Chemtrails

[lightbulbsun88]

Pretty crazy indeed, however, dismissing the validity of this photograph simply because of its origin would be a genetic fallacy.

...the Genetic Fallacy is committed whenever an idea is evaluated based upon irrelevant history. -http://www.fallacyfiles.org/genefall.html

The source of information is far from irrelevant.

 

[Ozymandyus]

The photos are simply evidence that supports the proposition that chemtrails exist. Suppose I took them myself, the burden of proof would be on you to disregard them as fallacious or invalid, not me. So does the origin of the evidence alter the residence of the burden of proof? The burden of proof would be on me if I simply declared- "The government is spraying us with chemicals from aircrafts" but if I were to present a valid argument it would be up to you to debunk my argument, not up to me to argue for my arguments validity without even being countered by an opposing argument.

Without a context the pictures are irrelevant. Those could easily be crop duster planes or chinese cloud seeding planes that they used to try to clear the skies over Beijing before the Olympics. A couple of them might not even be pictures of planes at all, and certainly not of planes that leave contrails of varying density. The fact is some wacky site's word is the only reason you believe that those pictures are of planes are somehow linked to long-lasting contrails - which is where the fallacy ACTUALLY is. You are accepting their claims of what the pictures are - when they are a clearly dubious source.

It's like accepting some hillbillies' shaky camera footage of UFO's when we should all know he is just drunk or hanging some styrofoam plates from a string - Now, if Nasa scientists had the same footage and told me it was a UFO, it would and should make a difference in how you view the evidence. It still shouldn't necessarily be Enough evidence - but it matters.

 

[Zeronix]

Bottom one looks like a fake, same with the middle one but I'm less sure. The top picture looks legit, but given the other two :? Anyway, without knowing what these planes actually sprayed, what's the point in even posting them? We know planes spray chemicals, I even posted a picture of it (a real one). Evidence would be a plane with spraying equipment actually making a chem/contrail in the same picture.

True, the pictures alone are certainly not sufficient evidence, and if you don't find them compelling, take a look at this:

The modified bill to permit 'weather modification' and 'cloud seeding'
The term 'chemtrail' was included in the original bill, but was later removed and replaced with the term 'cloud seeding' because 'chemtrail' sounded too malign.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-517

Germany admits "Clandestine Chemtrails Operations":

http://www.chycho.com/?q=Chemtrails

 

[GoodKat]

somewhat equivocal possibility that the trails contain some sort of mind control agent

Yeh, you've got some screws loose.

 

[Zeronix]

Yeh, you've got some screws loose.

That; would obviously be the more dubious possibility. Unfortunately you have chosen to equivocate the context in an effort to make my proposition, and apparently myself, look completely inane.

 

[GoodKat]

That; would obviously be the more dubious possibility. Unfortunately you have chosen to equivocate the context in an effort to make my proposition, and apparently myself, look completely inane.

You're the one who chose to use the words "somewhat equivocal possibility".

 

[Th1sWasATriumph]

It's time for me to enter the fray.

I cannot believe someone in this board is seriously considering such nonsense. Your argument seems to run like this: "Things were different when I were a nipper, therefore IT'S THE GUVAHMENT". Technology in planes has changed, the climate has changed. Your proof is gossamer-thin at best, laughably unsupported at worst.

As for those photos . . . eh? So a photo of a plane with some barrels in it and a couple of weird nozzles on the side proves chemtrails? Does that mean that a photo of a car with a gun in it proves all cars have guns and wander the streets shooting up old people?

Given the unbelievably tenuous nature both of your argument, your "evidence" and your logical leaps, I'm quite happy to assume that there's nothing to worry about. It's not up to us to fathom the links your mind has concocted between "those contrails look weird" and "THE MAN IS SPRAYING US".

You asked us what we thought, and the answer has been a consistent and unified headdesk. To continue to argue the truth of your assertions means you have no interest in our opinions at all, rather a personal agenda. Which I find pretty distasteful.

 

[Finger]

Conspiracy theories are the new magic. When faced with something supposedly unexplainable, its easier for the paranoid to chop it up to an intelligent agency that operates outside the law and is out to get us.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

The photos are simply evidence that supports the proposition that chemtrails exist. Suppose I took them myself, the burden of proof would be on you to disregard them as fallacious or invalid, not me. So does the origin of the evidence alter the residence of the burden of proof? The burden of proof would be on me if I simply declared- "The government is spraying us with chemicals from aircrafts" but if I were to present a valid argument it would be up to you to debunk my argument, not up to me to argue for my arguments validity without even being countered by an opposing argument.

No. You have no evidence, no legitimate position to debunk.

 

[Josan]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the simple fact that even if the government were in on a huge conspiracy trying to murder us in our sleep and mind control our children, chem trails would be a fucking stupid way to do it.

If you are spreading some "mind control agent" you would surely use the water or food supply? Or spread it airborne in places where there are many people in condensed spaces like public train stations or something like that. Or even better, spread it in homeopathic medication!

When it comes to climate procedres, surely we would have heard of them? And even if they wanted to keep it hush hush, if you want you're new and probably expensive gasses to be particularly useful, you would spread them much higher in the atmosphere.

There is no substance that would really be smart to spread from any commercial airliner for any reason....

