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.


Could we please lose the "Geo-engineering Forum?"

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2012 @ 06:38 PM
Having Geo-engineering in the title of a forum makes it impossible to discuss Geo-engineering seriously?

Really? This is the point of your thread?

I think you have ulterior motives, and I believe you know this.

posted on May, 5 2012 @ 06:40 PM

Originally posted by Goldcurrent
I think you have ulterior motives, and I believe you know this.

Not quite sure he know his own motive. He's just stomping his feet for no reason.

posted on May, 5 2012 @ 08:03 PM

Originally posted by fiftyfifty
Dare I say that if you want an intelligent educated debate, ATS is unfortunately no longer the place. Sorry Mods but it's the truth. I still come here but it is more for entertainment value than informative and educative reasons. Intelligent debates are very few and far between.

I agree. There are still a few members that put up excellent threads but even then they usually get polluted with nonsensical gibberish by people who can barely form a coherent sentence. Not the fault of ATS though.

posted on May, 5 2012 @ 11:50 PM
reply to post by Goldcurrent

Having Geo-engineering in the title of a forum makes it impossible to discuss Geo-engineering seriously?

Really? This is the point of your thread?

Absolutely. It is exactly what I keep saying, and chemtrailers keep proving.

I think you have ulterior motives, and I believe you know this.

No, I have made my motives explicit. Your motives for objecting are apparent. You crave the legitimacy that a genuine issue like geo-engineering gives to a nonsensical conspiracy theory like chemtrails. You mean chemtrails aren't about spreading HIV virus any more? They don't cause Morgellons? They're not used to bounce HAARP mind control waves? They're not covering up the giant brown dwarf planet that is looming in the sky? Now they're about geo-engineering, right? All I'm saying is that "geo-engineering" needs to come off the forum's title. I have no problem if you have a "chemtrail" forum, just don't assume that any discussion about geo-engineering has anything to do with it, or that any discussion of geo-engineering can be settled with a photograph you took of a passing jet.

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:02 AM
Makes no difference to me which forum we discuss
the effects of contrails on lifeforms.

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:31 AM
reply to post by DJW001

No, I have made my motives explicit. Your motives for objecting are apparent. You crave the legitimacy that a genuine issue like geo-engineering gives to a nonsensical conspiracy theory like chemtrails.

Here...your motive explicit...for those who are confused: geoengineering can't be proven, yet, but chemtrails can.

And your 'have some candy' remarks on HIV and chemtrails...I see you.

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 12:58 AM
reply to post by DJW001 because YOU say chemtrails aren't true ATSneeds to silence the ones that do. How utterly absured and beyond egotiscal of you.

"Although officials insist that these programs are only in the discussion phase, evidence is abundant that they have been underway since about 1990 — and the effect has been devastating to crops, wildlife, and human health. We are being sprayed with toxic substances without our consent and, to add insult to injury, they are lying to us about it."

Not my Above qoate but I totally agree w/ what it states.

Here is a video of David Kieth letting the cat out of the bag if you will...

We have Professional weathermen, some even ex-military explaining that they are spraying small sized aluminum in our atmosphere to " more then likely " block radar, satellites...ect

A man was able to collect the substance in a jar because they've been spraying around their area for quite awhile.

I am just shocked that you have the balls to imply that you are right and people like me are just full of hot air.

Just amazing of you!

Geo-Engineering and Chemtrails a lot feel go hand and hand and we feel we have pretty good evidence to back that up! That is why we come to ATS for clues, education, exchange of ideas and evidence....

edit on 6-5-2012 by tracehd1 because: Corr

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 01:18 AM
Hot On The Trails

Before continuing, I want to emphasize that what I'm posting here are my personal opinions as a member of ATS, and they should not be construed as statements of site policy.

I've been quietly following the thread up to this point and want to share some of my perspectives on the issues being discussed. I've tried (and failed, I suppose) to keep it brief and to the point, but there's a lot to consider here and my reputation for long-windedness didn't just arise from nothing, if you know what I mean.

Since I do (apparently) have a lot to say, I'll break things down into two posts.

On The Legitimacy Of Chemtrail Discussion

I don't think it's fair to knock ATSers who want to discuss the question of Chemtrails, refer to the subject pejoratively in BB&Q or debate the subject in this thread instead of the relevant forum.

Virtually every forum on ATS, including the news forums, could be dismissed as fictitious or invalid in the manner the Geo-Engineering and Chemtrails forum is being treated here. If we adopted that philosophy as a community and presumed to declare various debates closed based on our own beliefs, we might as well shut ATS down, because there are plenty of other venues on the Internet where such thinking is expected or required, and there is no point in ATS being just another one of them.

Whatever our personal beliefs may be, it is important to respect the rights of all ATSers to share their opinions without fear of ostracism or ridicule. It is a core principle of our community and one of the only things that makes discussion of unorthodox subjects possible.

