Chemtrails debunked.

pfurey101

Brown Bomber and IrelandSpirit, you lads are gas - ignore everything else that is being said and focus on bit that suits your theories

The pollution may get you in the end - but not the chemtrails.......:rolleyes:

True conspiracists and to the cause you are!

Cheers

IrelandSpirit

pfurey101 wrote: »

Brown Bomber and IrelandSpirit, you lads are gas - ignore everything else that is being said and focus on bit that suits your theories

The pollution may get you in the end - but not the chemtrails.......:rolleyes:

True conspiracists and to the cause you are!

Cheers

Ignoring the facts? Not at all! Do you really think the various polluting chemicals caused by the burning of fuel, blocking out natural sunlight is healthy? On any level?

You wouldn't put up with some wackjob spraying you and your family in the face with the same polluting chemicals, reducing your natural sunlight by as much as 30%, so why do you think it's acceptable when planes do it? Day in, day out.

Personally, the only thing I want to be sprayed with when I'm out walking the hills is my girlfriend's **** when she *** and that goes for blocking out natural sunlight as well, she has a nice ****. That's acceptable, anything else I have the right to take serious issue with! The right and duty. As do you.

Brown Bomber

pfurey101 wrote: »

Brown Bomber and IrelandSpirit, you lads are gas - ignore everything else that is being said and focus on bit that suits your theories

The pollution may get you in the end - but not the chemtrails.......:rolleyes:

True conspiracists and to the cause you are!

Cheers

It doesn't appear that you have taken in a single word I have said. a) I don't have any specific theories on this, as I've said. b) I don't believe I have ignored anything, by all means point out something that I have and I will be only to happy to unignore it.


On the other hand I am still waiting for the answers to two simple and direct questions I asked of you, so for you to be making such shallow accusations which you are actually guilty of yourself is a touch rich.


I suspect you will ignore this post or deflect again but here are the questions again:



I would be interested in your answer to the following questions:

Do you believe government(s) (that is western, democratic) etc would be too moral to test weapons in secret on their population?

If not, and I can't imagine you answering Yes to the previous question, even Nagasaki and Hiroshima were experiments, how would you best disguise aerial spraying of the skies?

Terry Gilliam Beard

Brown Bomber wrote: »

It doesn't appear that you have taken in a single word I have said. a) I don't have any specific theories on this, as I've said. b) I don't believe I have ignored anything, by all means point out something that I have and I will be only to happy to unignore it.


On the other hand I am still waiting for the answers to two simple and direct questions I asked of you, so for you to be making such shallow accusations which you are actually guilty of yourself is a touch rich.


I suspect you will ignore this post or deflect again but here are the questions again:



I would be interested in your answer to the following questions:

Do you believe government(s) (that is western, democratic) etc would be too moral to test weapons in secret on their population?

If not, and I can't imagine you answering Yes to the previous question, even Nagasaki and Hiroshima were experiments, how would you best disguise aerial spraying of the skies?

BB, you are not in a good position to complain about people ignoring posts. You ignored the whole of my previous post bar the first word, 'many'.

You are trying to conflate a secret nuclear research programme carried out during a war with the intention of attacking an enemy with a nebulous conspiracy carried on by hundreds of thousands of people all over the world against THEMSELVES, THEIR FAMILIES, and THEIR FRIENDS.

You have ignored all the common-sense questions I put to you. You are speaking out of both sides of your mouth here, ignoring the ridiculousness of the Chemtrail conspiracy rather than clearly stating that you either believe it is happening or it is not, possibly just for the sake of an argument.

So, even if you ignore all the other questions I put to you - answer this one: do you think there is a massive global chemtrail conspiracy going on?

Ignore this question if you choose, but if you do, please stop bleating about people ignoring your posts.

IrelandSpirit

"As reported by the Swedish paper Katrineholms Kuriren, Hagberg, the first major political leader to come forward on the issue, has openly admitted that these unusual cloud trails, which fail to dissipate like normal contrails do, are actually a toxic mix of chemicals, viruses, and metals that she has collectively referred to as “chemtrails.”

http://consciouslifenews.com/swedish-official-admits-toxic-chemtrails-real-wild-conspiracy-theory-video-article/#

IrelandSpirit

Malta beginning to realise that they too are being fumigated like cockroaches: “The Maltese population is owed an explanation as to how the trail formations like those seen recently in the sky, could take place.”