 

[Josan]

I also heard this podcast from Skeptoid.com on chemtrails this other day, it was quite good as most of his podcasts are.

http://www.podiobooks.com/title/skeptoid

You can download his first 50 podcasts from this page (thanks to ImprobableJoe for showing it to me), chemtrails is number 27 if you scroll down far enough.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the simple fact that even if the government were in on a huge conspiracy trying to murder us in our sleep and mind control our children, chem trails would be a fucking stupid way to do it.

It is a conspiracy theory... it is a "fucking stupid way to do it" by definition!

Every conspiracy theory I can think of offhand assumes a group with extreme power... so much power that there's no reason for them to engage in a conspiracy at all. If you control the government, and the banks, and the media, why would you even bother with chemtrails? It would be like Bill Gates shoplifting batteries at the local 7-11.

 

[Pulsar]

Congratulations, that's a tanker plane :roll:

 

[darthrender2010]

Congratulations, that's a tanker plane :roll:

lols

Also, the second picture looks like it's shopped and the third may not even be an aircraft since we can only see a nozzle attached to a white surface. It could be a giant's douche filled with unicorn spermicide.

 

[Zeronix]

I must have misconceived the purpose of this board. I was under the impression that it exists to address the contingency of conspiracy theories and present all supporting evidence so we can discuss whether it is completely absurd and why, or argue for its possible validity. Simply because I am the OP doesn't mean I actually believe that the government is spraying us with chemicals, and I shouldn't be accused of craziness because I proposed the possibility. It seems that if the theory is to scary or insane, people automatticaly dismiss it as unequivocally false.

 

[lightbulbsun88]

I must have misconceived the purpose of this board. I was under the impression that it exists to address the contingency of conspiracy theories and present all supporting evidence so we can discuss whether it is completely absurd and why, or argue for its possible validity. Simply because I am the OP doesn't mean I actually believe that the government is spraying us with chemicals, and I shouldn't be accused of craziness because I proposed the possibility. It seems that if the theory is to scary or insane, people automatticaly dismiss it as unequivocally false.

You are an idiot. You've had 2 pages to provide evidence in support of this conspiracy. All you could provide were three out of context photos, one of which has already been confirmed as a Tanker plane. Let alone the source of your photos is from a batshit insane website that's only trying to "confirm" their deluded preconceived notions about the government. You have not provided any valid argument for chemtrails nor have you been objective about it. Just because someone claims something and acts like a paranoid lunatic over it doesn't mean what they claim has any plausibility to it. It simply means they're batshit insane.

 

[Ozymandyus]

You are an idiot. You've had 2 pages to provide evidence in support of this conspiracy. All you could provide were three out of context photos, one of which has already been confirmed as a Tanker plane. Let alone the source of your photos is from a batshit insane website that's only trying to "confirm" their deluded preconceived notions about the government. You have not provided any valid argument for chemtrails nor have you been objective about it. Just because someone claims something and acts like a paranoid lunatic over it doesn't mean what they claim has any plausibility to it. It simply means they're batshit insane.

Honestly this is a little harsh. He also tried to provide a couple links to other sources and a u.s. senate bill. I admit it's not at all compelling, but to call him an idiot is not very fair. In your quoted bit he admitted he was unconvinced by the evidence as well, but just wanted to discuss it and hear any other bits of evidence.

Don't be a jerk.

 

[Pulsar]

I have to correct myself, it's not a tanker. The barrels are ballast tanks used during test flights of new airplanes:
http://www.x-plane.com/adventures/the long room.html

 

[Th1sWasATriumph]

I must have misconceived the purpose of this board. I was under the impression that it exists to address the contingency of conspiracy theories and present all supporting evidence so we can discuss whether it is completely absurd and why, or argue for its possible validity. Simply because I am the OP doesn't mean I actually believe that the government is spraying us with chemicals, and I shouldn't be accused of craziness because I proposed the possibility. It seems that if the theory is to scary or insane, people automatticaly dismiss it as unequivocally false.

This board doesn't exist to give time to theories that cannot be proved, especially when raised by someone who clearly has their own agenda.

There is no good evidence for your chemtrail theory, and a great deal of evidence against it. The conclusion is what any reasonable people would expect. And yet you're insulted? Please, find us some evidence and we'll talk. Until then, quit trying to promote something untrue and then claiming the moral high ground because we're being "unreasonable". We're being completely reasonable. You made a claim, and we refuted.

Next.

 

[Aught3]

The modified bill to permit 'weather modification' and 'cloud seeding'
The term 'chemtrail' was included in the original bill, but was later removed and replaced with the term 'cloud seeding' because 'chemtrail' sounded too malign.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtex ... l=s109-517

Like you said this is a bill about cloud seeding, not chemtrails. Cloud seeding has been done for years from either the ground or plane. This bill is advocating research into the effects of cloud seeding.

Germany admits "Clandestine Chemtrails Operations":

http://www.chycho.com/?q=Chemtrails

I don't speak German and the subtitles of the movie suck, but it seems like cloud seeding again. The chemtrail conspiracy theory does not refer to aerial spraying, crop dusting, or cloud seeding. It is about the government purposefully dropping chemical on the people. As someone pointed out the water supply is a much more effective way to achieve this.

The barrels are ballast tanks used during test flights of new airplanes

Nice catch