Chemtrails, NWO, and UFOs: How many believers do these CTs have?

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
The title pretty much says it all. Does anyone have information on the following:

1. How many people believe in some variant of the major CTs (Chemtrails, JFK, 9/11, NWO, Zionists, UFOs, etc)?

2. Are the proportions of different national populations that believe in these CTs the same, or are certain beliefs more prevalent in some countries than in others?

3. What is the breakdown of CT believers into different socioeconomic/education, ethnic, age, and religious groups? And, lastly,

4. Do a significant proportion of believers 'drop out' at some point?

Hard numbers would be great, but if they don't exist then anecdotal experience will have to do - though bearing in mind that 'the plural of anecdote is not data'.
 

Whitebeard

Senior Member.
Is this of use? if not to you, then anyone else?
http://www.open.edu/openlearn/body-...al-studies/the-psychology-conspiracy-theories
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
if not to you, then anyone else?
isn't EVERYONE on the planet 'critical of mainstream politics'? : )

They will never get anywhere studying CT thinking or psychological attributes until they break them down into specific CTs and specific groups. For instance I know several people who still question the JFK thing but don't believe Chemtrails or anti vax evil government CTs of today. And then there are those who believe EVERY gov related CT that exists.

Does anyone have information on the following:
a metabunk thread with some breakdowns
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/co...ace-splits-on-chemtrails-etc.1345/#post-34560
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
There are some that seem to overlap a lot, the anti GMO folks and the anti Vaxxers. Chemtrailers and agenda 21 folks and anti vaxxers.

My guess is that they get taken in by one, say anti GMO or anti corporation and then they add in the other ones
 

AltoidSBS

New Member
They will never get anywhere studying CT thinking or psychological attributes until they break them down into specific CTs and specific groups.
Agreed.

Also: without a clear definition of a CT, you could run into some difficulties, @Santa's sidekick. For example, you list "Zionists" -- what does that mean, precisely? I personally believe the pro-Israel lobby wields undue, and at times dangerous, influence over many U.S. politicians. Does that alone mean I'm a Zionist conspiracy theorist?
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
Agreed.

Also: without a clear definition of a CT, you could run into some difficulties, @Santa's sidekick. For example, you list "Zionists" -- what does that mean, precisely? I personally believe the pro-Israel lobby wields undue, and at times dangerous, influence over many U.S. politicians. Does that alone mean I'm a Zionist conspiracy theorist?
I don't want to get pinned down by definitions, because that can get really difficult.... What I meant by 'Zionists' was beliefs like that espoused by former Malaysian PM Mohamed Mahathir, who suggested on multiple occasions that Zionists control world finance and the governments of the major Western powers, and act in concert to damage their enemies. Similarly, George Galloway, a British MP, has said that Zionists manipulated world governments into invading Iraq. This concept is ubiquitous on stormfront and in antisemitic literature like 'Protocols of the elders of Zion' and Henry Ford's 'The international Jew', where the terms 'Jew' and 'Zionist' are often interchangeable.

The belief you hold (which I agree with) is a lot more rational and even apparent - AIPAC is a lobby organization, lobbyists try to influence politicians to support causes, and US politicians are usually irrationally and blindly pro-Israel. Believing that pro-Israel lobbyists (or pro-oil or pro-anything-else-you-can-think-of lobbyists) influence American politicians does not require a belief in 'secret' and 'nefarious' organizations or people doing something that most people are totally unaware of - everyone knows who lobbyists are and what they do. But the bigger point would be one of definition, and while that can be rather difficult to pin down, it does seem that most CTs involve a belief that 'things at not as they seem' and 'we are all being duped', in a big way (though never for the better - it's never 'fluoridation of our drinking water prevents cancer!' or 'The Bildurbegers are doing a swimming job leading the world to world peace!'), among other things. Saying that lobbyists exert influence over politicians definitely does not meet this criteria.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
Saying that lobbyists exert influence over politicians definitely does not meet this criteria
that's what I was getting at as far as polling or trying to psycho analyze CTers. For instance if someone identifies as an anti-vaxxer (in my experience) that in no way means they believe there is something nefarious going on. Most I know just think the government is 'wrong' in their interpretation of 'risk'. So polls and studies on CTs would have to be very careful to weed these types of people out OR better yet use these people (and say Altoid) as the control groups vs using the general public as the control groups.