The Gaia Foundation announced that it will be lodging a formal request with the Transport and the Environment Authorities to investigate the incidents and to ask the airlines flying over and around Maltese airspace to provide “all the necessary information” to establish the nature and reason for the these cloud formations."

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/gaia-foundation-calls-for-more-transparency-on-cloud-formations/

MrPudding

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

No, I wasn't a kid and there were plenty of planes, I was in my thirties when we first noticed the 'white lines' as we called them, 1998, living in the country.

I was a kid in the late 70s and was fasinated by contrails. Lots of them. If you were in your 30s in the late 90s and only started to notice contrails that is indicative of someone who is extremly unobservant or possibly partially blind, rather than a massive world wide conspiracy.

MrP

Daithi 1

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/gaia-foundation-calls-for-more-transparency-on-cloud-formations/

Geo watch ? you have got to be joking.

IrelandSpirit

MrPudding wrote: »

I was a kid in the late 70s and was fasinated by contrails. Lots of them. If you were in your 30s in the late 90s and only started to notice contrails that is indicative of someone who is extremly unobservant or possibly partially blind, rather than a massive world wide conspiracy.

MrP

Yawn ... "As reported by the Swedish paper Katrineholms Kuriren, Hagberg, the first major political leader to come forward on the issue, has openly admitted that these unusual cloud trails, which fail to dissipate like normal contrails do, are actually a toxic mix of chemicals, viruses, and metals that she has collectively referred to as “chemtrails.”


http://consciouslifenews.com/swedish-official-admits-toxic-chemtrails-real-wild-conspiracy-theory-video-article/#

IrelandSpirit

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Geo watch ? you have got to be joking.

Oh, you think it's so lovely being a human-cockroach? enjoy your spray sky, sucker -- that's your world, you can only hope your kids (presuming you're still fertile or anybody will have you) will forgive your dumb-arss ...

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3092/2616190281_3ba5ac4d2a_z.jpg

Daithi 1

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Yawn ... "As reported by the Swedish paper Katrineholms Kuriren, Hagberg, the first major political leader to come forward on the issue, has openly admitted that these unusual cloud trails, which fail to dissipate like normal contrails do, are actually a toxic mix of chemicals, viruses, and metals that she has collectively referred to as “chemtrails.”


http://consciouslifenews.com/swedish-official-admits-toxic-chemtrails-real-wild-conspiracy-theory-video-article/#

Yes, even the odd person in politics falls for hoax conspiracy theories.

Terry Gilliam Beard

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Yes, even the odd person in politics falls for hoax conspiracy theories.

What? I thought that politicians were all trustworthy geniuses??

whatstherush

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Yawn ... "As reported by the Swedish paper Katrineholms Kuriren, Hagberg, the first major political leader to come forward on the issue, has openly admitted that these unusual cloud trails, which fail to dissipate like normal contrails do, are actually a toxic mix of chemicals, viruses, and metals that she has collectively referred to as “chemtrails.”


http://consciouslifenews.com/swedish-official-admits-toxic-chemtrails-real-wild-conspiracy-theory-video-article/#

Couple of things here, the Green parties group leader for the city council of Vingaker, with a population 4,282, is a "Major Political leader":D. Forgive me if I don't get out the camera for a selfie with her.

Secondly she didn't "admit" to anything, She gave here opinion on it. If she was to admit to some thing, she would have to have some insider knowledge of what she was admitting to. Here is the original article, translated into English, maybe you can find what she is admitting to.

IrelandSpirit

lol ... I don't think any of you wierdos quite get it, insult me all you like -- I left Ireland (aka The Republic of Taytostan) years ago now, and tbh, it was the best thing I did, and it was because of narrow-minded self-centred bigoted coonts as yourselves that I left, dumbass **** who demonstrably don't even know the difference between a natural cloud and a plume of toxic pollution. lol Carry on, freaks, let the world know what 'Irish' really means. Morons, no wonder we're the laughingstock of the planet xx

Terry Gilliam Beard

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

lol ... I don't think any of you wierdos quite get it, insult me all you like -- I left Ireland (aka The Republic of Taytostan) years ago now, and tbh, it was the best thing I did, and it was because of narrow-minded self-centred bigoted coonts as yourselves that I left, dumbass **** who demonstrably don't even know the difference between a natural cloud and a plume of toxic pollution. lol Carry on, freaks, let the world know what 'Irish' really means. Morons, no wonder we're the laughingstock of the planet xx

Do you find that people laugh at 'the Irish' wherever YOU go? Because I think I might know why.

rosser44

Trying to get yourself banned now spirit? Please don't go, I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. Oh I miss rtdh. ........

