***ATTENTION ALL MEMBERS *** Regarding Those TankerEnemy Chemtrail Videos

Just because someone sets up a clonedbutslightlyaltered domain & then posts graphics which you all come in and shout out about in order to get web content from annoying (to you) sites banned from ATS means little to me. I need more substance. All you're really doing is making the whole thing (ATS) (in a psyop kind of way) even more unreal than it already was. Please clear this point up for me as well so that we can all get off this slippery slope.

reply to post by MALBOSIA

Isn't HOAX a little strong of a word as true as it may be, there is NO possible way for either side of the debate could PROVE either side?

Actually there is, because Zaphod shows in the OP how and why he is considered a hoaxer.

reply to post by MALBOSIA


In this case, yes I can say that he is hoaxing. You can easily prove that he is lying in the video, even without listening to the original video.

These are the same flap fairings, on a different aircraft. You can clearly see that they are solid, and designed to move with the flaps, and don't have nozzles on them. But in the TankerEnemy video, you can clearly see where he says that they are nozzles used to spray.

reply to post by luxordelphi


It was clearly laid out in the opening post. Any video from the user TankerEnemy is a Hoax, and will be dealt with accordingly.

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

Actually there is, because Zaphod shows in the OP how and why he is considered a hoaxer.

Zaphod58
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

In this case, yes I can say that he is hoaxing. You can easily prove that he is lying in the video, even without listening to the original video.

I wasn't trying to defend this particular video and It was already stated by Crakeur that this is no place to debate the video's validity, this thread is an announcement. Maybe my inquiry should also be left to another thread as well; however, my question is more about in what taste these threads are dealt with.

Hoax, or 'HOAX' is a pretty powerful statement. It leaves no room for reconsideration of things that may not be understood only for the moment. Again, I am making no reference to the video in this thread.

HOAX is a very absolute term that a Jedi might attribute to a Sith. And where is the line drawn? I just tried to draw an opinion from reference to Sci-fi literature.

'Not Suitable For ATS' to me is a more fair and balanced classification because the TRUTH is that ATS staff chose not agree with it so it is not suitable for THEIR site. And that is fair. This is a privately owned site.

HOAX gives an opinion of "fact" to the reader before they had a chance to read or view the material themselves and come to their own opinion. And that too is fine if your goal is to slant the opinions of readers that come to YOUR site for opinions. There appears to be nothing criminal about acquiring resources that can be used to convince people to listen to them rather than seek opinions for themselves. It is common practice in any media that does not report to public office.

If ATS wants to be seen as a fair and balanced environment to inform and debate, Ignoring topics that do not fit with the opinions of those that control this site is not going to allow that to happen. Readers can figure it out for themselves.

I hope ATS isn't trying to save us from our own opinions... that would be so cliche.

Just my humble opinion

reply to post by MALBOSIA


Hoax simply states that the source may not be the most reliable of sources. We're not telling you that you can't discuss it, or what to think. We're simply saying that we have evidence that the source is known to be less than reliable lets say. That's all.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I really despise hoaxers. They're like spoiled ass children with nothing better to do.

Zaphod58
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

Hoax simply states that the source may not be the most reliable of sources.

That be a "POSSIBLE HOAX", and I could get behind that for sure. It is like saying "tread carefully, BS meter reads high on this one." Some wack job stories can go on for a couple pages before anyone with some sense or knowledge on the subject weighs in.

We're simply saying that we have evidence that the source is known to be less than reliable lets say. That's all.

Now that is what I am trying to get at. Although I respect how hard this site is on any information posted and that is why I come here, 'HOAX' to me seems a little high and mighty for a bunch of amature enthusiasts. Even if you had credentials in a certain field it has not been verified to the reader that is in fact true nor are you under oath. It is impossible for you to have evidence. You BELIEVE You have evidence that gives you a reason to believe.... That's all. "HOAX" implies that you have PROVEN your evidence and this site has NOT proven it's evidence. If this site claims to have proven evidence....

reply to post by MALBOSIA


In the cases of auto-HOAX sources, there IS proof that they are hoaxing. Such as TankerEnemy, and Sorcha Faal. If we're not sure, we don't move it to HOAX, or we try to prove that they are. If we can't prove it, to a level that satisfies the Staff, it doesn't get moved. It's that simple.

