I am a Chemtrail Advocate . . . I believe there is an Aerosol Injection Program

[George B]

"The government keeps some secrets therefore my conspiracy theory is valid" seems to be quite common. It isn't uncommon to question a chemtrail vid or weather mod vid, or truther vid on Youtube and have replies come in which I am accused of "loving the government", "shilling for the government", and/or "believing that the government keeps no secrets". It doesn't follow that because I doubt a particular "theory(ies)" that I believe that there are no government secrets but the accusations fly just the same.

Name one conspiracy . . . Which has not been confirmed as true that you endorse. . . .just one. . . .

[George B]

It would certainly save you time.

The thing is you bring a vast amount of evidence to the table, and you think that because the amount of evidence is vast, then that indicates something. You also have some personal intuition that tells you this is correct.

However, if you add together 100 things that are 1% relevant, then it does not add up to something that is 100% relevant. If anything, the multiplicity of weak facts should dilute your case - yet you take each thing as a brick, building your solid tower of evidence to noticeable heights.

But they are not bricks, not suited for building a case. They are, to be polite, handfuls of dust. You think you are building a tower of bricks and steel, but you are building it with dust.

Well, let's allow someone other than the consensus group on this Forum judge. . .

[George B]

You're welcome. I'm proud of my reaction...and stand by it.

You should. . . If you believe strongly in something . . . You need to defend your position. . .

[Mick]

Well, let's allow someone other than the consensus group on this Forum judge. . .

Who? I certainly don't know anyone who would want to wade through your material.

[Noble1965]

You should. . . If you believe strongly in something . . . You need to defend your position. . .

My position is already well defended..

[George B]

My position is already well defended..

According to you and the individuals on this Forum . . .

[Stupid]

I cannot name one conspiracy I believe, which has been not been confirmed.
In other words....I don't believe any hypothesis until it IS confirmed.
That is a principle of this site...only believing what HAS been confirmed, by credible sources.

[George B]

Who? I certainly don't know anyone who would want to wade through your material.

Hmmmmm . . . Seems you don't know anyone that is interested . . . So . . . Do you want me to furnish some people?

[Mick]

Name one conspiracy . . . Which has not been confirmed as true that you endorse. . . .just one. . . .

By "endorse" I take it you mean agree that it is happening, not actually endorse the conspiracy itself

I'll go with Super PAC coordination.

Conspiracies happen all the time. There's nothing at all unexpected about that.

[Edit after reading Stupid's post] I'm basing this not on faith or feeling, but of very strong evidence that the conspiracy exists. It's not been "confirmed", but only in a tentative legal sense.

[George B]

I cannot name one conspiracy I believe, which has been not been confirmed.
In other words....I don't believe any hypothesis until it IS confirmed.
That is a principle of this site...only believing what HAS been confirmed, by credible sources.

Is that precondition you all sign in blood to be part of your group. . . ?

[Noble1965]

According to you and the individuals on this Forum . . .

Really!? You don't think that all of science and logic are on my side!? You have "they have done bad things before"... And I have...I see no evidence that anything is being sprayed.

Sorry, regardless of what you believe. I do have the logical position of the two of us. You just happen to think it's normal to assume and speculate. I don't.

I KNOW it's not...

[Mick]

Hmmmmm . . . Seems you don't know anyone that is interested . . . So . . . Do you want me to furnish some people?

Sure. I'll accept anyone who has never read GLP, Icke, Alex Jones, or ATS. Just some average people.

[George B]

By "endorse" I take it you mean agree that it is happening, not actually endorse the conspiracy itself

I'll go with Super PAC coordination.

Conspiracies happen all the time. There's nothing at all unexpected about that.

Yes . . . Super PAC coordination . . . I am not familiar . . .

[George B]

Sure. I'll accept anyone who has never read GLP, Icke, Alex Jones, or ATS. Just some average people.

Now that is a tall order . . . Anyone I could get would have some knowledge of what you just stated . . . Including everyone on this Forum . . .

[Stupid]

Is that precondition you all sign in blood to be part of your group. . . ?

Please don't assume any kind of pact. I speak freely on my own accord......and on my own study of the material, and the credible sources.

[George B]

Really!? You don't think that all of science and logic are on my side!? You have "they have done bad things before"... And I have...I see no evidence that anything is being sprayed.

Sorry, regardless of what you believe. I do have the logical position of the two of us. You just happen to think it's normal to assume and speculate. I don't.

I KNOW it's not...