Then of course you have "who bothers to sign up for studies/polls". I think any 'numbers' you find would have to be taken with a huge grain of salt. It would be much easier to find data or gather data if you pick ONE specific CT to focus on. : )
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
There are several polls that addressed conspiracy beliefs. Here's one: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/conspiracy-theory-poll-results-.html
That's a great find. Unfortunately, however, they don't report the text of the questions or how the sample was chosen, so there are all kinds of miscommunication and self-selection issues that could be there.

Taken at face value, some of their results are suspicious:
Some of these are hard to believe:

4% - one in twenty five! - believe in reptilians
13% believe Obama is the anti-Christ
21% believe in Roswell

And consider this: 28% believe in NWO as compared to 5% who believe in chemtrails. (Contrails are incorrectly described as 'exhaust seen in the sky'.)

Also, they describe '13% of voters including 22% of Romney voters' as believing the anti-Christ thing - but as Romney voters were ~47% of the total, that leaves ~2.7% of Obama voters who believe he's the anti-Christ! And if by 'voters' they mean 'registered voters', then as the turnout was an abysmal 51%, that leaves ~7.7% of registered voters who did not vote against Obama (including both those who voted for him and those who didn't vote) who believe Obama is the anti-Christ.

Others are not necessarily CTs, such as climate change denial (many deniers just think the science is wrong but do not believe it's a deliberate hoax) and the vaccine-autism link (ditto, as @deirdre pointed out above).

And all are vaguely worded.
 

Seeker

New Member
I don't think it is possible to put an accurate figure to the number CT believers in the world. I believe some do door over time whilst others don't and some may drift from one group to another of expand their portfolio of beliefs. I think it is fluid.
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
I don't think it is possible to put an accurate figure to the number CT believers in the world. I believe some do door over time whilst others don't and some may drift from one group to another of expand their portfolio of beliefs. I think it is fluid.
It's great to have you back, @Seeker!

Many things that are fluid are nevertheless measurable in a practical sense - people's religious and political beliefs often develop and shift but this often happens slowly enough to survey. So the question then would be, how much volatility is there in CT belief?
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
It would be much easier to find data or gather data if you pick ONE specific CT to focus on. : )
I agree with everything there except that last bit - I think CTs share enough features in common that they can be measured as a group. It's kind of like how social scientists measure religion - it often takes the form of 'X proportion of Y SES/age/ethnic group attend church more than once a month' or 'count themselves as members of religious groups of X typological classification' - the actual religion/sect/etc in question often doesn't matter, as they and their members share enough characteristics to categorized together.

(And on a surface level religious groups don't have as much in common as you would think - most groups believe in heaven/hell, Jewish people don't; most groups believe in God and divine texts, followers of some Budhist sects and some Jewish denominations don't. Even within a given religion - say Islam, Buddhism, etc - you often find an astounding diversity of opinions. What these groups share are sociological and philosophical characteristics, as I suspect do most CTs).
 

Seeker

New Member
It's great to have you back, @Seeker!

Many things that are fluid are nevertheless measurable in a practical sense - people's religious and political beliefs often develop and shift but this often happens slowly enough to survey. So the question then would be, how much volatility is there in CT belief?
Thank you Santa's SK!

You are right that fluidity does not prevent measurability and your new question certainly deserves some thoughts. I don't know how volatile their beliefs are but I would imagine that would be down to the individual and the depth of conviction. If a strong believer, then one should reasonably expect lower volatility or fluidity and vice versa but who knows? Nobody has actually taken a census of who is a CT believer, how often they change their beliefs or start to disbelieve.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
4% - one in twenty five! - believe in reptilians
and that's 4% that were willing to ADMIT they believe that!

I think CTs share enough features in common that they can be measured as a group
that's cool. but I disagree. this topic has been discussed quite a bit on this forum, so yea its a very mixed bag on how people categorize CTs and CT 'groups' and 'subgroups'.

I think you can find a very specific question and poll people "do you believe in ANY wide scale government coverups? do you believe in 3 or more wide scale government coverups? To get a round about 'number'.

but as far as 'analyzing' the reasons WHY, I don't think you can do that without a real fine breakdown.
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
I posted previously (regarding the survey found by @Chew):
[the survey posits that] '13% of voters including 22% of Romney voters' [believe] the anti-Christ thing - but as Romney voters were~47% of the total, that leaves ~2.7% of Obama voters who believe he's the anti-Christ
Perhaps the explanation is that 2.7% of US voters are members of Satanic rock bands! :mad::mad::mad::mad:

:p
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
Taken at face value, some of their results are suspicious:
4% - one in twenty five! - believe in reptilians
13% believe Obama is the anti-Christ
21% believe in Roswell
I don't think they're suspicious at all, given that most reputable polls in the
U.S. & UK--in the last few years--put belief in ghosts at or around 50%.

