Global March Against Chemtrails and Geoengineering

I am waiting for the first post claiming the people that control the weather caused the cold temperatures to disrupt the protest.
 
The Los Angeles Sky at 10:55 AM today.


Doesn't look like it's going to grow much. But it will give them something to point at. It's also "vertical", which is another thing that's great to explain to people, as it gives them some perspective if they can visualize why it looks vertical (it's flying directly overhead)

[15 minutes later, it did spread a bit. Expect this contrail to be featured in photos of the LA March, as it may well be the only significant one today]

 
Last edited:
deirdre said:
lol our guy says he cant go cause he got sick shoveling the chemsnow. what he really means is 'im not going cause its colder than a witches ... out there!"
snow.JPG
Click to expand...

Wow,

he asks his followers to face the chem-covered skies, but he prefer no to. I mean, for someone who believes in chemtrails he's basically saying that it's OK for the followers to sacrifice themselves, but no OK for him because the doctor said so?

Just wow!
 
Mick West said:
Well, now there's a nice horizon to horizon contrail from http://www.flightradar24.com/ASA222/2999caa
Alaska AS222 SFO->PVR


(Darkness in the sky is due to using a polarizing filter on a very wide angle lens)
Click to expand...

I'm In LA too. I've been seeing contrails following airliner flight paths recently as well....north/south (between San Diego and northern cities) and out in the Mohave Desert, west to east ( LA to the rest of the cities, east).
I was working in the Cali desert this past week.
 
Mick West said:
The weather here in Los Angeles today has a cloud layer that might be described as either "normal", or "HAARP clouds", depending on your disposition.



Contrail forecast (this is for 7AM today) does not indicate any contrails. Maybe later though.
Click to expand...

This is a great tool for debunking. I had no idea there was a continent wide forecast chart... I'd only seen contrails listed in METARS and PIREPs before.

Very cool.
 
Mount Shasta's event had 30-40 people. At least 2/3 were far down the rabbit hole, but I had a few interesting conversations. Several people said they would have liked to have heard me from the stand. They actually held the event on the private property where they were just supposed to gather, but the police did not want to get involved.
 
I've got the feeling that the attendance of this second "march" is significantly less compared to the first. Perhaps it's too early to say just yet, but I see a lot less online buzz about the recent protest. I don't see so much video documentation like last time. Searching Youtube for recently uploaded videos about yesterday's events yield not so much relevant stuff this time. And as I said, from what I've can tell and have been told by others there wasn't much people attending this time. Can someone else confirm this perhaps?

If we take a look at Google Trends there is a slight hint of decreasing interest in "chemtrails", besides the increased interest surrounding the recent "march".
http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=chemtrails

My theory is that we now happens to be in the spike of the "chemtrail" hysteria, and as with 911-truth these ideas will fade out with time since they don't lead to anything coherent. Even most believers will realize this eventually, but usually make the excuse that the information they once accepted was actually part of some greater conspiracy to distract the public from "the real issues". In that way the believer can distance themselves from their previous beliefs without having to admit failure.

Time will tell if the trend will show a decrease in interest eventually.
 
Last edited:
From the few pictures posted by the chemmies thus far, it doesn't look like there were many people at their show in San Diego..... but they broke out their surgical masks and drums for the performance and even a few bewildered looking children to swell their ranks.


Capture.JPG Capture.JPG
 
Last edited:
The Los Angles (Santa Monica) march:
http://intellihub.com/los-angeles-a...obal-march-against-chemtrails-geoengineering/ (http://archive.is/9WGIs)



The writer here is still pushing a very simplisting and factually incorrect version of the theory:

For many years people have noticed persistent contrails coming from jets and lingering in the sky for hours. Science’s reasoning for what we are seeing is that these are simply contrails, or condensation trails of jet exhaust. The problem with this explanation, leading to what the mainstream media has termed as the “chemtrail conspiracy theory,” is that it does not agree with the actual science of flight and weather.

Contrails are very short, last only a few plane lengths behind the aircraft, and only occur at altitudes above 30,000 feet. They are composed of ice crystals that dissipate quickly behind the plane. Chemical trails can happen at much lower altitudes, and now with the Plane Finder App for smart phones, many lay people have been documenting persistent trails at lower altitudes.
Content from External Source
"Science's reasoning" ... "does not agree with the actual science" ????

