1. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    This article on Geoengineeringwatch.org shows two "letters" that claim to be from a "chemtrail pilot". These letters appear to be an obvious hoax, and yet they are being treated as potentially genuine. Yet the letters contain ludicrous descriptions that make no sense at all.
    Some people interested in debunking chemtrails think that doing a hoax like this is a good way of illustrating to people that they should not believe everything they read. I disagree, and I think that, when the hoax is revealed, it simply makes people think their theories are more correct, as why else would people be trying to discredit them?

    So I'd like to state for the record that:

    1) This looks exactly like a hoax
    2) I don't know who is responsible for it
    3) I think such hoaxes are a bad idea, and they do not help debunking, which should be open and honest.

    I've posted a comment under the story, so Wigington is aware of this:
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2014
    • Agree Agree x 11
    • Winner Winner x 2
  2. Auldy

    Auldy Senior Member

    To quote Shaggy, "It wasn't me"
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    Unfortunately, ALL debunking is taken as evidence that their various theories are correct.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. Rico

    Rico Active Member

    I had a look at the article. Sounds completely like a Sci-Fi sketch. And really, it's not the first time pilots have been intentionally doing this. There are people out there who do find enjoyment when others unknowingly flock to their stories. Also, if this were true, and there was a pilot trying to "whistle blow" some chemtrail operation out there, he needs only state the lat and long coordinates of those "unnamed" islands, and then the coverup would be over.

    I also can't find your comment Mick. I guess they are quick to delete words from supershills such as yourself ;).
     
  5. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    Agree...with this particular topic (the non-existent so-called "chem"trails) it seems that while possibly well-intentioned as a "spoof" of the believers, it is counter-productive since they ('believers') will latch on to, and spread it.

    It's also a bit 'rude', poking fun...and that rarely is productive in educating.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. Rico

    Rico Active Member

    I read an article recently about a meteorologist who got so fed up talking to chemtrail believers that he started to have a little fun by posting hoaxes on his facebook page just so conspiracy theorists would fall for it. I probably shouldn't post the article, since it's a tad impolite, but I suspect that people who do this have really gone past their well-intentions, and are doing it just for the purpose of trolling for personal amusement.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Your reply & mine aren't there yet.....
     
  8. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    At some point, it's easy to conclude that the CTers are either terminally gullible idiots or trolling themselves, so anything goes.
     
  9. Balance

    Balance Senior Member


    Ya think it'll work this time? :D
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  10. Lisa P

    Lisa P Active Member

    It worked for me in the past in that I would come to Metabunk to see what they had to say about a new CT post, to see if it was real or not. I would see that CT admins would delete stuff as the original comment would be posted here. I hate dishonesty and closed convo's. I left a lot of chemtrail groups because of the false stuff some posted, when I questioned the admins in PM's they would say 'they mean well'. No sorry a lie is a lie. So for people undecided or fence sitters that come here to see this side of the story it helps.
     
    • Like Like x 9
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    This is great!! Seems it's possible for intelligent people to realize when they are being 'lied to'....YOU took that leap!!!

    Congrats!!!!
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    This is in the comments section:

    There is no way to combat the continuing skewed comments like this. I'm quite sure this person did't just receive "threats" as the only responses on pilot forums. In fact, I doubt she was threatened at all. This sort of person is SO convinced of the dastardly nature of the "spraying program" that they either just make up stories from whole cloth or vastly exaggerate them in order to 'fit in' with the believer crowd and make what they consider to be a "positive contribution". I daresay if that person was challenged to cite links to any supposed "threats", she wouldn't even respond because it didn't actually happen at ALL the way she says.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  13. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    My comment has gone from "awaiting moderation" to not appearing at all - presumably deleted.

    @Mick West - yours hasn't appeared yet - is it still awaiting moderation?
     
  14. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    No, looks like it was deleted. Meanwhile, we have comments approved like:
    Clearly not a good forum for discussing such things.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
  15. cloudspotter

    cloudspotter Senior Member

    I was reading this last night and wondered if Indigo Skyfold was meant to be some sort of clue that this is a hoax
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Strawman

    Strawman Active Member

    So Dane is creating an atmosphere in which people get so worked up about chemtrails that they consider pilots murderers, which are up for execution. And anything questioning the narrative behind it will be deleted. Good thing when someone finally follows up and kills a pilot (or a scientist), they can always claim it's a government attempt to discredit their movement. They will never stand up to what they're doing. On the other hand, with comments like the above, their responsibility will be patently obvious.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  17. Efftup

    Efftup Senior Member

    Well maybe you understand the TRUTH about folding the sky if you are an indigo child.

