Chemtrails?

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by Eryiedes

 

And what makes you think those are new videos?

I never said they were.
You want to believe they don't exist...that's your right.
You want me to agree with you?
Absolutely not.

-Amitaba-

AlienBuddha
Because a lot of people, especially on this website, think they are chemtrails. And if you notice, numerous times I said chemtrails/contrails. I also made the subject of the post "Chemtrails?" with a question mark; hence, I'm asking a question.

I'm trying to get people's takes on this phenomenon I've never seen before.

What you CAN tell so far from the responces is that those who don't believe in them are pretty rabid in their stance and don't think anyone should think otherwise.
Meanwhile those who seem to purport their existance seem to prefer you decide for yourself.
Pretty telling, no?

-Amitaba-

reply to post by Eryiedes

You want to believe they don't exist...that's your right.
You want me to agree with you?

Try to find some new evidence and you may have something, but with those videos you have nothing.

I really don't care if you agree with me or not that is all up to you, but don't try to convince others with warn out old videos.

reply to post by Eryiedes

What you CAN tell so far from the responces is that those who don't believe in them are pretty rabid in their stance and don't think anyone should think otherwise.

We prefer to call it deying ignorance..

Eryiedes

AlienBuddha
Because a lot of people, especially on this website, think they are chemtrails. And if you notice, numerous times I said chemtrails/contrails. I also made the subject of the post "Chemtrails?" with a question mark; hence, I'm asking a question.

I'm trying to get people's takes on this phenomenon I've never seen before.

What you CAN tell so far from the responces is that those who don't believe in them are pretty rabid in their stance and don't think anyone should think otherwise.
Meanwhile those who seem to purport their existance seem to prefer you decide for yourself.
Pretty telling, no?

-Amitaba-

I don't know. Considering those videos you posted, it seems the "chemtrail" side of the issue could be rabid, also.

Many of us who are trying to educate others on what a contrail is and how they form hate to see people being misled and lied to by the crowd who pushes the chemtrail agenda.

Actually, I just hate to see people being misled in general, or hate to see people who have an incorrect understanding of science and nature. I'm a big proponent of ATS's motto, which is "Deny Ignorance". There is a lot of "Ignorance" to deny out there -- contrails is just one example. I see people who don't understand what a contrail is or how a contrail forms (and how a contrail can persist), and I want to explain to them how things work.

tsurfer2000h
I really don't care if you agree with me or not that is all up to you, but don't try to convince others with warn out old videos.

To the OP they are not old.
He even said as much and I posted them for him and others who have not seen it.
You say you've seen em all?
Fine.
Some haven't.
Badgering and demeaning others however is not very becoming and doesn't mean you are right.
It does make you come across as a VERY defensive and somewhat insulting...which is once more...your right to do.
Just doesn't solve or establish anything other than your position.

-Amitaba-

Soylent Green Is People

I don't know. Considering those videos you posted, it seems the "chemtrail" side of the issue could be rabid, also.

False dichotomy. No one is claiming you are stupid or wasting your time for watching them except those attacking the idea that I posted them at all.

Actually, I just hate to see people being misled in general. I'm a big proponent of ATS's motto, which is "Deny Ignorance". There is a lot of "Ignorance" to deny out there -- contrails is just one example. I see people who don't understand what a contrail is or how a contrail forms (and how a contrail can persist), and I want to explain to them how things work.

Then you accomplish that by allowing others to decide for themselves.
To do otherwise means incinuating others are too stupid to know better or come to their own conclusions.
This does not "deny ignorance".
It is in fact doing others a grave disservice.

-Amitaba-

Eryiedes
...Then you accomplish that by allowing others to decide for themselves.
To do otherwise means incinuating others are too stupid to know better or come to their own conclusions.
This does not "deny ignorance".
It is in fact doing others a grave disservice.

-Amitaba-

As long as the evidence being presented is done so in an honest manner.

For example, that Bill Gates and Eugenics video you posted certainly needed to be called out in the way it twisted facts and presented innuendo as if they were facts.

