contrailscience.com : list the errors of fact , please ?

page: 1
12

log in

join

posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 05:18 AM
link   
hi - in thread afther thread , posters claim that the website : contrailscience dot com

is :

" wrong "

" without merit "

" lacks credibility "

etc etc etc

but never actually manage to point out any errors of fact or scientific innacuracies on any specific page

now folks - here is your chance

tell us precisley where contrailscience is wrong - and the URL where this error occurs

its that simple

as the saying goes - put up or shut up

CAVEAT : at the risk of being accused of attempting to cencor my own thread - in the first instance , i really only want replies from people who believe that contrailscience.com is wrong - rebbutals to thier claims are fine - but i want real debate - addressing any claims of error - not " chat " or praise for contrailscience.com

carry on
edit on 17-7-2012 by ignorant_ape because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 05:49 AM
link   
So your asking us to find errors in a site that uses a knowledge base of contrail dynamics to deny any kind of chemtrails exist, a site solely set up to deny any kind of chemtrailing takes place?.


What is the point?, it certainly won't do anything to convince those of us with the sense to ignore the protestations of buffoons that say every single "Chemtrail" is a contrail.
Whereas, chemtrailers have the sense to see the difference between the two, not every trail in the sky is a chemtrail, or, a contrail exclusively, they are both there.
Using "science" to defend against a precept is easily done, look at AGW, It was irrefutable science not so long ago, and now it looks like the protestations of buffoons.
There is absolutely nothing to be gained by engaging in this thread, maybe a circle jerk of debunkers, deniers, glorifying in their armour of impenetrable ignorance.
in 3...2...1



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 05:54 AM
link   
CONTRAIL CHEMTRAIL THREAD???

incoming ******* storm



i think they are real.


peace.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   
The error is that it is called contrailscience.com when it should be called chemtrail science

just kidding....



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by The X
 





So your asking us to find errors in a site that uses a knowledge base of contrail dynamics to deny any kind of chemtrails exist, a site solely set up to deny any kind of chemtrailing takes place?.


Can you show us a site that can refute any of the evidence contained in that site?

Secondly can you even show any credible evidence to prove chemtrails even exist?



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by The X
 





Whereas, chemtrailers have the sense to see the difference between the two, not every trail in the sky is a chemtrail, or, a contrail exclusively, they are both there.


Well then how about you show us all how to distinguish the difference,because they sure look the same?

That is one heck of a gift you have there.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   
list the errors of fact , please ?

Well to start with, your title is an error. Errors of fact ya reckon?? Hmm



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Seagle
 





Well to start with, your title is an error.


What makes it an error?



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsurfer2000h
reply to post by Seagle
 





Well to start with, your title is an error.


What makes it an error?


His/her mind that has been poisoned by all those harmful chemtrails at 30000 feet makes it an error.

The simple fact that they say so makes it an error, cmon this is how chemtrailers work they are like the T-1000 from terminator with their robotic eyes they can tell the differences of Con and Chem trails just by simply looking at them and with the extreme processing power of the chip in control of their minds they can do a chemical analysis without analyzing the chemicals.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Oh chem trails exist alright. Check these recent pics out from the heart of the drought in Indiana:








posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by chadderson
Oh chem trails exist alright. Check these recent pics out from the heart of the drought in Indiana:







Similar to these from 1905:



Via contrailscience.com, but the original 1905 book is real. Some of the cloud photos date back to before 1894.
picasaweb.google.com...



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by The X
 


ah - you cannot / will not highlight a single error of fact on the contrail science website

as for your " common sense " the T&C prohibits my response of choice

as for your claims on AGW - the science of ` hockey stick graph ` was challenged as soon as it was published



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


First of all, let's examine the concept of evidence to begin with.

The entire idea of proving a chemtrail, I though, rested on the fact that they 'linger' in the sky and do not dissipate. How can you prove it's not dissipating, with a video? Layering of audio over video is possible. Freezing the frame is, or looping it.

"Pictures of chemtrails" are even more a joke, because they cannot prove what is in the sky is not dissipating. It's very hard to prove lots of things using pictures now, but it's ever more a mistake to try to prove what's in the sky is a chemtrail.

Crisscrossing patterns and all that, mean nothing. They're just patterns. Maybe you live near a base or airport, where that could be expected. You could say you don't, but maybe you do anyway.

See how wild this is, to try to prove anything with just pictures and video? If you found evidence (soil samples) from 30 years ago that shows no evidence of barium or whatever it is that chemtrails are supposedly made of...and then you had samples from when you figure chemtrails started, THEN you could build a case against them, but even then, you'd be best to prove that by collecting a sample from the sky! Good luck with that!



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by daynight42
The entire idea of proving a chemtrail, I though, rested on the fact that they 'linger' in the sky and do not dissipate. How can you prove it's not dissipating, with a video? Layering of audio over video is possible. Freezing the frame is, or looping it.


Time lapse video works quite well for that:


However that's NOT the entire idea of proving a chemtrail, as normal contrails can persist and spread just like this. The idea that they cannot is entirely without evidence, it's just something that chemtrail believers state because they heard it somewhere, and they don't remember otherwise.

But it's wrong.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Uncinus
 


You don't get it....if a video can be faked, then so can a time lapse. You just run it slower or stick in frames multiple times.

What is not to understand? Anything on a screen can be manipulated. That is why I insist on seeing things in real life, and even then, how the hell do i know what's there, and what it's purpose it?

It's impossible to tell.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by daynight42
reply to post by Uncinus
 


You don't get it....if a video can be faked, then so can a time lapse. You just run it slower or stick in frames multiple times.

What is not to understand? Anything on a screen can be manipulated. That is why I insist on seeing things in real life, and even then, how the hell do i know what's there, and what it's purpose it?

It's impossible to tell.


Yeah, maybe life is all just a dream, or we are living in a Matrix......

Seriously, if you think that video was faked, then just go and make one yourself. But I can't even imagine why you'd think that was faked. It show trails like what people call "chemtrails", but are actually contrails. But what on earth would be the motivation for faking something like that.

We can know things with a reasonable degree of certainty. Planes leave contrails. They often persist and spread. That's just basic science and history.



posted on Jul, 30 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
and the silence was deafening - not single chemtrail proponent could step up and point out any errors on contrailscience.com

says it all really





top topics
 
12

log in

join