It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Round 1. NephraTari V EnronOutrunHomerun: Chemtrails

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 2 2004 @ 05:59 AM
Debate 3

The topic for this debate is "'Chemtrails' are a real and concerning phenomenon."

Nephratari will be arguing for this proposition and will open the debate.
EnronOutrunHomerun will argue against this proposition.

Each debater will have one opening statement each. This will be followed by 3 alternating replies each. There will then be one closing statement each and no rebuttal.

No post will be longer than 800 words and in the case of the closing statement no longer than 500 words. In the event of a debater posting more than the stated word limit then the excess words will be deleted by me from the bottom. Credits or references at the bottom do not count towards the word total.

Editing is Strictly forbidden. This means any editing, for any reason. Any edited posts will be completely deleted.

Excluding both the opening and closing statements only one image may be included in each post. No more than 5 references can be included at the bottom of each post. Opening and closing statements must not contain any images, and must have no more than 3 references.

Responses should be made within 24 hours, if people are late with their replies, they run the risk of forfeiting their reply and possibly the debate.

Judging will be done by an anonymous panel of 11 judges. After each debate is completed it will be locked and the judges will begin making their decision. Results will be posted by me as soon as a majority (6) is reached.

This debate is now open, good luck to both of you.

posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 11:11 PM
I would like to start by thanking Kano and the judges for donating their time to yet another tournament. I would also like to wish my opponent the best of luck on his side of the argument.

It is my intention to prove that chemtrails are a real and concerning phenomenon. More than 10 years ago you could watch a plane fly across the sky and watch the trail appear behind it but it would dissappear within seconds and all that would remain is the memory of the vapor that was there. Today you can look up at the sky and see long thick lines of chemical emmissions that sit there for sometimes many hours and break up slowly moving outward and spreading. These are what are now known as Chemtrails. Reports are showing that there is a direct relation to increases in respiratory illnesses in emergency rooms around the same times as these chemtrails are being laid out. I will prove that this is no coincidence.

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 12:02 AM
Here’s to a sobering victory! Good luck NephraTari outline:

My Argument/Persuasion:
Chemtrails are a natural occurrence and hold no imposing threats on modern society.

Evidence (or lack thereof) and questions to be probed:

  1. The realistic possibilities of aircraft modification for spraying methods proposed by those who are pro-chemtrail.
  2. Data or documentation which contributes proof for a definitive illness that is allegedly caused by chemtrails.
  3. Is there or has there ever been samples of these air-borne chemicals collected and analyzed to show undeniable proof that chemtrails exist?
  4. Are atmospheric conditions not as equally an explainable conclusion?
  5. How can the logistics required to power this large of an operation be covered up without any oversight?
  6. Why are the chemtrails produced and displayed in daylight for all to see?

Two topics from the above will be systematically researched and answered per each one of my three replies.
My Conclusion (from a pre-research stance):
Most who believe in chemtrails simply lack the understanding of other scientific rationale or other more logical conclusions. They do not have the investigatory techniques required to probe all aspects of the phenomenon. For them, hypotheses hold an equal value to theories, and thus the conspiracy theorist confuses truth with opinion. Logic is not employed in their reasoning and their research only extends as far as the internet will allow them to search.

My Introduction/Opening
My pre-debate knowledge of this topic goes about as deep as an ant’s grave. I’m not a star-gazer and I only look at the sky to see sunsets and if I wake up early enough, maybe a sunrise. But I am not oblivious to having seen contrails in the sky before. I’ve heard of chemtrails and have done very minor private research on the matter in the past, but nothing to warrant any formal degree of understanding on the subject. This debate shall prove to enlighten my understanding of this topic.

In my early searches on the internet, which I plain to go beyond for further proof of their non-existence, I’ve found several interesting websites. Of course, most sites out there are pro-chemtrail, so this should prove to be doubly challenging. Naturally I am aware of chemtrails which are both publicly accepted and approved a certain degree...which would be crop-dusting. Apart from these instances of chemtrails, proof exists that this hypothesis can be easily debunked.

