G. Edward Griffin: Don't Blame the Pilots!

Status
Not open for further replies.

scombrid

Senior Member.
On the other hand, if we use Occam’s Razor again, there is no doubt that the seeder-plane hypothesis does not make the cut. It really is complex, and so far, no one has come up with an explanation of what chemistry could do this.


So he chucked the seeder plane hypothesis but still says that no one has come up with an explanation of what chemistry could lead to a white trail behind a plane.

http://www.kentchemistry.com/links/organic/combustion.htm

See all those H2Os on the right hand side of those equations GEG?


 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
Yes, and we have G. Edward Griffin sitting on his data for two years and Dane Wigington refusing to discuss the matter when responding to Griffin.

Griffin really needs to publish his study. Accorinding to what he is saying, the data is extensive:



Here is the reporting template his people were using, perhaps with attached photos, etc.

planefinder.jpg


Anybody have some bright ideas how these could be displayed in an easy-to-understand way?

I can't find Griffin's statement at that link. Does it still exist?
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
FOund this on the Skydentify Chemtrails FB page. I can almost hear Robbie the Robot saying "does not compute! does not compute!" when I read the last comment, which did not totally fit in my screen shot:

"kydentify Chemtrails Who in the world is spraying?He is also supporting the debunkers explanation for the grids that the chemtrail movement have spent a whole decade disputing. For a whole decade we have been saying that is wrong but now suddenly they have been right all this time. The movement has been saying that the planes are military but at least in Australia it has been proven they are not. The movement have been saying photos of tanks inside planes are for chemtrails but now we have to admit the photos are just of flight certification testing. It's so frustrating. Now debunkers have challenged me to provide any documentation to support the idea that contrails can't persist for more than a few minutes but so far I can't find anything. I feel they must be wrong but it's hard to find documentation to prove it"



5-12doesnotcomputer copy.jpg


More interesting comments later in the same thread;
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=420063104756899&id=400145150082028
Wow. That is an amazing exchange. It's amazing to watch somebody see the light like that. Is that guy still around? Can he be brought here as an example of how people can see through the morass of falsehoods in the chemmie movement?
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
I can't find Griffin's statement at that link. Does it still exist?
I'm not sure which link and which statement you mean?

In the end both Wigington and Griffin ended the conversation, Wigington and Russ Tanner don't want to recognize that what they see are ordinary commercial planes, even though some of their associates such as "Mark from Utah" and Scott Stevens ifrequently are able to identify the planes as such. Griffin is still sitting on his research results. None of these parties actually seem interested in identifying the planes they see. To me the reason is quite clear, they know it would practically all be over if the public in general knew they were seeing contrails from ordinary commercial flights, s it is a great big secret from the rank and file.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
I'm not sure which link and which statement you mean?

In the end both Wigington and Griffin ended the conversation, Wigington and Russ Tanner don't want to recognize that what they see are ordinary commercial planes, even though some of their associates such as "Mark from Utah" and Scott Stevens ifrequently are able to identify the planes as such. Griffin is still sitting on his research results. None of these parties actually seem interested in identifying the planes they see. To me the reason is quite clear, they know it would practically all be over if the public in general knew they were seeing contrails from ordinary commercial flights, s it is a great big secret from the rank and file.

The one in post #33 where he speaks of "hundreds of planes".

PS: But I see all sorts of chemmies who believe "spraying" is being done by commercial airliners. Where is the disconnect?
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
The one in post #33 where he speaks of "hundreds of planes".

PS: But I see all sorts of chemmies who believe "spraying" is being done by commercial airliners. Where is the disconnect?
The disconnect is because if it became generally known that what people were seeing are ordinary commercial flights, there is no more mystery and no more conspiracy theory.

Without the unknown, there is no fear, and without the fear chemtrails as an issue is all over.

That is about as plain as I can put it. Though the rank and file members don't know it and cry out for information, their leaders simply will not take a common sense approach to actually solving the mystery they put in front of their followers. They do this very selfishly and deceptively.

You might be surprised to know that Russ Tanner, for instance, had no interest at all in identifying the planes he says are daily poisoning him. I asked him directly on-air and have the recording. He considers identifying the mystery planes to be useless. That makes no sense unless he has a vested interest in maintaining the staus quo. He may be self-deluded, but he is also engaging in producing a mass-delusion/deception by this lack of interest. Same for Michael Murphy, Dane Wigington, and many others. You may not know that Clifford Carnicom, a fifteen year veteran believer, has a University degree in photogrammetry, the science of taking and interpreting high resolution telephoto imagery. Yet Carnicom has spent well over a decade peering into microscopes over a phenomenon only six miles away, and has never sought to do any better than this:

mega2c.jpg



Unless they are trying to solve the conundrum, they are maintaining it. It is that simple.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
I see what you are saying, but still... lots of the rank and file DO accept that it is lots of commercial airliners. They don't seem to be bothered by that idea at all. They don't seem to recognize the problems that raises with the whole story. I was trying to get a direct citation for Griffin about it, but that link goes to a page which doesn't seem to contain it.
 

Belfrey

Senior Member.
I see what you are saying, but still... lots of the rank and file DO accept that it is lots of commercial airliners. They don't seem to be bothered by that idea at all. They don't seem to recognize the problems that raises with the whole story. I was trying to get a direct citation for Griffin about it, but that link goes to a page which doesn't seem to contain it.
Scroll up Hama, I gave it above.

The original "don't blame the pilots" article: http://ep.yimg.com/ty/cdn/realityzone/dontblamepilots.html
The page where he responds to comments from his readers about it, including the statement that "90% of the planes spewing out persistent trails are commercial flights": http://realityzone.com/20130510.html
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
From the Encyclopedia of Loons:

He has also been deeply engaged in what might charitably be called the Noah’s ark controversy, with Griffin claiming that the ark is located at the Durupınar site, as opposed to other Biblical young earth creationists who claim it is located near Ararat. One wonders what counts as “evidence” among these groups. Actually, in the case of Griffin, at least, his position is based on the book The Discovery of Noah’s Ark by David Fasold, who later admitted that the claims were wrong. Already deeply mired in conspiracy theories, Fasold’s admission has not seemed to affect Griffin, who has claimed the Ark continued to exist in fossil form, allegedly based on photographic, radar, and metal detector evidence, and that towns in the area have names that resembled terms from the Biblical story of the flood (keep in mind that Griffin has no background in archaelogy, etymology, or the languagaes of the area either). After Fasold backed out, Griffin continued to promote the view, together with Fasold’s “co-researcher”, none other than the legendary Ron Wyatt.

Just like we see so often, even though Fasold the originator said his claims about the Ark were wrong, Griffin still sells a movie repeating the false claims, and makes no mention of Fasold's admission. In a video, you can see a framed picture of the Drupinar site on his wall. He probably looks at it frequently. As my signature says, they don't admit mistakes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top