In this particular case, I DO have the credentials to say that TankerEnemy is hoaxing, and be certain of it. Not everyone on here is an "amateur enthusiast". I know several members on here that have a lot of experience in some fields. Enough that they could be called as expert witnesses required.

reply to post by MALBOSIA


I just want to state that when I first posted in this thread I was not intending to change the opinions of ATS staff. It was just an opinion, so however this dialog ends, I was never expecting ATS to change my mind or vice-versa. It was just a thought and I admit I am terrible at holding my tongue sometimes.

Zaphod58
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

In the cases of auto-HOAX sources, there IS proof that they are hoaxing. Such as TankerEnemy, and Sorcha Faal. If we're not sure, we don't move it to HOAX, or we try to prove that they are. If we can't prove it, to a level that satisfies the Staff, it doesn't get moved. It's that simple.

In this particular case, I DO have the credentials to say that TankerEnemy is hoaxing, and be certain of it. Not everyone on here is an "amateur enthusiast". I know several members on here that have a lot of experience in some fields. Enough that they could be called as expert witnesses required.

edit on 11/11/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

Oh boy. My friend this is no place for you to wave you and your friends credentials. I will never take your word for it and I would never ask you to try and convince me. I can figure out if you know what you are talking about on my own.

The court of law states facts. Scientific review states facts. to use absolute terms like 'proof' ,'evidence' in an amature venue like this gives as much credence as....

You know what? lets agree to disagree.

reply to post by Zaphod58


How about this video, then? It's not from "Tanker Enemy" but it is showing a wing-mounted fairing-nozzle combination. Would this be ok?

Chemtrail Nozzle in Wing Hinge Fairing?

What about this site? I'm not sure because it used the word tanker although I know for sure that this plane exists because it was used for the oil spill in the Gulf.

Supertanker Services, Inc.

luxordelphi
reply to post by Zaphod58

 

How about this video, then? It's not from "Tanker Enemy" but it is showing a wing-mounted fairing-nozzle combination. Would this be ok?

Chemtrail Nozzle in Wing Hinge Fairing?

fuel dumping

What about this site? I'm not sure because it used the word tanker although I know for sure that this plane exists because it was used for the oil spill in the Gulf.

Supertanker Services, Inc.

AFAIK this aircraft was not used for the gulf oil spill, but it certainly does exist.

What's your point - that all supposed chemtrail videos are hoaxes?

reply to post by luxordelphi


Let me make this perfectly clear. You can discuss any video, or website you want. However, any video sourced to the YouTube user TankerEnemy will go into the HOAX forum.

reply to post by MALBOSIA


A proven hoax is not a possible hoax. "Amateur Enthusiasts" make up only part of our membership, we also have Masters Degree level engineers, pilots, scientists, physicists, and brain surgeons here on ATS.

Every one of them agree this video channel is bollocks. I'm sorry if it's your friend's channel, or, if your world view compels you to believe in this tripe, but we don't and our disbelief is based on FACTS.



Springer...

Springer
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

A proven hoax is not a possible hoax. "Amateur Enthusiasts" make up only part of our membership, we also have Masters Degree level engineers, pilots, scientists, physicists, and brain surgeons here on ATS.

Springer...

Lol, hilarious.
I agree with you, in that the whole chemtrails scenario is poppycock,
regardless of any videos on the you tube

Zaphod58
Upon reviewing certain videos by the YouTube user TankerEnemy, the Admin and Staff have made the decision that going forward, any thread that is started using these videos will automatically be placed into the HOAX forum, and any reply using these videos will be removed.

