Chemtrail Forum and the T&C.

page: 3
25
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 25 2015 @ 07:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: James1982
So will this same level of scrutiny be leveled against the chemtrail followers? What is defined as an insult?

I'm not being difficult for the sake of being difficult, it's an honest question.

Countless times I've seen chemtrail followers be very insulting with their tone when people ask simple questions or ask for verification of statements made.

It pretty much ALWAYS goes like this:

Chemtrailer: There is xxx and yyy being sprayed on us

Poster A: Where is the proof

Chemtrailer: you stupid brainwashed sheep the proof is in the sky!

Then poster A gets defensive, and the whole thing devolves into trash.

If you really want to stop that, and encourage meaningful discussion, you need to have a heavy hand in moderating the pushers of these ideas. If you challenge someone's idea, ask for evidence, or provide evidence disproving their statements, they loose their minds and freak out. You cannot honestly deny this happens over, and over, and over again in the chemtrail forum.

If your goal is truly to solve the problem of threads getting out of hand, placing the blame on the shoulders of debunkers isn't going to help you with anything. I could post 50 threads right now of chemtrailers refusing the follow the rules of this site (posting sources, proof of statements, etc) then they get all emotional, and go around reporting everyone that disagrees with them.

Do you think if you took away people's posting ability when they refused to provide evidence for their statements it would cut down on bickering in threads? I'd be a million bucks it would. I wonder why that isn't being done. Instead just blame the people asking for proof and showing contrary evidence who get frustrated when OPs refuse to behave in a mature and logical manner.

Additionally any site that openly allows children to discuss such in depth and controversial topics in the same forum as adults is going to have HUGE problems. As proven by every forum on ATS where immature kids try to talk down to educated adults just because they saw a youtube video and are now an expert.



This whole "provide proof or be subject to insult" movement happening on ATS is disturbing. How do you find proof of something that is kept secret from most of government and operates on a black budget? I am not singling out chemtrails, there are many topics where this happens.

There are topics out there that there will NEVER be proof to support. Does that mean the topic should NEVER be discussed?




posted on Feb, 25 2015 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA


How do you find proof of something that is kept secret from most of government and operates on a black budget?

In the case of "chemtrails", the evidence would not be hidden in some secret location. They claim the evidence is sprayed virtually all over the world, everyday. If they are spreading the evidence all over the sky as claimed, believers could go and get some. Why don't they?



posted on Feb, 25 2015 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: DenyObfuscation
a reply to: MALBOSIA


How do you find proof of something that is kept secret from most of government and operates on a black budget?

In the case of "chemtrails", the evidence would not be hidden in some secret location. They claim the evidence is sprayed virtually all over the world, everyday. If they are spreading the evidence all over the sky as claimed, believers could go and get some. Why don't they?


I was pretty clear that I was not singling out chemtrails and the mods were clear about this thread not being a chemtrail debate. My question was pretty cut and dry.



posted on Feb, 25 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA


I was pretty clear that I was not singling out chemtrails

I am. You asked


How do you find proof of something that is kept secret from most of government and operates on a black budget?

I answered. The "chemtrail" conspiracy theory is different from most other conspiracy theories. To claim the evidence is kept secret while believing that very same evidence is sprayed throughout the sky is baffling.

ETA


and the mods were clear about this thread not being a chemtrail debate.

I'm not debating "chemtrails", I'm debating the notion that evidence would not be openly available. Of course there are many conspiracy theories where evidence might not be within reach. "Chemtrails" isn't one of 'em.
edit on 25-2-2015 by DenyObfuscation because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
This whole "provide proof or be subject to insult" movement happening on ATS is disturbing. How do you find proof of something that is kept secret from most of government and operates on a black budget? I am not singling out chemtrails, there are many topics where this happens.

There are topics out there that there will NEVER be proof to support. Does that mean the topic should NEVER be discussed?


On the contrary, they should ALWAYS be discussed, and in a particular manner that includes the following:

1. providing detailed explanation why certain factual evidence is not possible to obtain

2. explaining why specific available facts are not relevant

3. explaining why what has the appearance of solid logic is actually quite faulty

4. exposing firm conclusions when they are unjustified because of additional missing information

5. Pointing out when matters of fact are being confounded with ONLY the facts that support one side of an argument

6. alerting moderators to tactics of ridicule, off topic drift, and sheer banter between the people who care only about the "facts" that they care about.

7. by keeping in mind matters of geoengineering and chemtrail conspiracies are not only matters of pure "fact" and are also a matter of ethics (even if some believe all matters should be disguised as matters of pure fact).

8. by distinguishing what is real "fact" from what is actually social reality. See HERE.

9. by NOT participating in threads that appear to be designed as nothing but traps to provide evidence for something that evidence may be impossible to obtain, e.g., Is the military running it's own to top secret geoengineering program?

10. by complying with the terms and conditions of the website even if your facts, logic or your premise are disputed. This doesn't guarantee that when someone does something unethical it won't still be in compliance with the terms and conditions.





new topics

top topics
 
25
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join