IrelandSpirit

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

Do you find that people laugh at 'the Irish' wherever YOU go? Because I think I might know why.

No, they don't. They laugh at people like you and I spend half my time trying to undo the damage, majority of humans (rightly) believe people as yourselves are thick as **** -- and how can you blame them, when you can't even tell the difference between a natural cloud and a plume of POLLUTION? lol

rosser44

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

lol ... I don't think any of you wierdos quite get it, insult me all you like -- I left Ireland (aka The Republic of Taytostan) years ago now, and tbh, it was the best thing I did, and it was because of narrow-minded self-centred bigoted coonts as yourselves that I left, dumbass **** who demonstrably don't even know the difference between a natural cloud and a plume of toxic pollution. lol Carry on, freaks, let the world know what 'Irish' really means. Morons, no wonder we're the laughingstock of the planet xx

A post with hipocracy dripping from every corner. Stay classy Irelandspirit

Terry Gilliam Beard

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

No, they don't. They laugh at people like you and I spend half my time trying to undo the damage, majority of humans (rightly) believe people as yourselves are thick as **** -- and how can you blame them, when you can't even tell the difference between a natural cloud and a plume of POLLUTION? lol

Um...with all due respect (i.e. none) you know nothing about me.

rosser44

Pray tell, what are these "chemicals" that these planes are spewing out? Can you name them? With your obvious great knowledge of clouds can you tell us how they differ from contrails or naturally occuring clouds????

Please enlighten this bigoted Irish c**t, as you so nicely called me.

Daithi 1

Aluminium Barium and strontium. oh and red blood cells :rolleyes:

Daithi 1

You can test the soil anywhere in the world and it will test positive for aluminium. That's not because the Earths crust naturally contains almost 10% aluminium and that's not why monsanto are trying to create an aluminium resistant seed, it's because of the chemjets. They filter aluminium from our water supply, gather it up, put it on millions of jets and dump it on our heads.

IrelandSpirit

rosser44 wrote: »

Trying to get yourself banned now spirit? Please don't go, I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. Oh I miss rtdh. ........

Ban me, for what? Telling the truth? Go ahead, won't be the first time. I don't give a toss, you just carry on calling toxic pollution 'clouds', those funny-looking quadrangular, grid-like clouds in the sky, so pretty, hey?

Terry Gilliam Beard

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Ban me, for what? Telling the truth? Go ahead, won't be the first time. I don't give a toss, you just carry on calling toxic pollution 'clouds', those funny-looking quadrangular, grid-like clouds in the sky, so pretty, hey?

Anyone want to join me in a wager that this poster has experience of mental health problems?

rosser44

Daithi 1 wrote: »

You can test the soil anywhere in the world and it will test positive for aluminium. That's not because the Earths crust naturally contains almost 10% aluminium and that's not why monsanto are trying to create an aluminium resistant seed, it's because of the chemjets. They filter aluminium from our water supply, gather it up, put it on millions of jets and dump it on our heads.

And dont forget about evil strontium, killing people all over the world!!!!!! Just ignore the fact that its the 15th most common element on the planet :rolleyes:

Jesus come on IrelandSpirit, you're not even trying yet. Post some more articles, try a homeopothy website next amybe??

Penn

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Ban me, for what? Telling the truth?

Nah, Personal Abuse. That's what I've banned you for.

rosser44

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Ban me, for what? Telling the truth? Go ahead, won't be the first time. I don't give a toss, you just carry on calling toxic pollution 'clouds', those funny-looking quadrangular, grid-like clouds in the sky, so pretty, hey?

You are aggressive and insulting because you know that your false theories hold no water and cannot stand up to scientific scruitney so you just attack people and post no peer reviewed proof, because there is none.

D-, must try harder

Daithi 1

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

no wonder we're the laughingstock of the planet xx

Just you, and your title doesnt help the rest of us.

rosser44

Ah Penn, he was just starting to be fun

Daithi 1

Chemtrails are just a decoy for what's really happening.

rosser44

Daithi 1 wrote: »

Chemtrails are just a decoy for what's really happening.

Brown Bomber

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

BB, you are not in a good position to complain about people ignoring posts. You ignored the whole of my previous post bar the first word, 'many'.

I addressed everything that was relevant to your argument.

Correct me where I am wrong here but your argument is based on the false premise that it is impossible for hundreds of thousands of people to keep a secret?

