Hoax: Fuel Dump video on Facebook [Flight BA244 from Buenos Aires to London]

[M Bornong]

Like I said, I'm in two minds here. He has got half a million views, 11,000 shares and apparently has had "documentary makers and journalists" contacting him. He seems pretty anti-chemtrailer, so I think he might expose the gullibillity quite nicely. YMMV...

It will expose the gullibility about as much as the KC-10 spoof video. How many years now
is that still being passed around as ultimate proof?

 

[Mick West]

Yeah, but it's not anything we can control. "We" are not doing it, regardless of what CT people might think.

But we can help with the debunking, pointing out the real explanation to people, as in this thread.

 

[Mick West]

It will expose the gullibility about as much as the KC-10 spoof video. How many years now
is that still being passed around as ultimate proof?

Yeah, Dane Wignington still uses the KC-10 video, despite me explaining it to him. In some ways though that can be helpful, as you can use it to demonstrate how Dane ignores any contradictory evidence and will never drop anything he claimed - like him leaving up the photocopier toner level indicator patent.

But then it's also spreading bunk.

 

[Hama Neggs]

But we can help with the debunking, pointing out the real explanation to people, as in this thread.

Absolutely, but arguing whether he should be doing what he is doing is kind of beside the point. We don't even know what the result will be yet.

 

[Hedgeangel]

Lol. are you listening to him on the radio? He's a LEGEND!!!!

 

[Mick West]

A segment of audio from the show. Bovey's explanation/confession starts at 2:10

 

[Stuwyatt]

Hi peeps.

Firstly, GREAT WORK in very quickly debunking this video. Anyone who isn't suffering from extreme selection bias would have very quickly identified this video as nothing more than a fuel dump. My friend Chris and I were amazed at how quickly it went viral, and how many people were decrying it as definitive proof that chemtrails are real.

This all started out as a joke that Chris played on his facebook friends, and he was shocked when he finally landed in Heathrow and had seen that it had been shared and viewed so many times. I persuaded him to post a status update that he was detained by military police upon landing and had his iphone confiscated. He didn't think that anyone would believe him, but as we all know, conspiracy theorists take everything at face value if it fits their theories.

We thought the radio interview would be the perfect opportunity to expose it as a hoax, as there are 40,000 odd listeners who stream the show from the website, and it's also broadcast on FM in various places in Europe.

Chris did a brilliant job in the interview considering he was still jet lagged.

Hopefully this troll may wake up a few conspiracy theorists into looking more scientifically into chemtrails, and hopefully coming to the theory that chemtrails are bullshit, but I'm half expecting for us to be bombarded with accusations that we are paid government shills or have been forced by the government to lie about what REALLY happened... lol

I did a cleaner edit of the full interview -

Though I doubt that the interview will get 600,000 listens... lol

 

[M Bornong]

Hi peeps.

Firstly, GREAT WORK in very quickly debunking this video. Anyone who isn't suffering from extreme selection bias would have very quickly identified this video as nothing more than a fuel dump. My friend Chris and I were amazed at how quickly it went viral, and how many people were decrying it as definitive proof that chemtrails are real.

This all started out as a joke that Chris played on his facebook friends, and he was shocked when he finally landed in Heathrow and had seen that it had been shared and viewed so many times. I persuaded him to post a status update that he was detained by military police upon landing and had his iphone confiscated. He didn't think that anyone would believe him, but as we all know, conspiracy theorists take everything at face value if it fits their theories.

We thought the radio interview would be the perfect opportunity to expose it as a hoax, as there are 40,000 odd listeners who stream the show from the website, and it's also broadcast on FM in various places in Europe.

Chris did a brilliant job in the interview considering he was still jet lagged.

Hopefully this troll may wake up a few conspiracy theorists into looking more scientifically into chemtrails, and hopefully coming to the theory that chemtrails are bullshit, but I'm half expecting for us to be bombarded with accusations that we are paid government shills or have been forced by the government to lie about what REALLY happened... lol

I did a cleaner edit of the full interview -

Though I doubt that the interview will get 600,000 listens... lol

Are you going to change the description on the video? It will also change the description on every share. Unfortunately Chris' video is being ripped off without credit to Chris and will now be part of the lore for a very long time.

