Dane Wigington - Inaccuracies and Omissions

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Interesting he's making predictions. A "heat producing dome of high pressure" in the latter part of the month in the west. "Push the jet stream north", but still some rain. Some warming in the east some cooling in the east.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
A "heat producing dome"?? really?? Does he not understand where heat comes from and what causes high pressure??
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I think it's reached the stage where it's impossible to convince him that the weather is actually normal. No matter what happens, it's evidence. Literally no matter what.

An interesting challenge would be to get him to describe the range of "normal" weather for a year.

Weather.gov has some nice products. Here's the last 14 days of precipitation:
http://water.weather.gov/precip/


How does that tally with keeping the west dry and the east wet?
 

Balance

Senior Member.
How fast can you say
 

Strawman

Senior Member.
The post above puts the final clarification on the point of whether Dane Wigington understands science at all. My thanks and gratitude toward Mr. Wigington for making a fool out of himself.
 

Chew

Senior Member.
I skipped around and at 9:07 I heard something interesting. I want to hear more about this "a diabetic lapse rate"!

Does he mention anywhere that the combustion of 1 kg of jet fuel produces 1.375 kg of water?
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
I skipped around and at 9:07 I heard something interesting. I want to hear more about this "a diabetic lapse rate"!

Does he mention anywhere that the combustion of 1 kg of jet fuel produces 1.375 kg of water?

He rambles on about it and figures the average temps at altitude, only to make the disconnected claim that the atmosphere at altitude can't support contrail formation, in general. It's just meaningless nonsense.
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
Don't you hate it when Wigington doesn't seem to understand definitions? It seem to happen a lot.

I bet this would be confusing for believers, but technically a contrail is an aerosol. So yeah, when a jet engine produces a perfectly normal contrail it is spraying an aerosol into the atmosphere. So many times I've encountered believers who use the word "aerosol" like it refers to anything more specific than any type of particulates suspended in a gas.
 

Mumbles

Active Member

It's interesting to see one of the posters above turn up in the comment thread on the article below, yet not mention anything about the topic when Wigington's presentations and the fraud therein come up. This evidently got linked around a few antipodean chemtrail sites a couple of days ago. Seeing NZ's version of Alex Jones attempt impartiality is also kind of amusing :)

http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/abou...cle_uuid=536E4B82-C78D-9F68-89D8-CE947A65F0AC
 

skephu

Senior Member.
I think that it has been demonstrated several times that the people running geoengineeringwatch.org are in fact dishonest. They knowingly and deliberately use photographs and movie clips taken out of their actual context, clearly with the intention to deceive their readership. Reading the articles on the site, it appears that its main goal is scaremongering. What I don't understand is why they actually do this when it doesn't really look like they make a lot of money out of it. Or is it just a case of "the end justifies the means"? Do they think it is OK to use deception when it helps "awake" the people?

These people really do harm by arousing unnecessary and unfounded anxiety and fear in the public. Don't we have enough worry and anxiety in this world? Why add to it? I see a number of people who used to be more or less happy with their lives, and now they are worried to death by the stupid fear propaganda distributed by the chemtrail activists.
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
I think that it has been demonstrated several times that the people running geoengineeringwatch.org are in fact dishonest. They knowingly and deliberately use photographs and movie clips taken out of their actual context, clearly with the intention to deceive their readership. Reading the articles on the site, it appears that its main goal is scaremongering. What I don't understand is why they actually do this when it doesn't really look like they make a lot of money out of it. Or is it just a case of "the end justifies the means"? Do they think it is OK to use deception when it helps "awake" the people?

These people really do harm by arousing unnecessary and unfounded anxiety and fear in the public. Don't we have enough worry and anxiety in this world? Why add to it? I see a number of people who used to be more or less happy with their lives, and now they are worried to death by the stupid fear propaganda distributed by the chemtrail activists.

I think the people at Geoengineerinwatch (including Dane) are in fact true believers in the sense that they whole heartedly submit to the conspiracy. I'd love to be proven wrong on this, but it might be emotional bias that forces these people into a state of denial. It doesn't matter for them if the image with "spraying nozzles" is claimed by debunkers to be from a wake vortex study, that claim can be a part of the deception, ie. part of the conspiracy.

There are many ways one can "rationalize" oneself into complete ignorance and denial. And it doesn't have to do with deliberate dishonesty.
Some people just have very hard times admitting being wrong, for reasons that has to do with personality. And strong cognitive dissonance felt when facing counter arguments can force people into mental states of complete denial.
 

skephu

Senior Member.
It doesn't matter for them if the image with "spraying nozzles" is claimed by debunkers to be from a wake vortex study, that claim can be a part of the deception, ie. part of the conspiracy.
Yes, I would also like to give them the benefit of the doubt and use Hanlon's razor (never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity), but I've seen several cases where it was clear that it was them who copied photographs or videos from valid sources, and removed the context and provided a false explanation.