Also, as all too often happens, some of us are straying into ad hominem territory in this thread, which never leads anywhere good, so I hope we can avoid going further down that primrose path.

The topic of Chemtrails is controversial, as so many are on ATS, but to reject it out of hand as illegitimate undermines the value of this thread, in my opinion, and I hope we won't continue to do so.

We have dedicated forums for debating the merits of the theories themselves.

On Geo-Engineering Versus Chemtrails

While I suppose it may be fashionable in some quarters to equate Geo-Engineering and Chemtrail Theories, I believe the two are not equivalent terms, and that treating them as such can be misleading.

Not all theories related to chemtrails involve geo-engineering, nor do all geo-engineering proposals involve chemtrails. They are two different spheres that overlap to various degrees, some greater, some lesser, depending on who you ask.

Chemtrail Theory, by nature, tends to involve an element of conspiracy, because a foundation of the subject is that various chemicals are being discreetly distributed without public knowledge or consent. Geo-Engineering, on the other hand, tends to involve hypotheses, plans and proposals that are subject to public debate, with little or no insinuation of clandestine intent.

These are not hard and fast rules, but I think they are well-established elements of these areas of interest. Thus I sympathize with the noteworthy distinctions between the two subjects and hope we can agree on that.

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 01:18 AM
On A Combined Forum Versus Separate Forums

ATS is divided into various forums to make it easier to locate topics of interest and aid members in staying focused on matters of common interest.

Moderators and even admins don't have the final say on which forums are created, how they are named or their fundamental descriptions. That's the domain of the site owners, who make such decisions based on a wide range of factors that may not always be apparent to everyone else. While they definitely solicit suggestions and consider them carefully, it's up to them to make the calls, and whatever they may decide, someone is sure to disagree with them.

That is, of course, what we're discussing here, and doing so is a key part of the process.

Some of the many considerations that must be taken into account with forum organization involve the balance between specificity and generality.

If there are too many forums that are too narrow in scope, they can fragment discussion and lead to unnecessary redundancy where subjects overlap and or encompass multiple subjects. Forums that are too broad or undefined in scope can become cluttered with too many different topics, making them difficult to navigate and finding relevant topics of interest frustrating.

Where the right balance can be found is a matter of opinion, and in all matters of opinion there will be differences, sometimes very strong differences, as this thread illustrates. I have my own opinions and am expressing them here, but as an avowed skeptic must always leave ample room for my own fallibility, so they are never written in stone.

Blazing A Trail Forward

In this case, I can foresee various possible outcomes, from leaving things as-is (perhaps with a forum description that describes the overlap and its implications for discussion), to splitting the subjects into two different forums, possibly moving Geo-Engineering into Fragile Earth, for example.

Whatever the owners should ultimately decide, there will be disagreement, but I hope we can all appreciate that they make their decisions with the best interests of the community in mind.

Ideally, if we can discuss the matter with civility, mutual respect and an emphasis on the specific question of forum management, we may come up with a suggestion most of us can live with and offer it to the owners.

That's something I hope most of us can agree would be the most favorable outcome, and I hope you can join me in seeking that goal.

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 05:28 AM
reply to post by Majic

Thank you, well said. (And for the record, I have never suggested closing the chemtrail forum, simply re-naming it to avoid confusion.)

posted on May, 6 2012 @ 08:25 AM
My post that was removed minus the words that breaks T & C's..

Originally posted by DJW001
That happens anyway. The point is, the title of the forum makes it impossible to discuss geo-engineering seriously.

The title of the forum has nothing to do with the level of discussion inside.
Maybe you should set an example and post something interesting in the forum.

You care so much, then start a thread about Geo-engineering. Have fun with that.

There is nothing preventing you from having an intelligent discussion (except maybe me) about Geo-engineering.

Waaaaaa, the forum title doesn't allow me to discuss geo-engiblahblah..


Listen to your statement...

Originally posted by DJW001
the title of the forum.... makes it impossible.... to discuss geo-engineering seriously.

False.. 100% False..

edit on 5-5-2012 by ThisToiletEarth because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 7 2012 @ 07:34 AM
I think it would be a good idea to separate the topic of geo-engineering from the chemtrail stuff since chemtrails are a more or less minute part of geo-engineering, but there is much more to that area than "little fluffy clouds" (if someone remembers this song

posted on May, 7 2012 @ 09:08 PM
reply to post by ThisToiletEarth

You care so much, then start a thread about Geo-engineering. Have fun with that.

I'm researching it now.

posted on May, 10 2012 @ 09:14 PM

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Rising Against
Chemtrails have been called biological warfare, neuro-toxins, weather modification and, now, geo-engineering.

You forgot planetary camouflage (hiding nibiru, etc), an element of binary/trinary weapons, electromagnetic mirrors or lenses or pathways, UFO trails, sunscreen and food for sylphs!

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in