Advice for the amateur enthusiast debunker?

[MikeC]

I am in awe of your persistant and polite efforts regarding chemtrails!

However in the wider scheme of looniness, for those of us who are more amateur enthusast debunkers, the volume is just so much - any time one starts espousing any one aspect of logic one gets assailed by pretty much every other conspiracy theory going and one rapidly runs out of "off the top of my head" points to refute them.

At which point the loonies declare victory of course!

So how should one approach the maddening crowds?

(not that I expect you personally to be the font of all wisdom in this matter - but if we could get a discussion going that generates some advice and approaches it would be good)

Cheers

Mike

 

[Mick West]

Sticking on topic is a good strategy. The chemtrail crowd invariable ask my opinion on 9/11, and I (usually) politely decline, saying I want to stick to discussing contrails.

Get them to say what they think is happening. Get them to make some specific claims, rather than just "some things happened that I find suspicious". Try to stick to one topic until you reach mutual agreement on that topic. Identify the actual bone of contention - often it's a miscomprehension on one side.

Be polite. Otherwise they start to focus on that. Don't give them that opportunity.

 

[Mr. Suntour]

Agreed Mick, stay on topic and be polite. The key with "chemtrails" (or any discussion really) is staying on topic and not allowing the discussion to drift in another, sometimes broader, direction. Once 9/11 is allowed, you might end up addressing three or four different conspiracy theories, and we all know how exhausting it can be to try putting out fire after fire after fire etc....

 

[Mick West]

Sorry I've had a little spam in this forum. On of the challenges of the modern age is trying to discern the difference between information, entertainment, and advertising.

Alex Jone is an interesting melange there.

 

[Leifer]

I have tried...

I have tried to display the use-fullness of science, here in a baracade of fact..
Do you trust formally trained scientists?
I don't know if I am doing a good job of relieving suspicion.....debunking.

 

[Mick West]

DavidIcke.Com is perhaps not the best place to post such a question, as Icke's entire world-view revolves around the world being not as it is commonly perceived, which makes most scientists liars automatically.

However I think that their rejection of formally trained scientists is reflected in a still significant percentage of the American population, closely tied to anti-intellectualism. The term anti-science, on the other hand, seems more limited to an actual intellectual disparaging of the scientific method, more akin to philosophy than anything practical.

 

[Cairenn]

First, I would like to say hello and thanks for setting up a site where we can learn to me more effective.

I have been active the BP FaceBook site dealing with the Macondo well blow out. There seem to be a group of conspiracy theorists, radicals and even scammers that posting a lot of mis information. In fact, I found this site while looking for info to debunk the 'continued spraying of Corexit" (often accompanied with pictures of chem-trails).

I'm afraid that many of us have made mistakes in dealing with the 'true believers'.

I hope I can cease those and be more helpful. But how do you handle those folks that refuse to accept anything you post?

 

[Mick West]

Well, there's two approaches. Firstly you can accept that you are never going to get them to engage in meaningful discussion, and then simply use them indirectly to illustrate to others how the most vocal elements are often the ones with the biggest mental blocks. Keep on topic, and keep the topic narrow. If you keep bringing up a very reasonable point, and they keep ignoring it, then it just discredits the rest of their "arguments".

Secondly, if you really want to get them to change their minds about something, you have to use a wedge approach. Keep the focus as narrow as possible, on as simple a topic as possible, and invite them the demonstrate some very small point, something that they should be able to demonstrate, if their theory is true. Allow, for the sake of argument, various other of their claims, and then pick one small think that is bunk, and keep on that one small thing in various ways until they address it.

Recognize also that for them to actually respond to your question, it might come up that they don't actually understand some basic facts about the topic, or they might not know some basic points of science or mathematics. Avoid making them feel bad about this, but instead simplify it as much as possible to let them learn for themselves the various facts.

Example: Chemtrailers claim that contrails can't last very long. The obvious response is that contrails are clouds, so they last as long as clouds do. The point to focus on is "why can't contrails last as long as clouds?" The issues that might be revealed are that the chemtrailer actually never realized that contrails are clouds, or they never made the connection somehow - perhaps they have not even though what clouds are made of. In their mind clouds are just clouds, and contrails are exhaust gasses. Try to figure out what their mental model is, and where the gaps are. Then either fill in the gaps, or work around them.

 

[MikeC]

I am enjoying asking them for "Actual evidence" that chemtrails exist (for example) - and pointing out that their say so, "common sense", What in the world are they spraying, etc., all fall short.

I mostly do not say that chemtrails do not exist - I say I have seen no verifiable evidence that they do, and a great deal of verifiable evidence that what are being said to be chemtrails are actually bog-standard contrails, so why should I believe they are anything else.

Of course I get heaps of YT spam in reply.....but they are pretty easy to ask the same question about - where is the actual evidence?

 

[Chemtrail Kook]

TIPS fo the DEBUNKING YOUNG JEDI...

I have a few tips ... advice on how to proceed on the quest...

