I think I know What Chemtrails are... and it's worse than you can imagine!

network dude
reply to post by exiteternity

 

Why is it that if someone doesn't believe in a particular conspiracy, they are a shill?

Because the CT's cannot conceive of anything else - they cannot find any actual verifiable evidence to support their particular theory but they are unable to admit they are wrong therefore so they are reduced to personal attacks.

A CT who admits their conspiracy doesn't' exist is no longer a CT and doesn't call you a shill - only the ones who are unable to face the facts do so.

reply to post by waynos


I'm sorry but I think language barrier is problem here because I do not understand first and third paragraph of ur post. I do understand second and I have tons of examples to show u differences between con and chemtrails.
But tbh i don't think it matters what I show you?
But please explain first and last paragraph I am sorry for not getting it. I am not trying anything here I am genuine when I say I don't understand.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


I take offense to that. What u said doesn't fit to me at all. I think you are Generalizing a bit to much

reply to post by exiteternity


No problem. In the first part, I am agreeing with you that nothing I say proves chemtrails don't exist because it is not possible to prove they don't exist. That is also what the Tardis analogy tried to say.

In the third part I accepted that I called you stupid when I first joined the thread, but I quickly took that back and was wrong to say it.

And in reply to your post. Yes, it is worth you saying anything you want to. I may disagree, or I may not, but like you, I am open to discussion. Whether we change our minds or not should not stop the discussion.

reply to post by waynos


Ok thank you for explaining I understand now.
Yes I guess I could show some images of what I believe to be chemtrails. I suppose it would have some value.
Atm I'm at my phone so I'll get back to u on that.
I appreciate your candor towards me it make me feel respected even though as u said u might disagree which I think is perfectly fine to do.

reply to post by exiteternity

I appreciate your candor towards me it make me feel respected even though as u said u might disagree which I think is perfectly fine to do.

Now see this is why you have actually earned my respect.

You are genuinely wanting to try and find out answers whereas other chemtrail believers will resort to the name calling and you have been actually polite which is refreshing in these threads.

Thank you.

My major point if it hadn't come across yet is,

When a theory is under way, whether or not it is proven
The easiest way to kill that theory would be to disprove it.
I realise that way don't work under court of law.
Then u would have to prove your theory first.

But since Internet is not a court of law that is not possible.. The theory is already far under way.
So unfortunately it is not up to me to prove the theory correct at this point.
It's actually you who have to disprove it..
I understand that is not a very nice way to work but that's the way it is.

If you want the chemtrail theory to go away you will have to disprove it.

And it would be fairly easy to do won't u agree.
But it's not. And why is that.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Right back at you my friend

reply to post by exiteternity

And it would be fairly easy to do won't u agree.
But it's not. And why is that.

I would have to say because of the internet.

With the internet it is easy to reach many people that haven't heard about this topic before, plus with youtube it is amazing how many people believe anything they see without actually researching the topic.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


Yes it's definitely a challenge. You can count on me being on your side when it comes to the details.
Because I definitely realise how hard it can be regarding this stuff on the Internet. So when it comes to that part you can count on me supporting you.
But once we have gotten rid of the Internet waste, once it has been filtered down, we still have a real issue to discuss.
And trust me when I say I will be the first to dismiss it once it is possible to do so.

reply to post by exiteternity

But once we have gotten rid of the Internet waste, once it has been filtered down, we still have a real issue to discuss.

I have a feeling if the internet wasn't here you wouldn't have this abundance of what I call misinformation concerning this subject.

I say this because you didn't hear about chemtrails until 1996 when the subject of chemtrails began even though contrails(normal and persistent) have been reported as far back as the 1920's.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


To tell u the truth I didn't hear about chemtrails until 2007.

reply to post by exiteternity

To tell u the truth I didn't hear about chemtrails since 2007.

You would be amazed at only recently how many people are just hearing about them.