For example, they find a photo on airliners.net where the inside of a plane is seen with ballast barrels. The legend to the photo clearly explains what it is, who took it where, etc. But they remove the legend and post the photo on their own site saying "chemtrail plane".
Or they take a video from the NTSB web site showing a plane with smoke generators for a vortex study. They cut out the parts of the video where a close-up the smoke generator is seen with the legend "SMOKE GENERATOR", they cut out all the parts referring to the vortex study, and they post a short fragment of the video saying: "aerosol spraying mimicking fuel dump". Or they find Evergreen's video advertisement for their firefighting plane, cut out a short fragment and write "chemtrail spraying" on it.

This has nothing to do with not wanting to accept the debunkers' explanation. The debunkers are not even involved until much later! It is Dane Wigington and a handful of other "activists" who actively go out, search for photos and videos on the net from airliners.net, NTSB, NASA, etc., then alter them and attach false explanations. It is only after this that the debunkers go and find the original sources of the photos and videos and point out the fraud committed by the chemtrail activists. These pictures and videos do not just turn up out of nothing--some people deliberately create them in order to deceive the readers and to instigate fear and outrage in them.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
It is Dane Wigington and a handful of other "activists" who actively go out, search for photos and videos on the net from airliners.net, NTSB, NASA, etc., then alter them and attach false explanations. It is only after this that the debunkers go and find the original sources of the photos and videos and point out the fraud committed by the chemtrail activists. These pictures and videos do not just turn up out of nothing--some people deliberately create them in order to deceive the readers and to instigate fear and outrage in them.

100% wholeheartedly AGREE!!!
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
It is Dane Wigington and a handful of other "activists" who actively go out, search for photos and videos on the net from airliners.net, NTSB, NASA, etc., then alter them and attach false explanations.

It might be that they work in a cluster of independent users that sort of confuse Dane's group of tracking of sources sometimes. Some material might come from users who aren't part of Wigington's "staff" so to speak, and then Dane and his crew are too quick jumping to conclusion, and later simply ignores criticism because admitting failure makes them look bad. It's sort of like the case of the pastor who loses his faith but feel responsible for the faith of congregation.

Part of it might be the public humiliation of admitting having spent so many years and so much effort on an issue that doesn't even exist. The damage might be less just keep pretending, rather than giving up or withdrawing.

Is it dishonesty? It's hard to tell. I think there are degrees of conscious dishonesty, because from a psychological point of view there are many ways a biased brain can lie to itself to the point of absurdity without the person realizing it. That however requires a strong emotional bias of a true believer.

As a parallel, Mike Adams recently posted an article about "global warming proven to be a hoax". He cites several sources to back up his claims. None of the sources support his narrative. If you take a look at the old NASA-article, it even gives the context for the discrepancy in climate between northern America and the global temperature trend. It presents two graphs next to each other, clearly showing the difference between north America and the whole planet.

I mean, it's sooooo easy to tell how Mike Adams is wrong on this one. It makes me wonder if Mike isn't even trying to look credible, or doesn't know how to look credible.
Point is, when dealing with conspiracy thinking, you can expect to find displays of irrational behaviour, stuff that doesn't make sense in any way at all.

Mike Adams makes money of his site, Dane Wigington might not to that. But the only thing I can think of is that the reward for running a site such as Geoengineeringwatch is fame, and a sense of importance. Those are sometimes hard currency for some people.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
This has nothing to do with not wanting to accept the debunkers' explanation. The debunkers are not even involved until much later! It is Dane Wigington and a handful of other "activists" who actively go out, search for photos and videos on the net from airliners.net, NTSB, NASA, etc., then alter them and attach false explanations.

That's no so much Dane creating those false images though, he just re-posts them without question.
 

PurpleElmo

Closed Account
...What I don't understand is why they actually do this

It's hard to live in a world where some things happen without rhyme or reason.

I first encountered the word "chemtrails" in a Google+ post from a person who appears to be terrified about many things like GMO's and fracking. About a week later I heard it used by a person who is "healer" that uses crystal bowl vibrations to help align chakras. What I see as a common thread uniting these 3 chemtrail believers is a deep-seated need to believe that the universe can be controlled by people. Maybe "they" are controlling the weather with chemicals sprayed from airplanes. Perhaps "someone" is spraying chemicals to control our minds. [And whatever became of Nancy and her "soviet sputnik lasers" which have been controlling the world since the time of Jesus????].