 

[Stuwyatt]

Yes, I've asked Chris to change the description of the video, giving links to this thread and other places, but he hasn't responded yet. It will be changed soon.

As for the video being shared elsewhere, it's also on liveleak and other sharing sites, and will join the thousands of other videos of contrails and fuel dumps out there as 'definitive proof' of chemtrails. I personally don't think that Chris's video has swayed any newbie into believing that chemtrails exist, but I believe that it may have swayed a few of them to have a bit of a rethink about the conspiracy.

So in my opinion, very little damage was done, and lots of laughs were had at the expense of chemtrail believers.

 

[Chew]

You can't hoax conspiracy theorists without it backfiring, either by the hoax spreading uncontrollably with the original context stripped or them digging their heels in deeper in response to the ridicule.

 

[Trailblazer]

You can't hoax conspiracy theorists without it backfiring, either by the hoax spreading uncontrollably with the original context stripped or them digging their heels in deeper in response to the ridicule.

Well if, as you say, you can't beat them, then you might as well have some fun with them. They have to serve SOME purpose, after all.

 

[Chew]

Oh, it's certainly good for the lulz. I'm just saying hoaxes are rarely productive.

https://www.facebook.com/conspiracytheoristsdarndestthings

 

[deirdre]

Well if, as you say, you can't beat them, then you might as well have some fun with them. They have to serve SOME purpose, after all.

he doesn't say you cant beat them. you beat them with FACTS, not by making fun.

 

[Stuwyatt]

he doesn't say you cant beat them. you beat them with FACTS, not by making fun.

Chris ended up doing both... He gave them the full facts and made fun of them. If he had posted the original video as 'My aircraft jettisoning fuel', it still would have been re-uploaded and re-titled by chemtrailers and provided as proof of chemtrails.

 

[Hama Neggs]

Chris ended up doing both... He gave them the full facts and made fun of them. If he had posted the original video as 'My aircraft jettisoning fuel', it still would have been re-uploaded and re-titled by chemtrailers and provided as proof of chemtrails.

I only wish that, during the interview, he had been prepared to argue about some of the other "hard evidence" the host claimed exists. I just wish there was some way to hold their feet to the fire when they make broad claims like that. The host even implied, later during the part with Dane Wigington, that it had all been part of an intentional coverup agenda.

 

[Mick West]

I only wish that, during the interview, he had been prepared to argue about some of the other "hard evidence" the host claimed exists.

True, but I think Chris did very well in the interview otherwise, politely describing what happened, and encouraging people to look into claims a little before repeating them.

It's hard to counter the claim of "hard evidence" when even the host is not really sure exactly what that is.

 

[Trailblazer]

I only wish that, during the interview, he had been prepared to argue about some of the other "hard evidence" the host claimed exists. I just wish there was some way to hold their feet to the fire when they make broad claims like that. The host even implied, later during the part with Dane Wigington, that it had all been part of an intentional coverup agenda.

I've listened now. A nice job, but yes, I would have questioned the "qualifications" of Wigington and co, which the host mentioned.

But I was also pleasantly surprised that he didn't get cut off as soon as he came clean. It was a surprisingly civil interview. (I haven't listened to the Dane segment yet - it's late and I can't face it...)

 

[ChrisBovey]

I only wish that, during the interview, he had been prepared to argue about some of the other "hard evidence" the host claimed exists. I just wish there was some way to hold their feet to the fire when they make broad claims like that. The host even implied, later during the part with Dane Wigington, that it had all been part of an intentional coverup agenda.

Oddly enough, I wasn't aware there were that many people out there who actually believed this in chemtrails, so understandably I'm not familiar with these issues, I've never even heard of Dane Wiginton.

I don't believe in the tooth fairy either, but I don't spend time swatting up as to why the tooth fairy doesn't exist in case I'm unexpectedly asked to debunk the tooth fairy on Moonbat radio.

I listened to it again, and found it amusing the next guest was convicted murderer Dr Tullio Simoncini, who was convicted in Italy of murdering his patients by administering terminally ill cancer patients with bicarbonate of soda in the belief that cancer is a fungus (even though we can look at cancer cells under a microscope and know they are not a fungus).

 

[Hama Neggs]

True, but I think Chris did very well in the interview otherwise, politely describing what happened, and encouraging people to look into claims a little before repeating them.