The Manhattan project proves you wrong. End of discussion. There was no point addressing the rest of your points which were based on false premise.

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

You are trying to conflate a secret nuclear research programme carried out during a war with the intention of attacking an enemy with a nebulous conspiracy carried on by hundreds of thousands of people all over the world against THEMSELVES, THEIR FAMILIES, and THEIR FRIENDS.

... So nuclear weapons could never be used against the people involved with the Manhattan Project cor their , THEIR FAMILIES, THEIR FRIENDS?

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

You have ignored all the common-sense questions I put to you.

No. In fact it's the opposite, you aren't paying attention to what I say, or even what you say. You thanked me for clarifying my position...which makes your following comment really confusing...

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

You are speaking out of both sides of your mouth here, ignoring the ridiculousness of the Chemtrail conspiracy rather than clearly stating that you either believe it is happening or it is not, possibly just for the sake of an argument.

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

So, even if you ignore all the other questions I put to you - answer this one: do you think there is a massive global chemtrail conspiracy going on?

Again, I'd refer you to my previous statement, which you actually responded to. Or to save you the trouble I can restate - NO! What I am not claiming, unlike you, is that it is absolutely impossible that there is some form of military testing ongoing in the skies.

I don't accept your argument that if something resembles something the it must be what it resembles and that is the end of it. Would you drink a glass of white spirits because it looks an awful like water?

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

Ignore this question if you choose, but if you do, please stop bleating about people ignoring your posts.

Again, I haven't ignored anything.

Ask me anything. Since this Furey chap/girl has bottled it would you care to give me a reason to stop my "bleating"?

I would be interested in your answer to the following questions:

Do you believe government(s) (that is western, democratic) etc would be too moral to test weapons in secret on their population?

If not, and I can't imagine you answering Yes to the previous question, even Nagasaki and Hiroshima were experiments, how would you best disguise aerial spraying of the skies?

Terry Gilliam Beard

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Ask me anything.

Do you think there is a massive global 'chemtrail' conspiracy happening for some nefarious reason, as claimed by the chemtrail conspiracy enthusiasts?

I think you are saying 'no'.

Right - I am not claiming that it is impossible that hundreds of thousands of people can work on a secret project for a limited period of time during total war developing a weapon to attack an enemy bent on their destruction.

I am claiming that it is impossible that hundreds of thousands of people could work on a project all over the world spraying themselves, their families and friends with some noxious substance for an indefinite period, with the evil leadership expecting this to remain a secret indefinitely.

Daithi 1

If fairness, we hadn't got internet back then and several million people screaming "Manhattan project", while it was occurring as they do with chemtrails. If they had it would have drawn attention to it and end it. Not to mention that people keeping that secret were not falling victim to their own secrecy, and their families as with the chemtrail theory.

rosser44

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

Do you think there is a massive global 'chemtrail' conspiracy happening for some nefarious reason, as claimed by the chemtrail conspiracy enthusiasts?

Obtuse unclear answer in 3....2....1.....

Brown Bomber

rosser44 wrote: »

Obtuse unclear answer in 3....2....1.....

Is this unclear to you? If it is it's not really my problem. it was 60 posts ago,.

I apologise if I wasn't clear enough before, I had thought that it was implied. I personally consider the idea of "chemtrails" or what I understand to be chemtrails to be impractical essentially for reasons of logistics.

rosser44

The question asked can be answered with a simple yes or no, not a quote and a paragraph in which you do not give a concise and unabiguous reply. you give yourself an out with the "or what i believe..." etc.


Yes or No

Brown Bomber

Terry Gilliam Beard wrote: »

Do you think there is a massive global 'chemtrail' conspiracy happening for some nefarious reason, as claimed by the chemtrail conspiracy enthusiasts?

I think you are saying 'no'.

Right - I am not claiming that it is impossible that hundreds of thousands of people can work on a secret project for a limited period of time during total war developing a weapon to attack an enemy bent on their destruction.

I am claiming that it is impossible that hundreds of thousands of people could work on a project all over the world spraying themselves, their families and friends with some noxious substance for an indefinite period, with the evil leadership expecting this to remain a secret indefinitely.

So it is actually possible that hundreds of thousands of people involved in a secret military program could actually keep their work from getting out, right?

Brown Bomber

rosser44 wrote: »

The question asked can be answered with a simple yes or no, not a quote and a paragraph in which you do not give a concise and unabiguous reply. you give yourself an out with the "or what i believe..." etc.