'This is a perfectly normal situation with cirrocumulus cloud and a single spreading contrail,' he declared after inspecting one photo for a full minute. Then he flipped to the next. 'Nothing weird about that. Cirrostratus cloud...' And the next. 'The criss-cross pattern is a consequence of planes flying criss-cross patterns....' And the next. 'I've seen many situations like this one....' Contrail formation, Day explained, depends on the relative humidity of the atmosphere-- he ratio of what is to what could be at a particular temperature. When relative humidity is low, contrails dissipate within seconds. But when relative humidity is high, especially at the subzero temperatures of the upper atmosphere, the addition of even a tiny amount of water vapor acts as a catalyst. Under these conditions, contrails may linger and spread to cover the whole sky. ...At length, Day extracted from his bookshelf a well-thumbed edition of Peterson's Field Guide to Clouds and Weather, which he co-authored in 1991 (a good 10 years before chemtrails became widely discussed), turned to the section on contrails, and pointed to a photograph of a thick, white plume--a plume that looked for all the world like a chemtrail...
***See source 1***

What’s to be gathered from this statement? We have an educated man with experience, analyzing suspected chemtrail photos and denying their existence. It’s not bullet-proof but it stands to reason that his opinion can be taken seriously.

Claim: Samples taken have shown the presence of the "DOD patented" bacteria pseudomonas fluorescens.

Fact: The bacteria claimed to be DOD developed and patented is actually a common, naturally occurring bacteria. The US Patent Office (***See source 2***) lists 181 patents involving pseudomonas fluorescens, none of which are held by DOD.
**See source 3***

If these are the “dangerous chemicals/bacteria” being used, then why doesn’t DOD have their hands on them? Is there proof that they do and it is not registered? A conspiracy within a conspiracy?

Source 1 - A quote from John Day, a world-renowned expert on clouds, a professor emeritus at Linfield College and a regular contributor to the McMinnville News-Register
Source 2
Source 3 - For more information on pseudomonas fluorescens, click here.

EDIT: Broken Link

[edit on 4-9-2004 by Kano]

posted on Sep, 4 2004 @ 06:32 PM

Chemtrails are a natural occurrence and hold no imposing threats on modern society.

Well now.. as part of my task is to prove that chemtrails are real... you just helped me out a great deal in calling them a natural occurance thereby acknowleging their existance.

Lets take a look at the difference between a chemtrail and a contrail though.

Ceratainly anyone can see the difference between the two in the picture above.
This is a natural occurance?
This does not look like something natural in any sense of the word to me.. not only is this manmade but it appears to be anything but exhaust from the engines of that plane...

A picture is worth a thousand words.. or so it is said...

what happened here? did the plane run out of exhaust?

Now.. as to the why we should be concerned about chemtrails..

A "flu-like" epidemic is on the rise, which the Center for Disease Control says may be due to some "unknown pathogen." From their May 6, 2000 Influenza Summary Update, 11 out of every 100 newly dead people have died from this "influenza-like illness," but 99 percent of sick patients have tested negative for the flu.

Symptoms from chemtrail exposure:

Allergies, sore and blocked sinuses; dry, hacking, persistent cough; nosebleeds, blood in mucous; swollen, burning, teary eyes with mucous; flu-like, fever, sore throat; pneumonia, upper respiratory; mycoplasma infections; migraine or splitting headaches; pain in back of neck, particularly at the top of the spine, extremely stiff neck; disorientation, foggy brain, sudden dizziness; extreme fatigue, lethargy, inability to concentrate; loud ringing in your ears; depression, anxiety attacks; gastrointestinal distress, bloating; diarrhea, bloody stools; joint pain, aching joints and muscles; thirst (your pets, too!) or loss of appetite; loss of bladder control, tics or spasms; recurring fungal infections; metallic, oily or corrosive smell and taste.

Seems like a good reason to me.


[edit on 4-9-2004 by Kano]

posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 07:06 PM
I’ll address my principal questions:

The realistic possibilities of aircraft modification for spraying methods proposed by those who are pro-chemtrail.