It's hard to counter the claim of "hard evidence" when even the host is not really sure exactly what that is.

Yes, it's impossible, but I hate to see them toss that out without somebody saying: "What evidence is that?" I agree, he did a great job under the circumstances.

 

[Hama Neggs]

Oddly enough, I wasn't aware there were that many people out there who actually believed this in chemtrails, so understandably I'm not familiar with these issues, I've never even heard of Dane Wiginton.

I don't believe in the tooth fairy either, but I don't spend time swatting up as to why the tooth fairy doesn't exist in case I'm unexpectedly asked to debunk the tooth fairy on Moonbat radio.

I listened to it again, and found it amusing the next guest was convicted murderer Dr Tullio Simoncini, who was convicted in Italy of murdering his patients by administering terminally ill cancer patients with bicarbonate of soda in the belief that cancer is a fungus (even though we can look at cancer cells under a microscope and know they are not a fungus).

No disrespect intended. My "wish" wasn't meant that way. It's just that we have had the frustration of watching people like Dane march on and on, stating the same false "hard evidence" over and over again and having people like Richie Allen blithely tout him as an "expert".

 

[NoParty]

Oddly enough, I wasn't aware there were that many people out there who actually believed this in chemtrails, so understandably I'm not familiar with these issues, I've never even heard of Dane Wiginton.

I don't believe in the tooth fairy either, but I don't spend time swatting up as to why the tooth fairy doesn't exist in case I'm unexpectedly asked to debunk the tooth fairy on Moonbat radio.

I listened to it again, and found it amusing the next guest was convicted murderer Dr Tullio Simoncini, who was convicted in Italy of murdering his patients by administering terminally ill cancer patients with bicarbonate of soda in the belief that cancer is a fungus (even though we can look at cancer cells under a microscope and know they are not a fungus).

You rocked it, Dude. Struck a blow for sanity...without even having "swatted up" (hey, I learned a new phrase today, too).

Appreciate you coming here to share your view of the experience.
(feel free to stick around and check out our stellar "Debunking the Tooth Fairy" threads.)

 

[WeedWhacker]

You rocked it, Dude. Struck a blow for sanity...

I agree 100%

Now....how many of the "shared" posts from the FB page will get a chance to actually hear that interview? In order to learn the truth??

(The truth of the humour behind it all, is what I mean).

 

[Stuwyatt]

Chemtrail believers are very insulting and obnoxious when challenged aren't they? Both Chris and I have been inundated with abusive loons since the radio interview. It just goes to show that they have no facts and evidence to back up their theories - which is why their only option is to become abusive.

I'm having a great time on facebook today

 

[Trailblazer]

I see that Chris is now sharing videos that are actually factual. Good luck trying to get the same amount of traction with this one, Chris!

https://www.facebook.com/cbovey/posts/10203917120060935

 

[JRBids]

@ChrisBovey will you be changing the title of your video?

I can understand why people who don't know that much about what chemtrail believers post would think "what's the hard in having a kooky belief". Like the belief that the earth is flat or we never walked on the moon. However, flat earthers and moon hoaxers don't threaten to shoot down planes (see the lengthy thread on this forum about threats to shoot down planes/kill pilots). I have also been phoned and threatened by believers, and so has my business.

 

[Stuwyatt]

I've had death threats from EDL (English Defence League - UK nazis) members and other far right-wing groups too. So have many of my friends. Nothing ever comes of them.

 

[Hama Neggs]

This outfit has published a bit of a retraction after initially biting on the hoax story. They admit, early in this revised article, that the 8-hour police detention did not take place, but then the rest of the article remains substantially unaltered and reads like it all really happened. Metabunk is mentioned.

http://www.neonnettle.com/news/1173...ained-at-heathrow-for-filming-chemtrails-hoax

Man Claimed He Was Detained At Heathrow For Filming Chemtrails Hoax
Chris Bovey Admitted Hoax On Richie Allen Show

They even include, in the article, another "story" about a supposed similar detention. Quite a mixed message in the last paragraph.

This is not the first time someone has been arrested for potentially exposing the chemtrails cover-up. UFO Sightings Hotspot reported that at the beginning of this year, EUCAH public information director Melanie Vristchan was unlawfully arrested in Brussels and placed in a mental institution after proposing a ban on HAARP and chemtrails, under EU law.

