of 'chemtrails' as if they exist, without any evidence. He 'tests' for 'morgellons' which he attributes to 'chemtrails', in a non-scientific test using wine that indicates everyone is positive for 'morgellons' from 'chemtrails'. Etc, it's really more up the believer in his claims to show how anything he said is true, since it goes against known logic, reason and science. That's the burden of proof, sorry I can't change it for you?

Originally posted by bsbray11
I wouldn't expect to, since we are still talking about covert military operations, such as Operation LAC.

Okay.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Operation LAC alone would have had more vested interests and financial opportunities for chemical manufacturers than any book sales would.

Only if they're manufacturing biological weapons. If you're implying the chemical companies could make chemicals for 'chemtrails', then you're way off (even from the hoax itself!). Doesn't change the fact that Carnicorn promotes this hoax for personal gain.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Do you know how much money authors actually make from selling books? Piddy squat, unless you're constantly topping the NYT Bestsellers list.

That explains why everyone and his brother is selling a book. Or why everytime someone appears on a tv/radio show they are selling a book.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Do you know how much money goes through the Pentagon, or to black budgeted programs? We wouldn't even begin to count it.

A lot of money goes through the pentagon. Zero dollars are allotted for 'chemtrails', though. Otherwise we would probably see some evidence of them, don't you think?

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by bsbray11
Operation LAC alone would have had more vested interests and financial opportunities for chemical manufacturers than any book sales would.

Only if they're manufacturing biological weapons. If you're implying the chemical companies could make chemicals for 'chemtrails', then you're way off (even from the hoax itself!). Doesn't change the fact that Carnicorn promotes this hoax for personal gain.

You are very confused. First of all I don't even know who Carnicorn is, and you are presenting straw-man arguments. Second of all what I said still stands, that there is much more money to be made in the military industry than making up a "hoax" and writing books about it. I have never bought a chemtrail book and I would imagine 99% of people who read about them on the internet also do not ever buy a book about it. There is no need to.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Do you know how much money authors actually make from selling books? Piddy squat, unless you're constantly topping the NYT Bestsellers list.

That explains why everyone and his brother is selling a book. Or why everytime someone appears on a tv/radio show they are selling a book.

Everyone and his brother are not selling books.

According to you everybody must be news anchors too, and talk show hosts, and congressmen because I see them on TV all the time too.

Maybe all the TV you watch is part of the problem.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Do you know how much money goes through the Pentagon, or to black budgeted programs? We wouldn't even begin to count it.

A lot of money goes through the pentagon. Zero dollars are allotted for 'chemtrails', though.

Prove it.

And your rhetorical question is not proof.

That's just your opinion and it's based on nothing.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Prove it.

I can't prove where the money is going anymore than you can prove where it is going!

But if it went into 'chemtrail tech', we would notice sprayers, sprayplanes, etc, but none exist!

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by bsbray11
Prove it.

I can't prove where the money is going anymore than you can prove where it is going!

Good, then we both agree "following the money" results in a difference of opinions. You think all the money is in making up hoaxes and writing books about it. I think the money is in the military industrial complex.

But if it went into 'chemtrail tech', we would notice sprayers, sprayplanes, etc, but none exist!

I don't guess you can prove that either, can you?

It's an awful lot easier to assert a negative than to prove one.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Good, then we both agree "following the money" results in a difference of opinions. You think all the money is in making up hoaxes and writing books about it. I think the money is in the military industrial complex.

No, it has nothing to do with a difference of opinion. Have you noticed the lack of transparency in funding for "black ops", there lies your answer. Although it also allows one to claim that 'chemtrails' are funded under the guise of black ops and therefore unfalsifiable. But if that were the case, we would see some evidence of 'chemtrailing' (there isn't any).

Originally posted by bsbray11

But if it went into 'chemtrail tech', we would notice sprayers, sprayplanes, etc, but none exist!

I don't guess you can prove that either, can you?

Find me a sprayer, a sprayplane, etc, if you can't then I am right (you being the claimant in this case, since you would be claiming that these things exist without evidence!).

Originally posted by bsbray11
It's an awful lot easier to assert a negative than to prove one.

Oh my, around the circle we go.....again.