I can understand people being passionate about a cause they feel is important. It's just very unfortunate that this passion makes them reject any faint possibility of being wrong - to the extent of ignoring science.

It's very unfortunate that the myth "ice crystals that dissipate quickly behind the plane", that I addressed six years ago in my very first chemtrails debunking post, is still going strong. It's bunk by assertion, plain and simple.
 
There were all of 5 people standing around talking amongst themselves at the Eugene, OR 'event'. We walked right past them, even though I looked at both signs they had and made eye contact with a couple of them, nobody even tried to engage us. After we walked out of a store a block or two down the street at 12:45 they were already gone. Took some pics from across a nearby park which I'll post when I get a chance.
 
Mick West said:
@Steve, did you attend? Anything interesting transpire?
Click to expand...
I was there and shot a lot of video of their march. I'll try to edit it down this week.
It was really frustrating trying to reach these people with the simple reason of why some contrails persist.
As soon as you get half way in to an explanation they jump in with a completely new claim like "what about the patterns" or "what about the test from scientist that shows high levels of barium in the water". They don't really want to know any explanation because they truly believe that they know the whole story.

Several of them came close to physically attacking me for shooting them threating to grab my camera and pull out the chip. The combination of their pure conceit over their misunderstanding about the science of contrails and their complete distrust in anything to do with the government makes these people a real threat to our culture.
 
Steve said:
It was really frustrating trying to reach these people with the simple reason of why some contrails persist.
As soon as you get half way in to an explanation they jump in with a completely new claim like "what about the patterns" or "what about the test from scientist that shows high levels of barium in the water". They don't really want to know any explanation because they truly believe that they know the whole story.
Click to expand...

I think we perhaps need to try a different approach. Some ultra-simplified points that are easy to grasp, backed up with verifiable references. Perhaps even something that can fit on a postcard. Contrails are Clouds! Soil is 8% aluminum! Crossing flight paths make crossing contrails!

The thing to emphasise would be "think for yourself", "don't believe everything you read on the internet". Here's some scientific facts. You can verify them yourself. Here are some sources.

It's interesting looking at the intellihub article:
http://archive.is/9WGIs

Really really basic science mistakes. And yet the rebuttal does not work. They move from point to point, and if you start to actually get through to them then they think you are brainwashing them, and shut down.

So maybe instead of explaining things in depth, it's better to challenge them to do it themselves?
 
Steve said:
Several of them came close to physically attacking me for shooting them threating to grab my camera and pull out the chip. The combination of their pure conceit over their misunderstanding about the science of contrails and their complete distrust in anything to do with the government makes these people a real threat to our culture.
Click to expand...

I don't understand that. Isn't the purpose of marching to be seen? Why would they be upset that someone else was recording and possibly redistributing their attempts to spread their message. Is there something I'm missing? You would think that they would be happy to answer questions instead of trying to suppress a record of what they said and did.
 
Your right Mick, we need post cards or half sheets explaining basic facts to be used as hand-outs. They could be given to these activists and to the general public that these people are trying to reach with their nonsense. When I counter protest the Truthers I always hand out half sheets with the websites that debunk their claims to anyone that they are talking to. If you could put together a nice bullet point postcard size hand-out that we can print out and use at these demonstrations, it would be very helpful.
 
Mark Barrington said:
I don't understand that. Isn't the purpose of marching to be seen? Why would they be upset that someone else was recording and possibly redistributing their attempts to spread their message. Is there something I'm missing? You would think that they would be happy to answer questions instead of trying to suppress a record of what they said and did.
Click to expand...

There's quite a spectrum of people who attend that march (if the last one is any indication, I did not go to this one). Some of them were convinced that Steve and I were agents of Them. So they would think that any filming would be used for nefarious purposes. There were also some people there who were very quick to anger.
 