Yes or No

Do you not know what "impractical" means?

impractical
ɪmˈpraktɪk(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: impractical

1. 1.
   not adapted for use or action; not sensible or realistic.
   "impractical high heels"
   synonyms:unsuitable, not sensible, inappropriate, unserviceable More"she wore impractical white ankle boots"
   
   
   
   antonyms:practical, sensible
   
   
   • (of a person) not skilled or interested in doing practical work.
     "Paul was impractical and dreamy"
     synonyms:unrealistic, idealistic, head-in-the-clouds, out of touch with reality, romantic, dreamy, fanciful, starry-eyed, visionary, quixotic; Moreinformalairy-fairy
     "an unworldly and impractical scholar"
     
     
     
     antonyms:practical, down to earth
     
     
   
   
   
   
2. 2.
   N. Amer.
   impossible to do; impracticable.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

Now that that is cleared up, would you like to be the third person to ignore two simple questions?

I would be interested in your answer to the following questions:

Do you believe government(s) (that is western, democratic) etc would be too moral to test weapons in secret on their population?

If not, and I can't imagine you answering Yes to the previous question, even Nagasaki and Hiroshima were experiments, how would you best disguise aerial spraying of the skies?

Terry Gilliam Beard

Brown Bomber wrote: »

So it is actually possible that hundreds of thousands of people involved in a secret military program could keep actually keep their work from getting out, right?

We saw it happen once. Whether it could happen even in those special circumstances today is rather debatable (Wikileaks, anyone?).

Is there any known example in world history of a chemtrail-type conspiracy? A single one?

rosser44

yes or no

pfurey101

We are all entitled to believe what we want, but I prefer the facts.

1. There are bog standard pollutants emitted from aircraft engines, it is a by product of the fuel used. The world knows that.
2. There are also bog standard pollutants emitted from any vehicular combustion engine. The world knows that.
3. Contrails are made up of water vapour and will contain ONLY those pollutants as mentioned in #1
4. Contrails depend on atmospheric conditions at all flight levels. Aer Arran turboprops can fly over Dublin somedays at 22,000 and leave a solid trail. B747's can fly over at 41,000 feet and leave no trail.
5. Contrails can also be small, broken or very long and dissipate from a few miles to a few 100 metres behind the aircraft.
6. Contrails can also last a few hours dependent on atmospheric conditions - at all flight levels.
7. I have worked in aircraft maintenance for 31 years and NEVER once saw nor heard anything in any technical circles about the legitimacy on additives that make up the longer lasting trails.
9. I handled fuel sample reports as the fuel has to have very specific requirements and it is essential there are NO contanimants.
10. THERE ARE NO POISONIOUS CHEMICALS ADDED TO AVAIATION FUEL
11. If "THEY" wanted to poison the 6.7 billion of us - perhaps they would be better off NOT leaving a big white mark saying "POISON BE HERE"


Chemtrail advocates used to say it was all contrails, then they say it is only specific US military and now they say it is only those big white and very visible contrails - the ones that contain exhaust pollutants known to all.

Believe what you want - it is very hard to convince conspiracy theorists of anything else.

Daithi 1

Conspiracy theorists are one thing but chemtrail believers are quite another, the latter are like a religious cult, they will listen to no-one.

King Mob

Brown Bomber wrote: »

If not, and I can't imagine you answering Yes to the previous question, even Nagasaki and Hiroshima were experiments, how would you best disguise aerial spraying of the skies?

Your question is rather flawed on a few levels.

First, believers in chemtrails like Ireland Spirit don't actually think the governments are disguising anything. The believe that they are blatantly conducting the spraying for all to see and it's the sheeple's stupidity that allows the government to do this.

Second, if they were going to disguise it, then why not disguise it as what Ireland Spirit was accusing them of: that they are spraying stuff to fight global warming? They wouldn't particularly care about people complaining about the environmental impact and it would be a useful PR boost. And bonus if it's their actual goal.
What they wouldn't do is spray in such an "obvious" way and offer no explanation.

And third, they wouldn't spray in such an obvious way at all in the first place. If their goal is to poison or mind control everyone, it doesn't make sense that they would do so in such a way where the whole thing is blown open by anyone looking up. And this is ignoring the physical problems of spraying people from such a height.
It would be far far easier for them to just add the chemicals to water or staple foods.
If they are spraying to affect the environment, then refer to the second point.

So unfortunately, the answer you want is not the right one.
The conspiracy theory is not in any way reasonable or well thought out.