The reason for this comes from the following video(one of many similar videos):

In this video you can clearly see TankerEnemy pointing out several "nozzles" and "spraying equipment" on the aircraft.

Now, for the original video:

In the original you can clearly hear the crew filming making jokes about "spraying" and saying "I have to put this on YouTube.

At the 0:15 mark in the TankerEnemy video, when he highlights the "nozzles", what he is pointing to are actually the pieces sticking down under the wing. They're aerodynamic fairings on the bottom of the flap, and they are solid, with no way for anything to be sprayed through them.

Based on this, and other videos that have been shown to be hoaxes by this person, we will be implementing this policy immediately.

Thank you.

edit on 10/30/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

You call that hard evidence enough for this kind of action??

I think you have managed to rise to the ranks of moderator to discredit this very subject just as you and all your buddies have continuously!

There is no evidence in the second video that states this is not chemtrails!!

Even the talking states "look at the spray coming off the wings"!!!

Even if this was the original video which I have not seen any evidence to suggest... who is to say that the soundtrack has not been edited?

In fact when I get back to the studio I will make my own soundtrack to this video and post it to show you how easily it can be done!

If this is really going to be used as the be all and end all of this video then I call ATS out... Because that is DEFO not enough evidence to debunk this video!!!

Korg.

Springer
reply to post by MALBOSIA

 

A proven hoax is not a possible hoax. "Amateur Enthusiasts" make up only part of our membership, we also have Masters Degree level engineers, pilots, scientists, physicists, and brain surgeons here on ATS.

Every one of them agree this video channel is bollocks. I'm sorry if it's your friend's channel, or, if your world view compels you to believe in this tripe, but we don't and our disbelief is based on FACTS.

Springer...

I do respect you Springer as an Owner of this more than succesfull .com..... however there are no facts that can debunk the Chemtrail hypothosis. Yes you can attempt to debunk individual videos or pieces of evidence but there is nothing anyone can state that could put the whole issue to bed so to speak.

So are we left with ATS won't allow discussion of this or that because the owner or staff don't believe in that subject??

I sincerely hope not because then that would turn ATS into a non freedom of expression site, which is what has always drawn me to ATS.

The person whom posted this thread is known to be a chemtrail debunker.... making him a mod then allowing him the power to remove some form of evidence from discussion is just down right wrong!

It would be the same if you were to allow a 911 inside job debunker mod status, then they moved to remove some piece of 911 evidence.. however shaky that evidence is... it's just wrong!

Surely an open mind is what ATS is about?? Sure Deny Ignorance is the moto... but is denying the validity of something without concrete evidence in itself an action born of ignorance??

I could create a counter video and alter the soundtrack and stand as an expert in my field for and it stand as evidence yes..... but is it conclusive evidence... well only an investigation of the evidence can tell you that.

So I call for an investigation of this so called original video, an investigation into how a known chemtrail debunker could be allowed the power to make such a move without detailing all the evidence and ultimately an investigation into whether we the members of ATS are truly free to post our postulations!

A very disappointed,

Korg.

Springer
A proven hoax is not a possible hoax. "Amateur Enthusiasts" make up only part of our membership, we also have Masters Degree level engineers, pilots, scientists, physicists, and brain surgeons here on ATS.

And the news is chock full of these credentialed geniuses being caught in frauds and lies. In fact, it's darn near a certainty if they are in government.

Even a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day. Chemtrails are real enough and if this chemtrail site is 90% wrong, he's still 10% right. In the daily propaganda battle, anything that harms the bad guys is good news.

Bad call ATS.

the pieces sticking down under the wing. They're aerodynamic fairings on the bottom of the flap, and they are solid, with no way for anything to be sprayed through them.

This is a false statement:
I am a Aircraft mechanic and those so called solid pieces you reference are not solid but are hollow covers for the hydraulic flap actuators.
They can be used to pipe aerosol spraying.. YOU FAIL !! But keep pushing the ATS agenda