By that standard, 4% for reptilians seems embarrassingly low!!
Why should reptilians be only 1/12th as plausible as ghosts, damn it?!?
 

Chew

Senior Member.
but as far as 'analyzing' the reasons WHY, I don't think you can do that without a real fine breakdown.
I emailed the pollsters when that poll came out and asked for the raw data but they wouldn't give it to me. I was going to make a Crank Magnetism Venn diagram with the individual respondent data. Bob blaskowicz or however you spell his name, the skeptical English Lit professor, tried to get it too but didn't have any luck either. He wanted to use it for a class he was teaching to demonstrate crank magnetism.
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
I emailed the pollsters when that poll came out and asked for the raw data but they wouldn't give it to me.... Bob blaskowicz or however you spell his name, the skeptical English Lit professor, tried to get it too....
Frankly that makes me wonder whether there's a conspiracy here...
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
I don't think they're suspicious at all, given that most reputable polls in the
U.S. & UK--in the last few years--put belief in ghosts at or around 50%.
Does that seem right to you? When you ride a bus or look around you on the streets (never mind converse with friends and relatives) can you accept that half of these people believe in ghosts?

If you were to attend a grade school reunion (provided that the school was representative of the general population) do you not found it hard to believe that half of the people there would believe in ghosts and one in twenty five in reptilians?

I'm struggling with the concept.
 

Spectrar Ghost

Senior Member.
One problem, as I understand it, is that usually the polls don't come out and ask whether you believe in ghosts or whatever, but ask a more circumspect question that is used as a proxy for ghost belief. This to avoid false negatives due to people being uncomfortable admitting it. But then you run into the problem of whether you're getting false positives and inflating the numbers.

I'll look around for a source for this.

Aha! Sort of.

http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploa...inion-on-conspiracy-theories_181649218739.pdf

 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
One problem, as I understand it, is that usually the polls don't come out and ask whether you believe in ghosts or whatever, but ask a more circumspect question that is used as a proxy for ghost belief. This to avoid false negatives due to people being uncomfortable admitting it. But then you run into the problem of whether you're getting false positives and inflating the numbers.

I'll look around for a source for this.

Aha! Sort of.

http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploa...inion-on-conspiracy-theories_181649218739.pdf

A technique for getting embarrassing responses some social scientists have found effective is to ask three yes/no questions as a series, two of which are innocuous and one the question of interest - for example, did you eat breakfast today? Do you enjoy classical music? And do you believe the Earth is flat? - and then tell the subject to say how many 'yesses' there are but not which questions receive them. The average number of 'yesses' the innocuous questions when presented alone accrue (say, 1.3) is then deducted from the average number of 'yesses' accrued when the embarrassing question is added (say, 1.7), and the difference is the proportion of your sample that responded positively to that question (0.4).

I wonder whether this has been tried with CTs?
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
Well this if course is your problem. If they won't give you the raw data, then you don't know HOW MANY people they asked, how they ascertained they got a good spread of people across certain demographics etc.
I have been stopped in the street by Market researchers before who didn't want me because I didn't fit into a specific criteria they were looking for. This is either because they didn't want opinions from someone like me or because they had already filled their quota of weirdos in a suit and hoodie with a t shirt on his head and needed to fill out where they had gaps in order to be properly balanced.

We asked 100 people who are too busy to answer market research questions what they thought of market research 100% of the people we asked told us they were too busy to answer our questions.

SOME people don't want to bother spending the time to answer questionnaires and some people are too paranoid to answer them cos they think "THEY" are trying to find out stuff about you.


So it's overall REALLY difficult to find out who really thinks what.