I guess I must ask this, maybe it will offer you some insight. Prove to me that there are not no chemtrails.

But but but, we know they are in Lincoln Nebraska, Ted said so. I am still curious how they manage to take off from Ft Sill after they run off the end of that short runway.

Originally posted by bsbray11
It's an awful lot easier to assert a negative than to prove one.

We don't say "negative" any more. It's changed to "global absence", for precision.

And it is indeed a lot easier to assert a global absence than to prove one. In fact it's IMPOSSIBLE to prove a global absence.

But, one can provide evidence of absence by demonstrating absence of evidence.

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by wcitizen


So he's selling some videos and books, that's your 'follow the money'!! ROFL.

Yes, if he was really concerned about people this information would be free.

Really? So, your logic seems to be if anyone charges anyone for anything it's proof they don't care. Where's your evidence that he is doing anytthing other than covering the costs incurred in making this information available.

He wouldn't need to make statements that cause people to be afraid and buy his books, videos (and probably remedies).

See above.
To boot, you attribute motive based on your own flawed logiic, assumptions and bias - and state it as fact, not just an opinion. This sounds a lot like character defamation to me.

Originally posted by wcitizen
Now please also provide evidence that he's a hoax.

He speaks of 'chemtrails' as if they exist, without any evidence


This statement proves to me beyond any doubt whatsoever that your intentions here are to deny at all costs. You REFUSE to admit that there is evidence, but that the evidence doesn't convince you personally. This has been pointed out to you many times, but you continue on your crusade to deny, and knowingly repeat lies again and again.

.He 'tests' for 'morgellons' which he attributes to 'chemtrails', in a non-scientific test using wine that indicates everyone is positive for 'morgellons' from 'chemtrails'.

In what way is this non-scientific?

Etc, it's really more up the believer in his claims to show how anything he said is true
since it goes against known logic, reason and science.


Yawn. More blanket statements meaning nothing.

That's the burden of proof, sorry I can't change it for you?

Ah, your favorite buzz word which you believe makes you sound educated and important - but this sentence has no meaning whatsoever.

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by bsbray11
Prove it.

I can't prove where the money is going anymore than you can prove where it is going!

So you admit that your 'follow the money' statement is total rubbish - because you yourself have just admitted you can't follow the money. ROFL.

Originally posted by adeclerk

That explains why everyone and his brother is selling a book. Or why everytime someone appears on a tv/radio show they are selling a book.

You're excelling yourself in spouting utter rubbish.

I'm not selling a book - neither are billions of people. So 'eeryone is selling books' is utter garbage.

'Evertime someone appears on a tv/radio show they are selling a book' is even more garbage.

You just don't know how to separate fact from your imaginings.

reply to post by wcitizen


Not at all - you are taking a conclusion that simply isn't there.

there is money being made pushing chemtrails - advertising, "cures", books, and possibly more.
AFAIK the only thing that AdeC cannot prove is how much.

however her is plenty of evidence that there is SOME money being made from eth chemtrail hoax industry.

So how much evidence is there for any money being made by chemtrail debunkers?

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by wcitizen

 

Not at all - you are taking a conclusion that simply isn't there.

there is money being made pushing chemtrails - advertising, "cures", books, and possibly more.
AFAIK the only thing that AdeC cannot prove is how much.

Oh no, the conclusion is absolutely there. You're another denier who frequently doesn't comprehend what's written. He said his motive is making money and that he doesn't care. That's HIS conclusion NOT mine. - Yet he has no proof at all for saying that precisely BECAUSE he cannot prove how much he is making. It might well be a mere pittance. The point is he doesn't know, so his conclusion - once again, is based on pure conjecture - he's just spouting absolute rubbish..

however her is plenty of evidence that there is SOME money being made from eth chemtrail hoax industry. Money being made or costs covered? Where's your evidence that there is even any profit at all and it's not just covering costs?

So how much evidence is there for any money being made by chemtrail debunkers?

And your point?

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by adeclerk

Originally posted by bsbray11
Prove it.

I can't prove where the money is going anymore than you can prove where it is going!

So you admit that your 'follow the money' statement is total rubbish - because you yourself have just admitted you can't follow the money. ROFL.