So where’s the actual proof that hundreds if not thousands of plans have been outfitted with these covert tanks? A plane isn’t just hunks of metal put here and there, and modifications to a plane must be approved, designed and placed by the factory which produced the plane. Here’s a great quote I found on this topic which addresses this issue. It’s from a post in a chemtrail forum:

There is no evidence whatsoever of aircraft modified to perform some of the spraying methodologies that are proposed. The only things I have ever seen on an aircraft that shoot things out (besides the engine exhaust) is the toilet and the fuel dump orifices, often at the wing tip. If the aircraft are squirting chemicals out of the fuel dump nozzles, what's in the fuel tanks? Poisonous chemicals? Huh-uh. (One exception to this is a military version of a civilian aircraft called TACAMO, a Navy variant of the AWACS aircraft. It has these oddball nozzles near the base of the wings. But they're still fuel-dump nozzles; they've merely been moved inboard because the TACAMO has reconnaissance pods at the wingtips, and they don't want to jettison JP-5 over the million-dollar electronics.

Bear in mind that you don't just strap in a couple of big tanks and poke the nozzles out through the aircraft fuselage. There are VERY stringent engineering details to be worked out regarding structural integrity, movable center of gravity, environmental protection for the crew and poison-loaders, etc. Almost all major mods to an aircraft are done under subsequent contract to the original builder. Since no one at Boeing knows anything about such mods (and I've asked around) this means it either wasn't done, or everyone else (but me) in the company is in on the secret. Huh-uh.
(***See Source 1***)

The proof of these spraying systems comes from shady sources. The image below was taken by an anonymous member of a website who provides detailed information on the system, which he claims he saw with his binoculars on this aircraft. (***See Source 2***)

I just don’t see any credibility in his statement or attempt at a photograph…


Data or documentation which contributes proof for a definitive illness that is allegedly caused by chemtrails.

Here’s a list of symptoms I found - kind of similiar to yours Nephra.... (***See Source 3***)

Neck pain/stiff neck
Stomach cramps
Sinus problems
Dizziness/light headed
Can't catch breath
Weepy feeling of sadness
No energy/ massive or light fatigue
crying spells
Loose bowels
Feeling disconnected/ "spaced out"
Can't focus thoughts/speech/confusion
Deep coldness
Tight chest/gets worse when laying down
Symptoms never seem to go away
Tests from doctors show nothing
Congestion in chest
Body pain
Dramatic mood swings/anger, sadness
Tightness in chest and/or stomach
Ear aches
Sinus problems
Sore throat
Tightness in shoulders both or one side going in to neck, head, and sinuses
Soreness all over
Dry cough
Metallic taste in mouth
Stomach acid problems
Heat flushes
Unexplained rashes
Short term memory loss
Nose Bleeds

Well – That narrows things down a bit, doesn’t it!?

Let's start with a low figure of 2% of deaths caused by
global chemtrail spraying in 1993, and gradually increase
that percentage over the next years as people's immune
system became more and more compromised, due to
accumulative affects of chemtrail spraying, and increasing
concentrations of chemtrail spraying..........

1993 : 2% of 100 million people = 2 million people.
1994 : 4% of 100 million people = 4 million people.
1995 : 6% of 100 million people = 6 million people.
1996 : 8% of 100 million people = 8 million people.
1997 : 10% of 100 million people = 10 million people.
1998 : 12% of 100 million people = 12 million people.
1999 : 14% of 100 million people = 14 million people.
2000 : 16% of 100 million people = 16 million people.
2001 : 18% of 100 million people = 18 million people.
2002 : 20% of 100 million people = 20 million people.

Maybe the figure is less - maybe it is more.

We should not wait until our governments - in their
present state of denial - or our mind-numbing main
media turns to investigate this subject.
(***See Source 4***)

Yet again…this quote, along with the remainder of the information clogging the web on this topic is all generalized. There’s no homogeneity to any of this disinformation. People are acting paranoid because things are happening that they cannot explain and as a result they look to the sky for an excuse – okay – that’s a little bit of tongue-in-cheek humor…but it’s happened before!