Steve said:
Your right Mick, we need post cards or half sheets explaining basic facts to be used as hand-outs. They could be given to these activists and to the general public that these people are trying to reach with their nonsense. When I counter protest the Truthers I always hand out half sheets with the websites that debunk their claims to anyone that they are talking to. If you could put together a nice bullet point postcard size hand-out that we can print out and use at these demonstrations, it would be very helpful.
Click to expand...

Personally I think a standard "Metabunk" handout an extremely bad idea. After the event it will just be used to prove Metabunk is a disinformation organisation rather than a bunch of independant posters.
 
David Fraser said:
Personally I think a standard "Metabunk" handout an extremely bad idea. After the event it will just be used to prove Metabunk is a disinformation organisation rather than a bunch of independant posters.
Click to expand...

How about a standard "Contrail Science" handout.

And the idea would be to encourage people to "look it up!" - not take the flyer at face value.
 
David Fraser said:
disinformation organisation
Click to expand...

I heard this one a lot when "trolling" local-ish event pages on facebook. "Eric Lee you're either really F***ing stupid or are clearly a disinformation agent."
"Contrail science is a troll site. Mick west is a software engineer and disinformation agent, not a scientist."

Bizarre. "Disinformation agent."

That said, using inspiration from Metabunk, I politely posted in a non-confrontational way, and believe it was effective as I got through to a few individuals. I truly believe that's the best approach.
 
Buildy said:
"Contrail science is a troll site. Mick west is a software engineer and disinformation agent, not a scientist."

Bizarre. "Disinformation agent."
Click to expand...

Even if Mick was a scientist it wouldn't matter as he would just be a "shill"....they hide behind the ad hom to avoid the fact that the information on CS is all easily and independently verified over decades of research and knowledge accumulation.

They never provide any substantiation to the idea that contrail science is "disinfo"
 
Mark Barrington said:
I don't understand that. Isn't the purpose of marching to be seen? Why would they be upset that someone else was recording and possibly redistributing their attempts to spread their message. Is there something I'm missing? You would think that they would be happy to answer questions instead of trying to suppress a record of what they said and did.
Click to expand...
Mick West said:
How about a standard "Contrail Science" handout.

And the idea would be to encourage people to "look it up!" - not take the flyer at face value.
Click to expand...

Just basic facts like what causes persistence, why there are patterns, why the test showing high levels of Al are bunk and what the weight of a contrail can be. Most of the people these chemmies encounter have no idea what they are talking about, so a concise bullet point hand-out would give them some counter reference to these many misunderstood claims.
 
There's quite the post on the March's main Facebook page called "Dispelling Internet Disinformation Tactics – Debunking the Debunkers.
Disinformation Strategies Exposed – Please Don’t Feed The Trolls!"

They go after Mick, Contrailscience and Metabunk pretty hard. Interesting that they censor the names though. Fairly amusing read, actually.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...73741830.120482964826830&type=1&stream_ref=10

But Mick, I AM in love with you and your band of marauding minions! And boy am I glad I found your Craigslist ad for employment to your website so I could spread disinformation from home and make huge cash!


Wow.
 
Steve said:
Just basic facts like what causes persistence, why there are patterns, why the test showing high levels of Al are bunk and what the weight of a contrail can be. Most of the people these chemmies encounter have no idea what they are talking about, so a concise bullet point hand-out would give them some counter reference to these many misunderstood claims.
Click to expand...

While that may be a generally good idea, I think we need to understand that they have zero trust in anything contrailscience or metabunk claims. I wonder if it's at all possible to kind of show them how to validate claims, by looking at sources, fact-checking etc. Sometimes I feel what's needed is not so much factual knowledge, but the means to acquire and validate this knowledge - basic research skills, if you will.

Now, there are several things that will stand against this. One, the distrust they have for metabunk may extend to any scientific study which does not confirm their views. There's several ways to look at this, I guess, such as a pessimistic view as these people being too far down the rabbit hole, or a more optimist view of hoping that having these skills and studies out there could eventually give them reason to reconsider, and if not, well someone might find the skills and knowledge useful. Now, on to the second point, which concerns skills. Chemtrailers have, like it or not, their own set of skills, circular as they may be. They also have a conceived notion of what critical thinking is (mostly: which positions critical people have, not so much which skills.) What's needed is to show that these skills give them an advantage: the ability to verify for themselves the validity of claims. They often point to the need for critical thinking and waking up and looking for yourself, so it would make sense to show how the skills of fact-checking and research actually empower them to do things they pride themselves with.