It is your right to feel the way you do. . . .as is my right to feel the way I do. . . .it seems however, you deeply resent my position. . . .and I think you would censor me if you could. . . At least that is my perception. . . .

[Mick]

Now that is a tall order . . . Anyone I could get would have some knowledge of what you just stated . . . Including everyone on this Forum . . .

What? That's probably less than 1% of the US population. Almost nobody I know has even heard of those sites.

[George B]

Please don't assume any kind of pact. I speak freely on my own accord......and on my own study of the material, and the credible sources.

"..I don't believe any hypothesis until it IS confirmed.
That is a principle of this site...only believing what HAS been confirmed, by credible sources." . . . Then what does this mean . . . ?

[Noble1965]

It is your right to feel the way you do. . . .as is my right to feel the way I do. . . .it seems however, you deeply resent my position. . . .and I think you would censor me if you could. . . At least that is my perception. . . .

I "resent" the spread of belief as fact...especially when It accuses people of wrongdoing without evidence. "Chemtrails" are witch hunt. Nothing more....

[George B]

What? That's probably less than 1% of the US population. Almost nobody I know has even heard of those sites.

Then you should have no problem in finding someone . . .

[firepilot]

"..I don't believe any hypothesis until it IS confirmed.
That is a principle of this site...only believing what HAS been confirmed, by credible sources." . . . Then what does this mean . . . ?

That in order to be taken seriously, claims require evidence. And the more extreme of a claim, the more evidence that is required.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". I do see the word "evidence", however the words "speculation" and "manipulation" are missing.

[George B]

I "resent" the spread of belief as fact...especially when It accuses people of wrongdoing without evidence. "Chemtrails" are witch hunt. Nothing more....

You must dislike almost everyone with religious belief . . . Many believe their beliefs as fact . . .

[Noble1965]

You must dislike almost everyone with religious belief . . . Many believe their beliefs as fact . . .

I dont dislike them...but I'll admit, I don't like it when they force their beliefs onto me.

You are confusing disliking people...with disliking the spread of beleif as fact.

Yes George, as an atheist... I happen to think that people are entitled to their beliefs...but they had better not tell me I must believe as they do.."or else"....


So?

[George B]

That in order to be taken seriously, claims require evidence. And the more extreme of a claim, the more evidence that is required.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". I do see the word "evidence", however the words "speculation" and "manipulation" are missing.

The Mafia would love to have you on the investigation branch of the FBI. . . Speculation, inference, connecting the dots are critical in any process to discover the truth. . . That is where and what a conspiracy is . . .it is when the investigators become lucky or through hard work and persistence do that they get the big break and turn a conspiracy into a well accepted and believed concept . . .

[Mick]

Then you should have no problem in finding someone . . .

I already said I don't know anyone who would want to wade through your material.

[George B]

I dont dislike them...but I'll admit, I don't like it when they force their beliefs onto me.

You are confusing disliking people...with disliking the spread of beleif as fact.

Yes George, as an atheist... I happen to think that people are entitled to their beliefs...but they had better not tell me I must believe as they do.."or else"....


So?

I have never told you . . .you must believe in CHEMTRAILs or in fact, I have never said that to anyone. . . .

[George B]

I already said I don't know anyone who would want to wade through your material.

Have you asked?

[Mick]

The Mafia would love to have you on the investigation branch of the FBI. . . Speculation, inference, connecting the dots are critical in any process to discover the truth. . . That is where and what a conspiracy is . . .it is when the investigators become lucky or through hard work and persistence do that they get the big break and turn a conspiracy into a well accepted and believed concept . . .

Speculation has a place in investigation. In science we'd call that hypothesizing.

But when you come to court, or to publish your paper, you really need some convincing evidence.

Just because your evidence convinces you, does not mean it is convincing. It needs to convince the average person.

[Noble1965]

I have never told you . . .you must believe in CHEMTRAILs or in fact, I have never said that to anyone. . . .

I never said you did....


Sheesh!

[Mick]

Have you asked?

No, because I know what they will say.

The problem is that you've not even established a reasonable criteria for justifying having a debate.

The only reason a debate has been mooted is that you want one, to debate your personal theory. It's not even mainstream chemtrail theory. Heck, it's not even fringe chemtrail theory. Nobody believes this theory except you.

So why should anyone debate it? One lone guy's personal theory? Nobody I know.

The fact that you can't find anyone outside the conspiracy community to even discuss it, that speaks volumes.

[George B]

Speculation has a place in investigation. In science we'd call that hypothesizing.

But when you come to court, or to publish your paper, you really need some convincing evidence.

Just because your evidence convinces you, does not mean it is convincing. It needs to convince the average person.