Brown Bomber

rosser44 wrote: »

yes or no

Would it kill you to read the posts? This is on the last page from here, post 233.


"NO!"


Now...about those two simple questions you've ducked....

Brown Bomber

King Mob wrote: »

Your question is rather flawed on a few levels.

First, believers in chemtrails like Ireland Spirit don't actually think the governments are disguising anything. The believe that they are blatantly conducting the spraying for all to see and it's the sheeple's stupidity that allows the government to do this.

Second, if they were going to disguise it, then why not disguise it as what Ireland Spirit was accusing them of: that they are spraying stuff to fight global warming? They wouldn't particularly care about people complaining about the environmental impact and it would be a useful PR boost. And bonus if it's their actual goal.
What they wouldn't do is spray in such an "obvious" way and offer no explanation.

And third, they wouldn't spray in such an obvious way at all in the first place. If their goal is to poison or mind control everyone, it doesn't make sense that they would do so in such a way where the whole thing is blown open by anyone looking up. And this is ignoring the physical problems of spraying people from such a height.
It would be far far easier for them to just add the chemicals to water or staple foods.
If they are spraying to affect the environment, then refer to the second point.

So unfortunately, the answer you want is not the right one.
The conspiracy theory is not in any way reasonable or well thought out.

I'm not my brothers keeper nor have I mentioned any of that inane stuff you've just brought up for some reason.


Would you like to be the fourth person to ignore a simple question?


You have a limitless supply of resources at your disposal and want to experiment the effects of spraying something from aeroplanes on the population or environment. How would you best disguise this process?

King Mob

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I'm not my brothers keeper nor have I mentioned any of that inane stuff you've just brought up for some reason.

I bring up the inane stuff because the conspiracy theory you are trying to defend as reasonable or rational has this inane stuff in it.
The people proposing the theory are including the inane stuff in an attempt to try and explain away the very obvious flaws in the conspiracy.

What point are you trying to make with your question if not that the conspiracy theory is somehow plausible or reasonable?

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Would you like to be the fourth person to ignore a simple question?


You have a limitless supply of resources at your disposal and want to experiment the effects of spraying something from aeroplanes on the population or environment. How would you best disguise this process?

I did answer it.

Second, if they were going to disguise it, then why not disguise it as what Ireland Spirit was accusing them of: that they are spraying stuff to fight global warming?

And I further clarified that the way the theory is purposing they do it is in fact the stupidest way and the exact thing I would not do were I in charge of the plot.

So why do you not believe in this conspiracy theory? What about it makes the plot implausible if it's not the points that pfurey101 and Terry Gilliam Beard have outlined?

Brown Bomber

King Mob wrote: »

I bring up the inane stuff because the conspiracy theory you are trying to defend as reasonable or rational has this inane stuff in it.
The people proposing the theory are including the inane stuff in an attempt to try and explain away the very obvious flaws in the conspiracy.

What point are you trying to make with your question if not that the conspiracy theory is somehow plausible or reasonable?

I did answer it.


And I further clarified that the way the theory is purposing they do it is in fact the stupidest way and the exact thing I would not do were I in charge of the plot.

So why do you not believe in this conspiracy theory? What about it makes the plot implausible if it's not the points that pfurey101 and Terry Gilliam Beard have outlined?

This is like pulling teeth. To reiterate again - I cannot speak for anyone else, I have my own opinions, which I have freely expressed.


While you may be fooling yourself that you have answered the question, you very clearly haven't.

King Mob

Brown Bomber wrote: »

This is like pulling teeth. To reiterate again - I cannot speak for anyone else, I have my own opinions, which I have freely expressed.

What point are you trying to make with your question?
How would you answer it?

Brown Bomber wrote: »

While you may be fooling yourself that you have answered the question, you very clearly haven't.

I have.

Second, if they were going to disguise it, then why not disguise it as what Ireland Spirit was accusing them of: that they are spraying stuff to fight global warming?

If I were in charge of such a conspiracy and I had to spray things from a certain height to experiment on people (ignoring that this would be a very ineffective way to do so.) I would disguise the operation as a an effort to combat global warming. I would claim that the chemicals and chemtrails released by the planes were to reflect more sunlight to stave off the greenhouse effect.

What I would not do is what the actual conspiracy theory claims and just keep everyone quiet and leave the evidence to blow the whole thing wide open because this would be a. ineffectual and b. impossible.

pfurey101

Jaysus - I've forgotten the question!