Go to the store - buy a 12 pack of Diet Coke - drink it all for a nice starter dose of Aspartame... after all it's good for you - just ask Rumsfeld...
Next - buy a Jumbo pack of any Aspartame laced gum - so you can put a little pinch between the cheek and gum when the DC wears off...
Then - Brush your teeth 2x per day with the latest flavor of Fluoride toothpaste - don't bother reading the warning label regarding calling Poison Control Center...
Now - go drink some tap water - 8 glasses per day - but make sure you call the local authorities and confirm they are adding the yummy Sodium Fluoride to the mix...

When you get depressed - slam some Prozac or any of the assorted pharma cocktails available today...
Get ALL your shots - especially the ones with Thermisol Mercury based preservative - and get the kids too so they can grow up brain dead and autistic...

Watch lots of TV so you get the latest buzz words and talking points from the corporate fascist media - don't forget Idol and Dancing with the Stars - and remember to vote...
Play lots of fantasy football and other completely useless time sucks...

Put lots of money in the bank - paper money - and watch it slowly disappear... just for kicks.

DO NOT - under any circumstances do ANY of the following because you will definitely corrupt your young and fertile aspartame laced mind...
Eat any organic foods - only GMO - lick any residual Monsanto Round Up off as an appetizer...
Read about the US Constitution
Read the active ingredients list of Rat Poison
Look up at the tick tack toe skies
Ask anyone about building Seven - it did not happen remember...
Study metallurgy and learn about steel girder melting point temperature and the history of steel buildings imploding due to fire - oops - no history -sorry bout that...
If a veteran - recall the oath you took - or try to understand what it means...
Visit the Chemtrails Map Website

That should do it - you will be PERFECT - and soon you will be snatching the pebble from the hand young grasshopper.

Peace

Kook

 

[Mick West]

I don't suppose you have any verifiable, statistically sound evidence to back up any of your suggestions?

For example, if they have been poisoning us for decades, then why has mortality been decreasing for decades? Is there any verifiable evidence of decrease in health? Or just anecdotes?

And if there is such evidence, why don't the people like yourself get it organized in one place, so you can show it to the world?

 

[Chemtrail Kook]

You ask this question "For example, if they have been poisoning us for decades, then why has mortality been decreasing for decades?"

Well - it hasn't. Look at cancer rates / alheizmer rates / autism rates. Not rocket science.

Kook

If you want me to produce scientific journals so you can sit and study in your cubicle - I don't have time at the moment to entertain such a task. The data is there - this took 5 minutes... all the time I have now:

http://www.diseaseproof.com/archive...ates-will-skyrocket-in-the-next-20-years.html
http://www.preventcancer.com/losing/nci/manipulates.htm
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18236173

http://www.pediatricservices.com/prof/prof-11.htm
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=95
http://blog.autismspeaks.org/2010/1...ader-and-as-such-the-prevalence-seems-larger/

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a.../03/dementia-rates-to-double-in-20-years.aspx
http://barbfeick.com/healthinformation/alzheimers.htm

Peace

 

[Mick West]

Your first article says that breast cancer will increase, but simply because obesity is increasing. Perhaps you'd like to pick the one article you think best supports your case?

The bottom line is that cancer rates on average have fallen, as they have done for decades.

http://www.cdc.gov/Features/dsCancerAnnualReport/

And if chemtrails are causing an increase in Alzheimers, then why is the Alzheimers death rate in North Dakota (40.4/100000) over four times that of New York (8.8/100000)?

http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=63&cat=2&sub=20&yr=18&typ=3&sort=a

 

[Leifer]

http://www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2008/r081202.htm

BTW....I will look into it, but I beleive that ailments like Asthma are seen as a "rise" in incidence, only
because the techniques used to diagnose the disease are more widely available than ever before, population increases means more people are being reported as "diagnosed", as well as the trend to put a name to an ailment.

And when looking at lung cancer rates, tobacco usage is the primary factor, in the statics. For example, many smokers of the 1960's are just now being diagnosed as cancer patients. I believe we will see a decline in lung cancer in the years ahead, because of current decline of cigarette smoking.

 

[Cairenn]

There is one theory that Asthma rates have increased as the incidence of intestional worms decrease. Many allergies are an over reaction of the body's own immune system. It would make logical sense that if you remove one of the things the body needs to fight, that it might well find in incorrect target.

I do not have a link to this, however. My best friend, who has asthma is where I got it.

Autism is being diagnosed now, the same is true with ADD and ADHD. I am almost 60 and I was diagnosed as having ADD about 10 years ago. There is also a good chance that I have Asperger's as well. NO ONE knew to look for those in the 1950's

 

[MikeC]

Likelwise - my dad was probably aspergers, I am/was borderline autism, my son is definitely autistic. how many millions went undiagnosed or appreciated for every one who made some advance in science? Have a look at the careers of RN admirals through teh age of sail for example - if they weren't psychotic they weer probably autistic - complete nutters half of them!!