Soylent Green Is People
For example, that Bill Gates and Eugenics video you posted certainly needed to be called out in the way it twisted facts and presented innuendo as if they were facts.

Then we disagree.
Case closed.

-Amitaba-

Eryiedes

Soylent Green Is People
For example, that Bill Gates and Eugenics video you posted certainly needed to be called out in the way it twisted facts and presented innuendo as if they were facts.

Then we disagree.
Case closed.

-Amitaba-

Well, maybe the case is closed for you, but I will still try to help people learn things, and help them separate fact from fiction. For example...when someone posts something false such as:

"Contrails can't persist. Therefore, persistent trails are always chemtrails"

I'm not just going to sit back and hope someone researches the facts of contrails on their own in an attempt to verify this and realize the statement above is not the truth. I will instead present the science behind how contrails work to show that contrails CAN in fact persist for hours. I will give them the tools to make up their own minds, rather than getting mislead by disinformation.

What I present will be backed up by science. The idea that "Persistent trails are always chemtrails" is backed up by nothing. A person would need to blindly believe that persistent trails are chemtrails. People can learn the science of a contrail to make their own decision, rather than blindly believing anything.

reply to post by Eryiedes

Badgering and demeaning others however doesn't is not very becoming and doesn't mean you as right.
It does make you come across as a VERY defensive and somewhat insulting...which is once more...your right to do.

Sorry if I am coming off that way it wasn't my intentions.

tsurfer2000h
Sorry if I am coming off that way it wasn't my intentions.

No need to appologize.
We are all friends here...at least in theory.

-Amitaba-

reply to post by Eryiedes

We are all friends here...at least in theory.

Why not were all looking fir the same thing...The Truth.

Eryiedes


What you CAN tell so far from the responces is that those who don't believe in them are pretty rabid in their stance and don't think anyone should think otherwise.
Meanwhile those who seem to purport their existance seem to prefer you decide for yourself.
Pretty telling, no?

-Amitaba-

I think I gave a calm and reasoned reply to the OP. Can you point out what was wrong with it?

reply to post by AlienBuddha


Did the link I offered answer your question?

reply to post by mrthumpy


Likewise I offered a link to a thread and said "see what you think". This somehow means I am telling the OP what to think.

My request for clarification has been ignored.

mrthumpy

I think I gave a calm and reasoned reply to the OP. Can you point out what was wrong with it?

You can be pretty sure I wasn't refering to you then.

-Amitaba-

reply to post by AlienBuddha


Did you look at the thread? Did it give you any thoughts on your own observation?

Eryiedes
Then you accomplish that by allowing others to decide for themselves.
To do otherwise means incinuating others are too stupid to know better or come to their own conclusions.
This does not "deny ignorance".
It is in fact doing others a grave disservice.

-Amitaba-

The difference in the approach of many of us who are trying to educate others as to what contrails really are compared to the approach of those who assert that those trails we see are really chemtrails is that the chemtrail proponents usually provide no evidence to support their claims about what those trails in the sky are (the trails we see in the OP).

A person would need to accept their claims of that those white trails are chemtrails on blind faith. Chemtrail proponents provide nothing that explains how those chemicals could hang in the sky and spread out, or how enough those chemicals could all fit in a plane to be able to be spread for hundreds of miles.

On the other hand, those who are trying to educate others about the nature of contrails can provide the science needed to explain contrails. There is no need for blind faith. They can make up their own minds based on the science.

So one side wants a person to make up their mind based simply on "believe us when we say those are chemtrails", while the contrail side provides the tools to understand how a contrail forms -- so no blind belief is required.

Eryiedes

mrthumpy

I think I gave a calm and reasoned reply to the OP. Can you point out what was wrong with it?

You can be pretty sure I wasn't refering to you then.

-Amitaba-

It seems most of the responses (almost all, actually) have been civil. 'Aloysius of Gaul' may have gotten a little carried away (just a little -- Sorry Aloysius), but it wasn't too bad.