So, cards on the table right from the off. Yes, I think Chemtrail believers are missing the point completely. Furthermore I wonder if they are mere
pawns being used to mask some other issue. At least most of those on here, because, based upon what I see going on within threads, one or two give
every impression of being the paid stirrers they so readily accuse others of being.
The thing is, I am perfectly amenable to the idea that things are happening in our atmosphere that are detrimental to us, that these things are man
made and that only through research and awareness do we have any chance of having a say in what does and does not happen.
However I look at the "Chemtrail" argument and I am 100% certain that this is not "it", but that it is possibly the greatest red herring in
I realise such a statement needs to be backed up by explanations, so here are mine, as succinctly as I can.
The "Chemtrail", when pictured, is invariably, every single time, a contrail doing exactly what contrails do. The only distinction with these
assertions is that the person making it either does not understand half the amount they think they do about meteorology, or they are pretending not
to. I see, presented as statements of fact, blatantly false statements about the nature of contrails that immediately show the claim to be false. By
this I mean things like "contrails don't persist and spread out" "they are laid in a grid pattern" "the fact that some planes left a trail when others
did not is suspicious" and other such vacuous nonsense.
The Chemtrail plane is mainly a commercial passenger transport. This, due to reasons explained superbly in the 'Busted' thread, is an absolute
impossibility and anyone insisting it's true instantly has no credibility. Notions of commercial planes carrying extra tanks, having it in the fuel or
even, as I have seen today, having a spare engine that's only used for spraying are not merely flawed, they are plain stupid. Even a rudimentary
understanding of civil aviation should make this clear.
Another reference I saw was to a Cessna and another to Luftwaffe Tornadoes, What?!?
Speaking of which, in the Luftwaffe example, why did a chemtrailer purposely mis translate from German in order to try to convince others? This is
something easily checked (and found to be false) so not only was the perpetrator a liar, but an idiot too. Yet some still cling onto it as evidence.
What is the purpose of the Chemtrail? Can chemtrailers even agree?
Mind control? And yet people are asking about chemtrails, 9/11, Diana etc so where's the control?
Poisoning? Everyone would be poisoned, anything in the atmosphere at those altitudes goes all around the globe with zero control over when and where
it comes down. If that was the idea, it would be one of the most Ill founded and least effective plots in history.
Weather control? Cloud seeding is an entirely different subject and works on existing clouds, not creating new ones in blue skies. Another fail.
It is claimed that this is a phenomenon of the 90's, evidence from the previous fifty years being ignored, as is the consideration that the skies may
be cloudier because commercial jets are much much bigger and vastly more numerical than before. No, they must be "up to something", yet another
massive leap with nothing to support it.
Another disturbing trait is that actual, bona fide experts such as pilots, engineers, meteorologists etc who offer the mundane and factual explanation
are immediately accused of being "disinformation agents" or shills, without any supporting evidence at all, as if the hardcore believer *cannot* enter
a dialogue with these experts because they know they will be exposed. Maybe I will be accused of this too, which would at least be solid proof to me
that these accusers are bull#ters, the only solid proof they would have ever provided lol.
So, why the fanatical, closed minded obsessive fervour? Never mind what are they trying to prove, what are they trying to HIDE? This is the question
that the chemtrailers always get me asking.
And no, I don't expect this collection of thoughts to make a blind bit of difference, I just wanted to say it to see if anyone agrees
9-10-2011 by waynos because: (no reason given)