I, like Whitebeard, work on a community radio station, and I would say the percentage of the volunteers at mine who believe in at least ONE conspiracy theory is actually pretty high, but that is likely because of the sort of people who will volunteer for a community station.
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
It would be interesting to see whether there had been a rise in CT'ers specifically the NWO, Zionist Banker - or in other words, the "them" type meme in recent years

My totally unscientific, anecdotal, COD analyse (I.e. proceed with caution) would be that it has been growing

In part because the younger generation somehow (and with some justification) feel terribly let down, the future they were promised, or at least assumed they would achieve, seems impossible



This is the first time in recent human history where most children (in the developed world) may well be poorer than their parents



With reports from two very different organisations, Oxfam and Credit Suisse that suggest the top 1% own more wealth than the bottom 50% of the worlds population

The simple narrative that "they" have conspired to steal the future seems an easy link to make and in a way gain some control their lives
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
It's not just that, it's also the rise of the internet so information and "disinformation" is much more easily available.
PLUS the fact that a lot of people have busy lives or are just lazy, so it;s easy for the lie to be spread as it will contain many points to trigger the right response and people reading something shocking on FB that suits their worldview won't bother to check it out before commenting and sharing.
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
Lol, good points too


But maybe that is something to do with "confirmational bias"


It is still pretty easy, using the same tools, to debunk the cr4p
 
Last edited:

Whitebeard

Senior Member.
I know a few CTers who will claim 'I've done my research, I know whats REALLY happening', then when you ask them to show you their evidence, it turns out their 'research' consists of nothing more than reading the usual CT web-sites (cos everything else is disinformation) and watching hours of you tube vids that only serve to pander to their own world view.

Now these people are not stupid, far from it, some of biggest CT believers I've encountered over the years really are smart cookies; but its like the whole conspirasphere is brainwashing itself to believe ANYTHING the CT 'gurus' (Icke / Jones / Simpson / (insert a vast list of the guilty here).) tells them is true. Then they will tell you that 'a vast majority of the people agree with them', again because the gurus say so. (Total hogwash of course, CTer's and us debunking rationalist skeptics are both in small minorities in the general scheme of things).

I grew up in a very religious (but not fundamentalist) christian household, and although my family and a lot of the people were not 'headnagers' about their faith, I did meet a lot of born again types, and the way the born againers, and the hardcore CT speak act and preach are very similar. Which all brings me back to my own belief (and I know a few will disagree, which is fine, free world and all that), that CT is almost a form of religion, or some kind of cult at the very least, and I dread the prospect of a day when one of the more unhinged of the CT gurus decides it's time for their followers to 'drink the kool aid.' :(
 
Last edited:

Spectrar Ghost

Senior Member.
Micheal Shermer opined in "Why People Believe Wierd Things" that intelligent people are no more or less likely to believe in conspiracies or other woo then others, but that once they do they are less likely to let their beliefs go because their intelligence allows them to rationalize their belief more effectively. This is a very plausable theory to me.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
That reference intrigued me, thank you. SO? I found a "TED-Talk" clip from ...ermmm..."Ted-Talk":
that is TOO funny. Thanks, lol!

 

JRBids

Senior Member.
I think there is a hierarchy of CTs. People who believe in Niburu, Reptilians, or what I would consider the most far out CTs tend to believe ALL the others. The chemtrail believers seem to believe MOST of them, except some don't believe Niburu and CTs like that. Most chemtrail believers appear to believe every political CT. At least from my unscientific lurking of Chemtrails Global Skywatch, anyway. Hollow Earth believers are in a class by themselves, I think.
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
While I think a lot of us would agree with Whitebeard on the religious cult angle, I think there is a sort of hierarchy or maybe just a different style.
for example it is plausible that 9/11 was an inside job. People can even point to other false flags that have happened or at least been planned so I wouldn't put it past either the Us administration or even certain elements in the security services who would do something without telling the president or whatever. but logically the easiest way to do this would be to pretend to be Al Qaeda and recruit some guys to hijack planes.

If it suits your worldview that this event could not happen, that your political view or racial/nationalistic stereotype cannot believe that 19 arabs with boxcutters could take on the best goddarned country in the world (wipe away tear) then it forces you to look elsewhere.

but really people don't actually think that anyway. They didn't REALLY at the time think: " That just looks wrong" they later read something on the internet with all the right arguing points that stacked up a pile of "evidence" that was then "very compelling" (I bet you've heard that phrase a lot) and people don't have the time or even the inclination to question the individual pieces of evidence to see how flimsy they ALL are.

There are very few people who literally see conspiracy in EVERYTHING, but I suppose it's the end result of believing too many others. if the gubmint did 9/11, MI5 killed Diana, NASA lies, THEY are spraying us with stuff, giving us nasty vaccines etc etc then why WOULDN'T they be alien lizard people? That actually makes more sense than humans doing all this stuff to the planet.
when I first got into debunking, I discovered a guy on the TPUC forums who was OBSESSED with Saturn. Saturn is apparently the same "God" as Chronos and also Set and possibly Satan so with a bit of numerology and word play (with a huge cognitive bias) it was easy to link everything to Saturn (and the planet and god seemed to be linked or one and the same thing too) Joanna Yeates murder? well she went to the Bristol RAm pub and then shopped in TESco or Set Co.
See? Ra and Set which are Egyptian gods and so therefore = Saturn. because... erm.
 