I think this is part of the problem . . . You are using the standards of hard science to judge the worthiness and prove-ability of a 'CONSPIRACY' which by definition is speculation, inference, and intuition. . . .the word Conspiracy tells you
that. . . . You can say it is a poor conspiracy and do not believe it but it is still a conspiracy. . . .

[George B]

No, because I know what they will say.

The problem is that you've not even established a reasonable criteria for justifying having a debate.

The only reason a debate has been mooted is that you want one, to debate your personal theory. It's not even mainstream chemtrail theory. Heck, it's not even fringe chemtrail theory. Nobody believes this theory except you.

So why should anyone debate it? One lone guy's personal theory? Nobody I know.

The fact that you can't find anyone outside the conspiracy community to even discuss it, that speaks volumes.

If that is true. . . Why do you have this Forum.? . . .Contrail Science. . . .and why is this particular Thread so active.? . . .there must be some interest. . . .seems obvious. . .

[Mick]

I think this is part of the problem . . . You are using the standards of hard science to judge the worthiness and prove-ability of a 'CONSPIRACY' which by definition is speculation, inference, and intuition. . . .the word Conspiracy tells you
that. . . . You can say it is a poor conspiracy and do not believe it but it is still a conspiracy. . . .

But you are 100% convinced it is true? Based on "speculation, inference, and intuition"?

[Mick]

If that is true. . . Why do you have this Forum.? . . .Contrail Science. . . .and why is this particular Thread so active.? . . .there must be some interest. . . .seems obvious. . .

This forum and contrailscience.com are for debunking more mainstream theories.

This thread is active because debunkers can't help themselves. Ultimately it's going to be unproductive, but like moths to a flame we try to make you see reason. We should probably stop.

There was a quote on another thread that describes what is going on here:

What can skeptics do to counter-act such arguments? In my experience, these are typically intelligent people who have put their efforts into theories that only

could be true, without relying on evidence or skepticism to sort through them. Getting a conspiracy theorist to converse on rational terms is then the objective, supplanting the seed of skeptical doubt the ultimate goal. However, if you run up against the kind of opposition that I have, perhaps you should jettison and try to promote critical thinking to people not so entrenched. Charging headlong into the lion's den is admirable, but dangerously unproductive.

Dangerously unproductive is right.

I quit this thread. Feel free to declare victory.

[George B]

But you are 100% convinced it is true? Based on "speculation, inference, and intuition"?

I am highly confident that my personal definition is true. . . However, could I have been fooled, mislead, connected too many dots . . . Sure . . .but I am convinced enough to challenge the bastions of empiricism!

[Stupid]

Some people feel "alive" because there may be a conspiracy to fight against. Many people relish a "cause".
I see no problem with that.
Most people will feel strongly about their chosen cause, if the information presented to them makes sense.....and it affects their daily lives.
I am one of these people.....but only IF the evidence has merit.
It is the "if"...that needs explaining and convincing......so that the evidence of "if", becomes "it".

[George B]

This forum and contrailscience.com are for debunking more mainstream theories.

This thread is active because debunkers can't help themselves. Ultimately it's going to be unproductive, but like moths to a flame we try to make you see reason. We should probably stop.

There was a quote on another thread that describes what is going on here:

Dangerously unproductive is right.

I quit this thread. Feel free to declare victory.

Sorry to hear that. . . .I suppose if the rest of you declare the same resolution and abandon this Thread I will have to leave. . . .I will wait a while and see. . . .you may vote with the absence of your Posts. . . .

[George B]

Some people feel "alive" because there may be a conspiracy to fight against. Many people relish a "cause".
I see no problem with that.
Most people will feel strongly about their chosen cause, if the information presented to them makes sense.....and it affects their daily lives.
I am one of these people.....but only IF the evidence has merit.
It is the "if"...that needs explaining and convincing......so that the evidence of "if", becomes "it".

Thank you! I feel that is a very honest response. . . .

[Stupid]

2-letter words can represent thousands of ideas.
2 thousand ideas can be held in within 2 words.
....in each instance.....neither is enough.

[George B]

This forum and contrailscience.com are for debunking more mainstream theories.

This thread is active because debunkers can't help themselves. Ultimately it's going to be unproductive, but like moths to a flame we try to make you see reason. We should probably stop.

There was a quote on another thread that describes what is going on here:

Dangerously unproductive is right.

I quit this thread. Feel free to declare victory.

I guess if convincing me to abandon my position was your mission and goal . . . you have failed. . . Very good analysis. . .