And again that is where I have a hard time believing chemtrails exist, because with this going on as long as it has you would think someone involved would have came out with verifiable evidence.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


And again.
I would think the same.

But it still doesn't disprove it

reply to post by exiteternity


You'll never be able to disprove them. That's the problem with having to prove a negative. No matter what we do (including samples) it will never be enough. If we take samples, that show nothing, they will always be the wrong trails. The only thing we can do is what we're doing and showing why it doesn't make sense.

exiteternity
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

I take offense to that. What u said doesn't fit to me at all. I think you are Generalizing a bit to much

AFAIK you have not called anyone a shill, so it doesn't apply to you at all

exiteternity
reply to post by network dude

 

That picture doesn't show any chemtrails.
It shows clouds and contrails.
I would appreciate u don't insult my intelligence for no reason and I'm sure I leave enough reason for you already.
But that pic doesn't contain anything close to a chemtrail

edit on 7-10-2013 by exiteternity because: (no reason given)

network dude
reply to post by exiteternity

 

It doesn't have to kill the theory. Having a notion that something may not be what it's advertised is just fine. The problem comes in when someone looks at this

And claims that they are not contrails, but chemtrails, and the fail to explain how they arrived at that conclusion.

None of us that I know of make the claim that chemtrails couldn't exist. Knowing what a contrail is, I think it would be very easy to make a contrail on purpose (then making it a chemtrail) but since it would take lots of weight and cost lots of money, the purpose seems very unlikely.

I was offering the science that explains what everyone sees in the sky. Nothing more, and nothing less.

I am very sorry you took offence to my post. I did not mean to infer YOU believed that, I was pointing out that this is why I come to these threads and try to explain contrails. I hear of people trying to teach their children to fear the fallout from "chemtrails". I don't feel that children should have to worry about anything other than being children. Again, I am sorry if my post offended.

exiteternity
reply to post by network dude

 

That picture doesn't show any chemtrails.
It shows clouds and contrails.
I would appreciate u don't insult my intelligence for no reason and I'm sure I leave enough reason for you already.
But that pic doesn't contain anything close to a chemtrail

edit on 7-10-2013 by exiteternity because: (no reason given)

Good luck not getting angry... I am going to leave this thread now... the thread I started. It's pointless to post here there is a turret of derailers and debunkers whom have such a hard set view that unfortunately they cannot or choose not to have an objective view...

I don't post many threads but following this I think I will give it a miss... The level of abuse that is allowed to be conducted here unabated is frankly atrocious!!

Korg.

reply to post by Korg Trinity

I don't post many threads but following this I think I will give it a miss... The level of abuse that is allowed to be conducted here unabated is frankly atrocious!!

So I take it that you just make accusations without any proof and that is fine, but when called out on them you run away?

Most of the abuse and derailing came from you, and it's funny when your faced with fact you run and complain that everyone is baiting you and abusing you because they ask for evidence that you just could not produce.

Btw you haven't proven chemtrails exist and you contradicted yourself numerous times in your own thread, Take a page from exitetrnity and learn how to have a rational debate and you may get alot farther in your next thread.

Btw chemtrails aren't real and neither is global warming.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


If you think discussing the validity of the existence of chemtrails or of a suitable delivery method for them has no bearing on a thread about what effect chemtrails are having on the climate then it just shows you haven't thought much about it at all. If they don't exist or cannot be delivered they cannot affect the climate can they.

You have shown two delivery methods for SRM devices, one which produces large thick clouds from seawater spraying, and one which proposes releasing tiny particulate matter from aircraft. Neither of these results in chemtrails, maybe saying chemtrails instead of SRM in the first post was your error? Chemtrails are just misidentified contrails with no basis for their existence, SRM is a serious scientific proposal, they are not the same.

I tried having a reasonable discussion with you several times and my last response went ignored four pages ago.

Also to abuse members the way you have and then post complaining about abuse is supremely ironic, well done.