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
While I think a lot of us would agree with Whitebeard on the religious cult angle, I think there is a sort of hierarchy or maybe just a different style.
for example it is plausible that 9/11 was an inside job. People can even point to other false flags that have happened or at least been planned so I wouldn't put it past either the Us administration or even certain elements in the security services who would do something without telling the president or whatever. but logically the easiest way to do this would be to pretend to be Al Qaeda and recruit some guys to hijack planes.

If it suits your worldview that this event could not happen, that your political view or racial/nationalistic stereotype cannot believe that 19 arabs with boxcutters could take on the best goddarned country in the world (wipe away tear) then it forces you to look elsewhere.
Just to focus very narrowly on this point: your point that it's simpler to assume 9/11 happened the way it did just with FBI agents in the 'al Qaeda role' than to assert the huge operation truthers put forth is a good one. But here's the thing: if truthers can 'disprove' the official story (as they believe they have) then in their minds the only alternative is their version. If 9/11 happened just as it did but with FBI agents carrying out the hijacking, then truthers are left with very little to disprove.

Some creationists have a similar motivation: as a creationist friend once told me, some of them have no problem with evolution from a religious standpoint, they just think that by 'disproving' evolution they automatically 'prove' theism, so they invest much effort into 'disproving' evolution (and they succeed in convincing themselves, if no one else).
 
Last edited:

Santa's sidekick

Senior Member
when I first got into debunking, I discovered a guy on the TPUC forums who was OBSESSED with Saturn. Saturn is apparently the same "God" as Chronos and also Set and possibly Satan so with a bit of numerology and word play (with a huge cognitive bias) it was easy to link everything to Saturn (and the planet and god seemed to be linked or one and the same thing too) Joanna Yeates murder? well she went to the Bristol RAm pub and then shopped in TESco or Set Co.
See? Ra and Set which are Egyptian gods and so therefore = Saturn. because... erm.
That reminds me of a CT radio show on AM640 in Toronto called 'View from space'. The guy has so many numbers and names involved in his Illuminati CT that it's inevitable that he find symbolism everywhere. But it's all delivered in an awesome, bassy radio voice, and his speech is punctuated by long, contemplative silences, so it all sounds really reasonable and even convincing.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
the inclination to question the individual pieces of evidence to see how flimsy they ALL are.
Yep. CTs are about a mountain of somewhat plausible innuendo. Each bit having no real substance, but the believers don't care to examine ANY of them closely enough to see that. They only see the mountain.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Well, that's the 'model' at FOX "news". Uh-oh....I realize there is a global audience reading these threads, but surely a quick Internet Search will clarify the reference.

Real journalism (at least as I once learned it) isn't about "innuendo" nor "speculation"...or worse? Out-right lying. No, that's the 'bailiwick' of FOX "news". Unapologetic lying. Not much different from some grocery store 'Tabloids' that I tend to see, weekly.

Whatever "sells"? Will "sell".....
 