Source 1 - Chemtrail Central Thread
Source 2 - Chemtrail Planes Photographed At Portland Facility
Source 3 – Yahoo! Groups – Chemtrail Illness Research
Source 4 - Death Rate From 10 Years Of Chemtrail Spraying

posted on Sep, 6 2004 @ 02:14 PM

The realistic possibilities of aircraft modification for spraying methods proposed by those who are pro-chemtrail.

WEll lets see..
courtesy of

C-130H aircraft are modified to perform aerial application. Modifications consist mostly of ULV and LV wing line installation and electrical modifications.

b. Spray System. The MASS is built by Lockheed/Conair. One of the major design criteria of the MASS was that it had to be a "roll-on/roll-off" system allowing the aircraft to be reconfigured for spray or airlift in under an hour. To accommodate the Roll-on/Roll-off design, the full MASS is designed in 3 modules, each attached to modified standard (463L) aircraft cargo pallets. The operators console, pumps, catwalks, and cradles for flush and chemical tanks are all secured to these modified pallets. The pallets lock into the C-130's dual rail system. Once the MASS is loaded, interconnecting plumbing and electrical circuits tie the MASS modules together. To contain any spillage of spray materials, a 1.5" lip (drip pan) surrounds the pallets. The dry weight of the MASS is ca. 10,500 lbs.

Hope that helps a bit there..
Now we may never know the why.. but it is possible that there are some good intentions behind the spraying even though taking into acct the risks they feel that it is an acceptable loss.

courtesy of
In Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Bases conclusion...

the N.A.S. found that the most effective global warming mitigation turned out to be the spraying of reflective aerosol compounds into the atmosphere utilizing commercial, military and private aircraft. This preferred mitigation method is designed to create a global atmospheric shield which would increase the planet's albedo (reflectivity) using aerosol compounds of aluminum and barium oxides, and to introduce ozone generating chemicals into the atmosphere.

It is evident to anyone who cares to look up, that this mitigation is now being conducted worldwide and on a daily basis. It is certain that our leaders have already embarked on an immense geoengineering project; one in which they expect millions of human fatalities, and consider these to be acceptable losses.

The evidence is all around us. For example; this past week Boeing Aircraft received an enormous initial order from the Pentagon for 100 Boeing 767 tanker planes, to begin replacing the Air Force's aging fleet of KC-135s, the most commonly seen chemtrail spray plane. The final order will exceed 500 planes. There has been no mention of the usage of these aircraft.

Geoengineering is being carried on Earth on a staggering scale, without the impediment of environmental laws or regulatory constraints. This grand experiment is being conducted in full view, while being concealed in plain sight.

while this plan may or may not help the earth in the meantime the aluminum and barium oxides are not good for the health of the people in the areas over which it is being sprayed.

posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 11:45 AM

Originally posted by NephraTari
courtesy of
In Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Bases conclusion...

That report was published in 1992. Regardless whether it is true or not, it is outdated. (In my own personal opinion however, which is not related to this debate, I would say it is hard to argue with the evidence that report finds - good find!).

Ahem - lol....but nonetheless - the information is over 10 years old. Enough time has elapsed now to show us whether or not these "acceptable" losses have occurred. Where are they?

Back to my questions:

Is there or has there ever been samples of these air-borne chemicals collected and analyzed to show undeniable proof that chemtrails exist?

Well…didn’t find much there – no avid chemtrail researchers with the ability to actually collect scientific data and analyze it in a lab…maybe I’m missing a website or two out there….but I did find this: (*Source 1*)

But this all really ties into the big question…the one that debunks it all:


Are atmospheric conditions not as equally an explainable conclusion?

