1. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member

    This video will be the new evidence for the Conspiracy buffs . . . their smoking gun . . .???

    The Airline is AeroMexico


    Pilot: Hi
    Hans: Do you speak English?
    Pilot: Sure, what do you need?
    Hans: Okay, just a question, do you know what is a chemtrail?
    Pilot: what?
    Hans: A chemtrail
    Pilot: I do know what a chemtrail is
    Hans: Yeah, and is it true?
    Pilot: Well, er, there's a big debate
    Hans: Yeah...
    Pilot: Are you filming me
    Hans: Maybe (laughs) Okay, now...
    Pilot: I don't want to go on record sir
    Hans: Okay (turns camera away), but, do you believe it ... (inaudible)
    Pilot: Um, well, I don't have enough information ... (inaudible)
    Hans: Oh okay, because I saw a lot of videos on the internet, and it really looks, ah, believable.
    Pilot: Well, it's arguable both ways I think
    Hans: Yeah?
    Pilot: Depends on which side you're on, but
    Hans: Yeah, but what is your personal opinion of it?
    Pilot: I think that there is part of truth.
    Hans: Part of truth, yeah. Yeah, we should investigate, because when it's true imagine so many people they suffer, of this.
    Pilot: Yeah, it's a, necessary evil, as you could say.
    Hans: Yeah, okay, thank you so much,
    Pilot Have a good day sir.
    Hans: You too, thank you.
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 29, 2013
  2. mrfintoil

    mrfintoil Active Member

    Okay, here we have one pilot saying he knows very little about the details, but he knows about the claims.
    The pilot thinks the claims are "part of truth" (did he mean "partly truth"?) but admits he knows very little.

    But when he says "it's a necessary evil", I get the feeling that he is basically just joking about it, not realizing believers will take this at face value.
    A joke backfiring, just like the hoax played on Max Bliss some time ago.

    I mean, regardless of being a joke answer or not, there was no established definition of the word "chemtrails" to begin with. We know the common claim is that the trails are mixed up with chemical compounds that increase persistency, but water is technically a chemical compound too. That would fit the definition of "chemical trail" because contrails are created through a chemical process, except that it's not a deliberate conspiracy but simply a side effect of jet engines in cold air. What exactly is it that the pilot consider to be "part of truth/partly truth"? That they spray viruses and metal grains? That they want to simulate the return of Jesus with Project Blue Beam? Or that aviation companies use cheap fuel that increase exhaust particles? He does not say anything about what exactly would be "part of truth".

    I know Max loves "evidence" such as this, because it allows so much personal interpretation.
    So here is one incredibly vague video of a pilot "coming clean". Let's just get the other million-something pilots to agree that "chemtrails are real" as well.

    And there is a little challenge for Metabunk.
    I'm sure there are, but if we do show him the pictures I bet he's just going to dismiss them as fabrications. Who decides if they are "genuine" or not?

    To bad I've been blocked on Bliss' channel long ago for disagreeing.
  3. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member

  4. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Last edited: Nov 20, 2013
  5. Ross Marsden

    Ross Marsden Senior Member

    Yes, I agree with this.
    First, English is clearly not his first language, so there are shades of meaning as well as not fully appreciating and understanding the thrust of the questions.
    Then there is the reply, "Yeah, it's a, necessary evil, as you could say."
    Again, struggling with the language in the conversational situation.
    I think the "necessary evil" refers to the unavoidable production of contrails, and perhaps acknowledging that they are at worst unsightly.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. scombrid

    scombrid Senior Member

    I would think that a pilot, being somewhat cornered, would be of the mindset to smile, pat the weirdo on the head, and hope that the weirdo moves on without causing a scene.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    That's what I thought he was doing.
  8. cloudspotter

    cloudspotter Senior Member

    It's like 'that guy' who sits next to you on the bus. Your stop can't come soon enough.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. EpsilonVonVehron

    EpsilonVonVehron New Member

    I think the poor bloke is probably referring to contrails and the debate over possible contrail effect on the weather. Obviously something is lost in his English translation.
    I wonder if the guy will get some grief from his employer.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. JRBids

    JRBids Senior Member

    There was a quick look at "that guy" filming at the beginning of the "interview". I can imagine having what looks like a large bearded person cram into the cockpit door and start asking questions.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member

    I wondered the same thing ?
  12. TWCobra

    TWCobra Senior Member

    I doubt he will get any grief from his employer. He was filmed after saying he wasn't to be and he said nothing apart from one ambiguous remark. Almost certainly he was referring to the effects of contrails whilst politely dealing with a paying, deluded customer.
  13. A.G.

    A.G. Member

    Uh-oh. Video taken down. That makes it even more useful for the CT crowd, at least for a while.
  14. justanairlinepilot

    justanairlinepilot Active Member

    give me a break...GAWD
  15. Steve Funk

    Steve Funk Active Member

    It reminds me of a time at the Global March against Chemtrails last summer. The Tea Party guy, Mark Ragosa, was passing out some chemtrails literature to the crowd. When he handed me a leaflet, I said, "You could do a lot more good for the conservative movement if you concentrate on things that are real." He gave me a knowing smile and a thumbs up sign before moving on. If I had filmed that, I could have posted it on You Tube to say "Chemtrail Protest organizer knows it's self serving bunk." More likely, he was just being hypocritically polite to avoid argument.
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    It's back. Please note that it has been edited to remove the part where the pilot asks not to be recorded. Also note that what George lists as "inaudible" is the man saying he will turn off the camera, at about :44.

    And here:

  17. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member

    Chemtrail advocates have so little "real" evidence to hang their beliefs on . . . so they recycle things like this hoping it gets traction . . . I think they even realize this can be interpreted different ways and theirs is rather weak . . .
    • Agree Agree x 2
  18. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    I think they don't realize anything which goes against their confirmation bias.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. George B

    George B Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member

    Their resistance is very high . . . some beliefs go deep into their view of the world . . . hard to change even when contradictory evidence is undeniable . . .
  20. Melbury's Brick

    Melbury's Brick Active Member

    I think the pilot is being polite to someone who's a stranger and possibly also a customer of his employer. Rather like someone you have only just met saying to you "Ain't Justin Bieber great?". You might well say "Oh yes, he's quite talented", rather than "No he's an obnoxious little turd."
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1