skephu

Senior Member.
The belief in chemtrails just doesn't seem to gain traction. It's been around for several years now, but still only a negligible fraction of the population believe or even heard of chemtrails. I keep hearing complaints from chemtrail believers how they fail to convince other people about their beliefs. They get alienated from their family, get laughed at by people at work, etc. The yearly "global march against chemtrails and geoengineering" typically only attracts about a dozen people even in large cities. This year, it was canceled in Hungary because of lack of interest. In Hungary, we even have a Facebook group for people who like to make fun of chemtrail believers; this group has many more members than the group of chemtrail believers. It looks like chemtrail belief will remain marginal after all.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
tryblinking Dead birds? UFOs? Chemtrails? Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Mick West TFTRH #13: Professor David Keith – Geoengineering Research and the Chemtrails Conspiracy Theory Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 2
Mick West TFTRH #11: Jim Lee – Chemtrails, Geoengineering, Conspiracies, and Semantics Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 1
Trailblazer Explained: video of concentric circular "chemtrails" (E-3 Sentry AWACS plane, Feb 1 2019) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
Ben Geddy Happy to have found this site and Mick thru JRE! Practical Debunking 4
Mick West YouTube adds Encyclopedia Britannica article on Contrails to "Chemtrail" Videos Contrails and Chemtrails 18
FlightMuj Claims of Predictions of Chemtrails in Old Texts Contrails and Chemtrails 3
M Bornong Can Belief in Chemtrails and/or other Conspiracy Theories Lead to Violence? Contrails and Chemtrails 4
skephu Solar geoengineering and the chemtrails conspiracy on social media Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Mick West Chemtrails and the Anti-Vaccine Movement Contrails and Chemtrails 34
MikeG Debunked: Air Force Verifies Chemtrails are Real Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Mick West Banff Chemtrails Billboard Worries David Keith Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Mick West Quantifying Expert Consensus Against Covert Geoengineering / Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 116
skephu Debunked: Dutch Government Admit Chemtrails Exist Contrails and Chemtrails 7
mrfintoil Debunked: CIA Director admits chemtrails, geoengineering, stratospheric aerosol injection Contrails and Chemtrails 24
C Strange Flickering in Contrail Video Posted in Earlier Thread [Focussing artifacts] Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Trailblazer Russ Tanner accidentally debunks chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 2
Mick West Demythologizing Prince's reference to "Chemtrails" Contrails and Chemtrails 5
ParanoidSkeptic Chemtrails: Experiments on the Public Contrails and Chemtrails 5
MikeC New Zealand Ministry of Environment reply to "chemtrail" query Contrails and Chemtrails 6
F Explained: Video of plane leaving "6 chemtrails, then 2" [Mixed Exhaust and Aerodynamic Contrails] Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Mick West Debunked: Article: "Court Takes Child From Mother After She Mentions Chemtrails At School" Contrails and Chemtrails 92
skephu Chuck Norris on chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Mick West Vice: 'It Was Like a Cult': Leaving the World of Online Conspiracy Theories Escaping The Rabbit Hole 4
skephu Paul Beckwith (climate scientist) on chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 19
JFDee Debunked: Lichens and Moss on Trees Caused by Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 4
Sausalito Spectral analysis of alleged "chemtrails" Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Jay Reynolds Safya Yassin, Missouri ISIS supporter and chemtrails believer arrested for threats Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Trailblazer Chemtrail response from Swiss Federal Office of the Environment Contrails and Chemtrails 3
MikeG Climate Change War Games Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Mick West Persistent Trails Survey Shows Chemtrail Believers Only Recently Noticed Persistent Trails Contrails and Chemtrails 32
Dan Page idea: a "Debunked" Stamp Practical Debunking 9
Z 3 military helicopters Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 14
Mick West Debunked: AnonSec's NASA Hack, Global Hawk Hijack, Evidence of Chemtrails [Public Domain Data] General Discussion 32
MikeG Giant Snowflakes [Rimed Dendrites] Contrails and Chemtrails 24
Balance Blatant photoshop deceit of BP refueling tank Contrails and Chemtrails 2
Dan Page Claim: Mobile app uses atmospheric data to prove chemtrails vs contrails Contrails and Chemtrails 12
MikeG Futurism and Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 4
MikeG Accidental Geoengineering Contrails and Chemtrails 7
MikeG Debunked: HAARP Caught in Action Contrails and Chemtrails 28
Ray Von Geezer Ian Simpson / Look-up.org.uk debunks chemtrails & geoengineering Contrails and Chemtrails 13
skephu Parallel lines of clouds (Virginia Beach) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
Ray Von Geezer George Monbiot in the Guardian on "Chemtrails" & Look-up.org.uk Contrails and Chemtrails 26
Dan Page Is Belief in "Chemtrails" Growing? Contrails and Chemtrails 63
P Hi all, I'm new to this forum, so still trying to find my way around. I wanted to comment regarding Contrails and Chemtrails 2
MikeG Common Core and Geoengineering Contrails and Chemtrails 2
Trailblazer Debunked: "Top climate scientist Tim Lenton admits to ongoing geoengineering" Contrails and Chemtrails 23
Mick West Mick West on the Pat Walsh Show, KFBK Sacrament, Talking About Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 7
TEEJ "Airline Pilot" at Climate Engineering Awareness Day - Carlow, Eire, 22nd August 2015 Contrails and Chemtrails 16
Mick West Debunked: Rise In Respiratory Mortality from 4th to 3rd Cause of Death. "Chemtrail Flu" General Discussion 13
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top