Here’s an abstract from a Geophysical journal article that postulates that what these supposed chemicals do in the air to create chemtrails is actually being created naturally:

The freezing of deliquesced aerosols is the most likely formation mechanism of ice particles in wave clouds. A similar microphysical process has been postulated for the formation of aircraft contrails. Aerosol and cloud particle measurements have been made in contrail and wave clouds that formed under similar environmental conditions. Microphysical and optical properties are compared for these two types of clouds using a number of unique capabilities of the MASP particle probe, i.e., direct detection of forward and backscattered light, and the measurement of particle spacing to determine small scale cloud structures relevant to microphysical processes. The data indicate similarities in optical properties, but significant differences in the number concentrations, liquid water contents and the spatial organization of the cloud particles in the two types of clouds.
(***See Source 2***)

Here’s another similar explanation from another reputable source…

If you are attentive to contrail formation and duration, you will notice that they can rapidly dissipate or spread horizontally into an extensive thin cirrus layer. How long a contrail remains intact, depends on the humidity structure and winds of the upper troposphere. If the atmosphere is near saturation, the contrail may exist for sometime. On the other hand, if the atmosphere is dry then as the contrail mixes with the environment it dissipates. Contrails are a concern in climate studies as increased jet aircraft traffic may result in an increase in cloud cover. It has been estimated that in certain heavy air-traffic corridors, cloud cover has increased by as much as 20%. An increase in cloud amount changes the region's radiation balance. For example, solar energy reaching the surface may be reduced, resulting in surface cooling. They also reduce the terrestrial energy losses of the planet, resulting in a warming. Jet exhaust also plays a role in modifying the chemistry of the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere. NASA and the DOE are sponsoring a research program to study the impact contrails have on atmospheric chemistry, weather and climate.
(***See Source 3***)

Check this image out along with its analysis…" target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Notice the similarity of expanded-contrail structure and the natrual cloud structure. That fluffy structure manifested itself naturally in the haze layer. The contrails simply provided "grist for the mill," and as such, were inducted into the unique cloud-formation mechanics of that day. There was no epidemic of illness that I could detect after February 11, and these contrails were right over where I live.
(***See Source 4***)

I think this information is proof enough that what the average person considers a “chemtrail” is actually a natural occurrence. If chemtrails truly do exist, then the question becomes, how many conspiracy theorists and average citizens following and documenting this phenomenon are actually competent enough to consider natural meteorological occurrences first? Most are just looking for a quick fix so they can update their private message boards with “today’s chemtrail photo” that is actually just a contrail in a humid environment that is dissolving into the surrounding clouds….what psychological boundaries does one cross when they say screw the physical truths of our planet we’ve thus far discovered, I’m going for any possible evidence that confirms what I want to hear and see….

Source 2
Source 3
Source 4

[edit on 7-9-2004 by Kano]

posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 02:55 PM
Okay.. I don't know how I can get any more official than a proposed bill on a government website.

Space Preservation Act of 2001 (Introduced in House)

HR 2977 IH

H. R. 2977

To preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the United States, and to require the President to take action to adopt and implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons.


(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--

(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;

(ii) chemtrails;

(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;

(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;

(v) laser weapons systems;

(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and

(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.

(C) The term `exotic weapons systems' includes weapons designed to damage space or natural ecosystems (such as the ionosphere and upper atmosphere) or climate, weather, and tectonic systems with the purpose of inducing damage or destruction upon a target population or region on earth or in space.

I think this not only proves that chemtrails are REAL and acknowledged by our government, but also since they are classified as an exotic weapon.. they are also cause for concern.

I think it is about time we do as the motto for this website suggests and DENY IGNORANCE in regards to chemtrails.

The are both REAL and Concerning.

posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 02:18 PM
Concerning the proposed bill...Perhaps this does provide credence to chemtrails, but the bill was not passed. It was 2001 when that bill was submitted, and chemtrails are but one item on a full list of “exotic weapons” that I have yet to see regularly utilized to the brink of “destruction.” So once again, I ask the question: Where is the proof of “damage and destruction upon a target population?”


How can the logistics required to power this large of an operation be covered up without any oversight?

Well – this question really ties into my final question, so I’ll address both at the same time:


Why are the chemtrails produced and displayed in daylight for all to see?