And of course there are the trolls who will tell any story to anyone who will believe it to try to string them along. Have you ever heard of the "Breatharians" who believed that everything that is necessary for life can be found in the air so it is unnecessary to partake of food or even water? Some people that I knew about 20 years ago consciously infiltrated a "Breatharian" news group and told stories of how long they had been living on nothing but air. Clearly lies told for the purpose of entertainment and nothing more.
 

skephu

Senior Member.
Here are debunks of two of Dane's more recent claims:

Debunked: Geoengineering patent suggests spraying aluminum, barium, strontium to reflect sunlight

Debunked: Anomalous ice formed in the Arctic Ocean
 

PeteSYD

Member
Oh, it's really quite simple. You can reverse the mixing ratio vapor pressure by inverting the Riemann manifold hydrostabilizer feed until the flow tensor is metaorthogonally tangent to the tank parity-laminar valve.

Excellent explanation. I believe a similar process is used on the ground to induce quantum effects in homeopathic medications.
 

skephu

Senior Member.
Who's this person? Another "former" something...
Courageous Former Commercial Pilot Joins The Fight To Stop Geoengineering
I found this:
http://rawfoodrehab.ning.com/profile/willemfelderhof
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Well, he himself says he never even noticed these persistent trails (as anything unusual) until after 2009. So why would they?

The fact that there isn't any "uprising" would seem to indicate to most people that there's nothing to rise up against.
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
He apparently won a court case against KLM regarding aerotoxic syndrome. Nothing in what he writes indicates anything more than a belief in chemtrails. No evidence, no technical details. Nothing at all.
 

skephu

Senior Member.
Apparently this Willem Felderhof organized an "Open Mind" conference in Amsterdam this year, which was about various conspiracist topics:
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2015/06/open-mind-conference-in-holland.html

So he's a seasoned conspiracy theorist.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
He apparently won a court case against KLM regarding aerotoxic syndrome. Nothing in what he writes indicates anything more than a belief in chemtrails. No evidence, no technical details. Nothing at all.
I found this article, in Dutch:

http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/21901121/___Gifpiloot__wint_zaak_tegen_KLM__.html



Google translation of the article, slightly edited by me for sense:

Link to the court ruling here: http://aerotoxic.org/news/in-the-courts/klm-court-case-netherlands/


I must say I find it rather disturbing that someone with Mr Felderhof's mindset is allowed to fly large airliners.
 

MikeG

Senior Member.
I found this article, in Dutch:

http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/21901121/___Gifpiloot__wint_zaak_tegen_KLM__.html



Google translation of the article, slightly edited by me for sense:

Link to the court ruling here: http://aerotoxic.org/news/in-the-courts/klm-court-case-netherlands/


I must say I find it rather disturbing that someone with Mr Felderhof's mindset is allowed to fly large airliners.

"Chronically poisoned" by nerve gas? I can see why a reasonable person would not want that in the workplace.

But it seems a pretty big leap from "toxins" inside an aircraft.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
"Chronically poisoned" by nerve gas? I can see why a reasonable person would not want that in the workplace.

But it seems a pretty big leap from "toxins" inside an aircraft.

This is the chemtrail conspiracy we're talking about - there is no leap too big to make to "prove" their case!!:confused:
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West The Dimming - New Documentary From Dane Wigington Contrails and Chemtrails 8
MikeG Toxic Spraying and Radio Frequency Bombardment Contrails and Chemtrails 9
Jacob Aman J. Marvin Herndon's chemtrail letter to San Diego City Council Contrails and Chemtrails 39
Rico Debunked: Dane Wigington's Undeniable Footage of Jet Aircraft Spraying [Aerodynamic Contrails] Contrails and Chemtrails 42
FuzzyUK "Geoengineering And The Collapse Of Earth 2014", a Dane Wigington presentation Contrails and Chemtrails 16
JRBids Dane Wigington "Nucleated 'fake snow' demystified" Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Jay Reynolds Dane Wigington & Co. get taken to the cleaners by climate scientists Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Hama Neggs Challenge from Dane Wigington General Discussion 71
Jay Reynolds Global Skywatch Conference Call with Dane Wigington, Nov 2012 Contrails and Chemtrails 110
Jay Reynolds Debunked: Dane Wigington's Claims That UV is "Off The Charts" Contrails and Chemtrails 207
Jay Reynolds Geoengineering Watch Radio: Dane Wigington's Quack Infomercial Contrails and Chemtrails 2
Jay Reynolds Debunked: Dane Wigington's- “Heavy Wet Snow” Is Now Often The Norm Contrails and Chemtrails 45
Jay Reynolds Debunked: Dane Wigington's Video for CBC Conference Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Jay Reynolds Debunked- Dane Wigington's 10 "bullet" points regarding geoengineering Contrails and Chemtrails 34
Jay Reynolds Dane Wigington's speech Contrails and Chemtrails 8
Mick West Wigington/West Geoengineering Debate West/Wigington Geoengineering Debate 233
TWCobra Wigington/Max Bliss Debunked. Automated Chemtrail dispersal Commercial aircraft Contrails and Chemtrails 7

Related Articles

Top