To be honest, I have tried this sometimes. And while I have mostly not faced outright rejection, as opposed to full-on debunkers, I don't see much success. But maybe patience is a virtue here. It's at least not a confrontative style of debate, but an attempt to take serious the intents and views of the person and to empower them to critical thinking.
 
Strawman said:
While that may be a generally good idea, I think we need to understand that they have zero trust in anything contrailscience or metabunk claims. I wonder if it's at all possible to kind of show them how to validate claims, by looking at sources, fact-checking etc. Sometimes I feel what's needed is not so much factual knowledge, but the means to acquire and validate this knowledge - basic research skills, if you will.

Now, there are several things that will stand against this. One, the distrust they have for metabunk may extend to any scientific study which does not confirm their views. There's several ways to look at this, I guess, such as a pessimistic view as these people being too far down the rabbit hole, or a more optimist view of hoping that having these skills and studies out there could eventually give them reason to reconsider, and if not, well someone might find the skills and knowledge useful. Now, on to the second point, which concerns skills. Chemtrailers have, like it or not, their own set of skills, circular as they may be. They also have a conceived notion of what critical thinking is (mostly: which positions critical people have, not so much which skills.) What's needed is to show that these skills give them an advantage: the ability to verify for themselves the validity of claims. They often point to the need for critical thinking and waking up and looking for yourself, so it would make sense to show how the skills of fact-checking and research actually empower them to do things they pride themselves with.

To be honest, I have tried this sometimes. And while I have mostly not faced outright rejection, as opposed to full-on debunkers, I don't see much success. But maybe patience is a virtue here. It's at least not a confrontative style of debate, but an attempt to take serious the intents and views of the person and to empower them to critical thinking.
Click to expand...
Me thinks the major issue is the distrust of government and anything that is institutionalized or funded by them . . . also including academia, major multi-national corporations, banking and international political interest groups CFR/Trilateral Commission/ UN and so forth . . . which also includes all things based exclusively on the scientific method . . . if it is not divisible by common sense, intuition, or pronounced OK by one of the acceptable ones . . . Alex Jones, Project Camelot, Jessie Ventura, FOX Network, etc . . . it is simply not reliable or to be believed because all conventional mainline sources such as NASA, NOAA, FAA, UN, ABC, CBC, NBC , CNN are controlled propaganda information outlets to control the Sheeple . . .

If you can get beyond the above and isolate the individual in a one on discussion you might get somewhere . . .
 
Certainly I think rampant Govt secrecy and carelessness with citizen safety since, say, WW2 is a major factor in the rise in conspiracy thinking - I won't try to count the number of times people have said "MKULTRA therefore chemtrails" or similar associations.

This Scientific American Article "Why people believe conspiracy theories" remains a good primer on the topic IMO.
 
insulting peoples intelligence is never the way to go. it Always backfires. But I LOVE the "look it up" motto. cheeky and true. a lot of my friends are new ager types and I think youre banging your heads against a wall. the bullet point list to give to the passerbys to prevent them from 'waking up' is the best way to go in my opinion. I've been debunking autism bunk for 15 years. you gotta pick your battles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NorCal Dave
Claim: A UFO crashed in 1933 Italy and the US Recovered it
Replies
8
Views
3K
NorCal Dave
NorCal Dave
NorCal Dave
Claim: New HD video Shows Bigfoot
Replies
20
Views
4K
PublicStranger
PublicStranger
Mick West
Claim: Original Calvine UFO Photo
27 28 29
Replies
1K
Views
131K
Scaramanga
Scaramanga
John J.
Is "Improved Instrumental Techniques...", Nolan, Vallee, Jiang, Lemke 2022 a useful paper?
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
Z.W. Wolf
Z.W. Wolf
NorCal Dave
Szydagis Point #2: “It’s curious that Asia and Africa have so few sightings, and sightings stop at the Canadian and Mexican borders."
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
Skalman
Skalman

Latest posts

Back
Top