I’m going to quote this from another website (***See Source 1***)

It gets worse. 1951 Department of Defense begins open air tests using disease-producing bacteria and viruses. Tests last through 1969 and there is concern that people in the surrounding areas have been exposed.

1953 U.S. military releases clouds of zinc cadmium sulfide gas over Winnipeg, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Fort Wayne, the Monocacy River Valley in Maryland, and Leesburg, Virginia. Their intent is to determine how efficiently they could disperse chemical agents.
Fast forwarding through the 60's and 70's to 1987. The Department of Defense admits that, despite a treaty banning research and development of biological agents, it continues to operate research facilities at 127 facilities and universities around the nation.

I've concluded that Chemtrails ARE real, though what they're spraying remains a mystery as there are too many theories abounding as to the cause and what the ingredients are. To read some of the first person stories about their experiences with Chemtrails and to see what they look like, here's some links. I also have to thank Michael Irving of World-Action UK for keeping the need for world-knowledge of their existence alive.

I agree here – but my real concern in this debate is not whether they exist or not...I realize that’s part of what I should be debating, but that’s like trying to prove that water doesn’t’s a silly idea and a waste of time. So in hindsight, if I could go back and change my argument/persuasion, it would read:
Chemtrails do exist, but there is no solid proof of their harmful effects
Regardless of the list of a thousand different symptoms, I don’t see any statistical consistency.

I see a consistency though in their flight patterns and spraying – I see them here in Tallahassee...and the biggest question of all...why am I seeing them? Does the government truly believe that one of their biggest secrets can be just dismissed by the public - it’s in the damn skies, it’s in the bills submitted to Congress that anyone can read and it’s actually a non-taboo research area that a professor will not loose their credentials for studying...

It's not a cover-up. They do exist, but my biggest question of all comes from my desire to see the proof that there are negative results. And as I’ve stated before – the average Joe chemtrail spotter probably can’t tell the difference between a cloud, a contrail, and a chemtrail. So, how can a concerned citizen hear the truth when it’s being quietly whispered behind thousands of blabbering uninformed amateurs!?

For example, we all know the power of data. It can be manipulated and twisted to fit any perspective.

I have been very curious as to whether or not the chemtrails have increased the death rate. I found it very difficult to get any official figures to compare from different years so I decided to do an informal check using the classified death listing archives from my local newspaper.

This is what I found:
Year / Death Notice Totals for Jan-Feb:
1995 / 191
1996 / 134
1997 / 105
1998 / 98
1999 / 144
2000 / 196
2001 / 1680
2002 / 1734
2003 / 1728
As you can see the totals for 2003 are almost 10 times higher than the totals for 1995. This seems way out of line and very alarming even taking into consideration an aging population. Perhaps there is another reason for these figures but I suspect it is a result of the chemtrails and what we are seeing may be the result of a deliberate depopulation campaign. (***See Source 2***)

I keep coming to the same conclusion...these people are overly paranoid on a subject that represents .0001% of our concerns as nation and more so as a planet...The paranoia turns to lies and deceit, thus leading to politicians joining the fight to win support over this minority. It is healthy and reasonable to question crosses the boundary of stupidity to insert facts from different sources, twist them to fit your story, and to then try to make a conspiracy-orientated conclusion about something that is so obvious that it’s in the sky right above you...where’s the common sense?

Source 1
Source 2

posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 06:31 PM
In closing I would like to thank my opponent EnuonOurtunHomerun for keeping me on my ties. Nice work!

My task was to prove that chemtrails are real and a cause for concern.

I believe I have proven both points via photographic evidence as well as official government acknowledgements of them as an "exotic weapon".

Anything that is labeled as a weapon regardless of the category it fits into is cause for concern in my opinion. As for the status of the bill the site I referenced earlier stated that it had Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from DOD... this really comes as no surprise considering the nature of the bill.