    Strawman is right. If anyone does go and kill a pilot, it will be on the heads of people like Dane Wiggington. but they will NEVER take responsibility for their own actions
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  18. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Moderator Staff Member

    Surely there must be some legal action that can be taken against Dane and his website? I know there is no law against lying, but he talks about named individuals (eg David Keith) and blatantly spreads misinformation about them. If this isn't libel then I don't know what is:

    http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/confronting-geoengineer-david-keith/



    From the "open letter", which originates from James Hodgkiss but is reproduced on Dane's site:



    The bolded part is a complete fabrication. It comes from what Stephen Colbert said in an interview, conflating low-altitude sulphuric acid emissions with stratospheric aerosol spraying:

     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    I'm confused. Isn't Keith saying that implementing his proposal would kill 10,000 MORE people than die now? He is comparing it with existing emissions, but not conflating them? Isn't it part of his REAL proposal that people would die, due to the "spraying" he proposes?
     
  20. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    yes. he is saying people will die. which is why he really doesnt want to do it.

    It's not really fair to judge based on a TV interview like that. They wouldnt begin spraying unless global warming was killing (going to kill ) alot more than 10k a year. Or at least that's how i took the colbert interview.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. Rico

    Rico Active Member

    Probably the individuals themselves (i.e., David Keith) are in the best position to take legal action. Since Keith is Canadian, it might be an expensive lawsuit though, but he would probably win regardless, since burden of proof would be a non-issue. I'm actually kind of curious now as to whether or not Mr. Keith is aware of how much defamation he gets behind his back. It would probably be a good idea to write him a letter.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. Hevach

    Hevach Senior Member

    He does say there are better ways, like "stop burning stuff for fuel" and that this kind of option is really only to punt it down the field - we'll still have to stop burning, we just might be able to put it off a few more years.

    The irony there, really, even taking that bit in the context the CTs want us to, it still hurts their claim. What chemicals is he talking about using? No alluminum, no barium, none of the usual suspects. None of the ones they claim are being sprayed, nor any of the ones in their much touted tests. Just plain old fashioned acid rain pollution.

    Academics in general, particularly scientists, seem to frown on taking legal action for defamation. Maybe because it's so often by crackpots to either silence them (see the whole thing a few years ago with chiropractors suing a UK scientist who suggested that maybe spinal adjustment isn't a valid alternative to chemotherapy), or to claim they are silencing crackpots (see basically every over-unity or cold fusion claim that jumps to "mainstream science is trying to silence me!" when the question, "so how does it work?" comes up).
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
    • Like Like x 1
  23. MikeC

    MikeC Closed Account

    Yes - "serious" scientists tend to avoid giving any sort of platform to kooks - hence Dawkins won't debate with creationists - much to their chagrin!
     
  24. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    From his book:
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
  25. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    Right. Good to know. Colbert, of course, is interested in creating comedy and/or drama and/or sensationalism, so the "kill 10,000 people" was what he emphasized.
     
  26. Classy site you guys run here.
     
  27. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    ...says the guy that passes out red Xs to everyone who doesn't immediately swallow whatever Bird's peddling...
     
    • Agree Agree x 7
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  28. I disagree with a lot of things on this site. Isn't that okay?
     
  29. Is there any proof this is a hoax?
     
  30. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    If by "hoax" you mean a belief in so-called "chem"trails? Yes. Science that explains contrails is the proof.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  31. Yeah a lot of people wanna sue Dane for spreading the truth.
     
  32. Is it made up? Is this completely fabricated? And what are the motives behind this?
     
  33. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    No, Dane is a bit like (though not to the level) of Alex Jones. They both (apparently, allegedly) lie in order to promote themselves, and get attention.

    Many call this "Free Speech". So, could be protected from litigation as a result....until someone gets hurt. There ARE laws in the country that prohibit the promotion and inciting to violence.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  34. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    Some of it is. There are a number of truly sincere (if "under-educated") people who 'believe', and reject ALL science and factual evidence to the contrary.

    There is a thread (here) which discusses the original "motive" behind the promotion of the meme of "chem"trails, back in the 1990s. It was a plan to sell unnecessary "cures" for non-existent illnesses.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  35. I have never seen Dane advocate violence. Is that what you are implying? Is Dane promoting violence?
     
  36. NoParty

    NoParty Senior Member

    Honest disagreement is one thing.
    You just throw crap up on the wall...when others point out that it doesn't hold water,
    you don't really "disagree"...
    you throw up a big red X,
    run away from addressing legitimate objections
    and then pop-up (Whack-A-Mole style) a few days later, with a new handful of crap to throw at the wall.
    Which you also won't actually discuss.
    That may pass for intelligent discourse in your world...Me? I've had about enough of it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  37. Weird. I'm talking about this interview. Why would this man make all this up? This information sounds very classified.
     
  38. Listen man, I have a life. I can't be addressing the flock of comments I get on every single thread. POST even. Your little group here that just swarms me makes it really hard. Sorry!
     
  39. Ray Von Geezer

    Ray Von Geezer Senior Member

    I've found my time management skills have improved no end with age. Not falling for everything I see on YouTube and then feeling the need to post it here must save me about 3 or 4 hours a day.

    Ray Von
     
    • Funny Funny x 5
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  40. That's great man. I'm happy for you.