Nope, if you read my post again you will see that statement was pertinent to the money going through the pentagon, not the money going back to the 'chemtrail' hoaxers.

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by adeclerk

That explains why everyone and his brother is selling a book. Or why everytime someone appears on a tv/radio show they are selling a book.

You're excelling yourself in spouting utter rubbish.

I'm not selling a book - neither are billions of people. So 'eeryone is selling books' is utter garbage.

'Evertime someone appears on a tv/radio show they are selling a book' is even more garbage.

You just don't know how to separate fact from your imaginings.

I'm sorry, I shouldn't be speaking it absolutes. We can at least agree that there are a lot of authors (self publishing is really popular in the 'chemstuff' community).

Originally posted by wcitizen

Really? So, your logic seems to be if anyone charges anyone for anything it's proof they don't care. Where's your evidence that he is doing anytthing other than covering the costs incurred in making this information available.

I guess getting paid to speak at 'chemtrail' and 'conspiracy' and 'geo-engineering' and 'ufo' seminars isn't enough?

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by wcitizen
Now please also provide evidence that he's a hoax.

He speaks of 'chemtrails' as if they exist, without any evidence

This statement proves to me beyond any doubt whatsoever that your intentions here are to deny at all costs. You REFUSE to admit that there is evidence, but that the evidence doesn't convince you personally. This has been pointed out to you many times, but you continue on your crusade to deny, and knowingly repeat lies again and again.

No, there literally is no evidence. Some 'evidence' chemmies are citing sure seems like evidence, then you read it in context.... If you have this evidence, please share. I'll be here. If you don't want to share it on the thread for whatever reason, PM me, I'm willing to learn.

Originally posted by wcitizen

In what way is this non-scientific?

There's no control, he has a test that he uses for morgellons, that conveniently shows everyone as having morgellons (well, his findings aren't even consistent with morgellons). Read into the red wine test and bask in the fallacy.

Originally posted by wcitizen
Etc, it's really more up the believer in his claims to show how anything he said is true
since it goes against known logic, reason and science.

Yawn. More blanket statements meaning nothing.

Okay, since my link is ignored by you, here is another definition of the burden of proof: the duty of proving a disputed charge. How can I put this simply....Okay, in a court case, the burden of proof is on the prosecution, they must prove their charges are correct. So let's imagine a 'chemtrail' court case. Chemmies are suing the government over poisoning their air, stopping global warming, or whatever function 'chemtrails' are serving that day. It is up to the chemmies to prove that 'chemtrails' exist and are doing what they claim, not up to the government to prove to the prosecution that 'chemtrails' don't exist, do you understand? Maybe someone else can explain this better for you.

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by wcitizen

 

Not at all - you are taking a conclusion that simply isn't there.

there is money being made pushing chemtrails - advertising, "cures", books, and possibly more.
AFAIK the only thing that AdeC cannot prove is how much.

Oh no, the conclusion is absolutely there. You're another denier who frequently doesn't comprehend what's written. He said his motive is making money and that he doesn't care. That's HIS conclusion NOT mine. - Yet he has no proof at all for saying that precisely BECAUSE he cannot prove how much he is making. It might well be a mere pittance. The point is he doesn't know, so his conclusion - once again, is based on pure conjecture - he's just spouting absolute rubbish..

Hang on - that's not even the same thing as you were talking abou above - the bit you quoted:

I can't prove where the money is going anymore than you can prove where it is going!

Ther's nothing in there about how much is being made - and you talk about me lacking comprehension??? Bleedin' heck!!

however her is plenty of evidence that there is SOME money being made from eth chemtrail hoax industry.

Money being made or costs covered? Where's your evidence that there is even any profit at all and it's not just covering costs?

where did I say profit??

Was this in a post where you accused me of lacking comprehension?? Oh yes - i see it was....how delicious!!

but back to your questions - I have not suggested anything about the relative amounts of income vs costs, & the level of profit (or indeed loss) resulting from that. I have suggested ther is money being made - do you deny that??

Are you suggesting that any money made is solely to cover costs?

So how much evidence is there for any money being made by chemtrail debunkers?

And your point?

My point is a question as to whether there is any money being made by chemtrail debunkers??