I now leave this in the very capable hands of Kano and the judges.

posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 07:03 PM
The debate of chemtrails deserves a respective place on the shelves of any conspiracy theorist’s bookshelf. They can dub it as, “the one that almost got away.” Over the course of time, people have become more and more suspicious of what occurs in their respective space. As a result, we’ve also added logical reasoning to our notions of suspicion. Simply put, some are more logical than others. Those who are not yet thoroughly convinced of the “dangers” and “horrors” of the streaks in the sky can confide in their list of bookmarked “chemtrails kill” websites.

Logic, scientific research, and “plain-as-day” evidence should prevail in such an argument, but for the majority, they simply do not. Claims are made of people dying from the exerted fumes, but where is the medical research? Lists of symptoms a thousand pages long clog the internet, but where is the consistency?

When I entered this argument I claimed that the only chemtrails you would ever see would be the ones coming off a crop duster. After my own research and a few links Nephra provided, I began to formulate my own opinion that chemtrails do exist. My options were to act as though my opinion didn’t matter or to admit this in my debate and continue on with what I still believe to be true…the lack of medical evidence proving chemtrails are a resonating negative force. This I believe I have proven, along with the fact that many people who call something a chemtrail and make it publicly known often have no clue what they’re saying and do not welcome opposing opinions in their “reasoning.”

At any rate, it’s been fun Nephra – you brought up a lot of excellent points and sources. You had me stumped on how to continue my debate from my side more than once. Kano, thanks for steering me through some of the intricacies of the debate forum. I’m looking forward to a second round if luck so has it.

posted on Sep, 9 2004 @ 12:17 PM
The judges are all oiled up and ready to judge, results in a few days.

posted on Sep, 13 2004 @ 07:04 PM
Results are in, the winner of this debate by a margin of 6-4 is NephraTari. Well done to both debaters and best of luck EnronOutrunHomerun in future tournaments.

Judges comments:

I'm going to have to vote for NephraTari. Great job on this one, and even EnronOutrunHomerun seemed to be affected by the debate. The part that won me over was when EnronOutrunHomerun stated, "So in hindsight, if I could go back and change my argument/persuasion, it would read:
Chemtrails do exist, but there is no solid proof of their harmful effects."

I think at that point NephraTari sealed the win.

A very interesting debate in several ways. Enron clearly did a lot of research, but he bloodied himself up with the admission that chemtrails are real. This is a debate, not Talk with Opera where you share opinons and feelings.

I found that both sides dished out healthy amounts of specious reasoning: NephraTari pointed to some odd numbers while Enron pointed to the lack of definitive causation.

Overall, Enron was more impressive. But his argument was wrong. He was charged with arguing against a logical AND proposition. In admitting that chemtrails were real he failed to statisfy his job as a debater. He wasn't supposed to pick one or the other or engage in whatever flights of fancy his opinon may have led him.

So NephraTari wins the day, standing tall on the slumped back of Enron.

Definately a tough debate, but both participants handled it quite well. I feel that this debate, in my opinion, could easily have gone both ways, but my vote ended up going to NephraTari for presenting and persisting with a more persuasive argument/presentation.

I had to side with NephraTari because EnronOutrunHomerun didn't actually seem to be debating, which is a shame considering the obvious amount of time they put into research.

EnronOutrunHomerun had planning, varied sources, and the more persuasive argument. I have to give this one to him, although it was a great debate. Way to go, both!

This was an interesting debate. However, I was a bit distracted by the number of times that Kano had to edit and by the large amount of quotes. Please proofread your posts and check them for spelling, grammar, link function and that they conform to the rules. My vote goes to NephraTari on this one for a couple of reasons, the least of which being that she did not concede her stance. EnronOutrunHomerun had the right plan in the beginning, but shot himself in the foot by the middle of the debate and then totally conceded his side by the end. NEVER concede your point.

This one was very difficult to judge. The topic is "Chemtrails' are a real and concerning phenomenon." The first part of the criteria was conceded by Enron but he proved the latter. NephraTari put up a good debate, however I feel that the most credible source material was provided by, the winner, EnronOutrunHomerun. Nice job by both.

NepraTari has this debate sown up with a clear presentation versus her opponents interesting but muddled responses.

Good luck NephraTari in round 2.

new topics

top topics


log in