"They took my bags and shoved me, handcuffed, inside the police car", she said in a statement published by Exopolitics.

"They then took me to a room where the female officer searched my body and they waited with me until a psychiatrist arrived at which time they left the room. The psychiatrist told me that he had received the order from the Prosecutor to have a psychiatric admission exam with me".

Lucky for Bovey, he was not sent to a psychiatric hospital and was eventually released by officers. But since his video has been shared over 10,000 times on Facebook, it seems he may have found fame as this footage could expose something big, however, it the claims have turned out to be false

He was lucky to have been released, it spite of the fact he was never actually detained? What?! The footage could expose what, the practice of emergency fuel dumping?!

 

[Chew]

This outfit has published a bit of a retraction after initially biting on the hoax story. They admit, early in this revised article, that the 8-hour police detention did not take place, but then the rest of the article remains substantially unaltered and reads like it all really happened.

I like how they mention another person who claimed to have been detained because of chemtrails. You would hope they would have learned a lesson from all this and start applying some due diligence and put in a statement like, "This one really did happen. We verified it with the police. We didn't just take some kook's word for it. Seriously, we're not so gullible as to make the same mistake twice!"

But no.

Metabunk is mentioned.

"Metabunk have since issued this statement:"

Statement? You mean a simple comment on a thread? "Statement" makes it sound like metabunk is a government agency, which I'm sure is exactly what they were going for.

 

[deirdre]

I see that Chris is now sharing videos that are actually factual. Good luck trying to get the same amount of traction with this one, Chris!

well once you're a known and admitted liar, why would anyone believe anything you say or share?

 

[Hama Neggs]

well once you're a known and admitted liar, why would anyone believe anything you say or share?

You mean like Metabunk or the government?

 

[deirdre]

You mean like Metabunk or the government?

youre comparing Metabunk to this Bovery guy?

 

[Mick West]

youre comparing Metabunk to this Bovery guy?

Metabunk is perceived by some as a "government shill" site, and now so is Chris Bovey (at least by some people on Facebook). It's a common response from believers, a very easy way of ignoring conflicting evidence by labeling it as "shill".

I think generally hoax do more harm than good. In this instance it's a mixed bag. The majority of people will see it quite clearly as a hoax, but some of those people will think it's a disinfo hoax, aimed at spreading confusion. Then there's those who skim, who will still think it's yet more "100% proof" of chemtrails.

Hard to say what the aggregate effect will be.

 

[deirdre]

Metabunk is perceived by some as a "government shill" site, and now so is Chris Bovey (at least by some people on Facebook). It's a common response from believers, a very easy way of ignoring conflicting evidence by labeling it as "shill".

I think generally hoax do more harm than good. In this instance it's a mixed bag. The majority of people will see it quite clearly as a hoax, but some of those people will think it's a disinfo hoax, aimed at spreading confusion. Then there's those who skim, who will still think it's yet more "100% proof" of chemtrails.

Hard to say what the aggregate effect will be.

true. but that isn't what I was responding to. debunkers on Metabunk don't lie.

 

[Hama Neggs]

youre comparing Metabunk to this Bovery guy?

No. I'm comparing the attitude towards them.

 

[Hama Neggs]

true. but that isn't what I was responding to. debunkers on Metabunk don't lie.

I didn't say they lie. You are missing the point.

 

[deirdre]

I didn't say they lie. You are missing the point.

I'm not missing the point. you missed the point of my post so I was responding to that.

People aren't going to believe anything new Chris says because he is an admitted liar and hoaxer.

As for your shill premise:

If CTs want to say Metabunk lies ... well, they are wrong. simple as that. and they cant prove they are right -because they aren't.

If they say Chris B is a liar. well, they are right and they can prove that cause Chris admitted it.

 

[ChrisBovey]

.

I'm not missing the point. you missed the point of my post so I was responding to that.

People aren't going to believe anything new Chris says because he is an admitted liar and hoaxer.

As for your shill premise:

If CTs want to say Metabunk lies ... well, they are wrong. simple as that. and they cant prove they are right -because they aren't.

If they say Chris B is a liar. well, they are right and they can prove that cause Chris admitted it.

Except I'm nothing to do with Metabunk and these people are [...] and call anyone who disagrees with them a shill. I made them look completely stupid, so of course they are going to call me a shill ... trust me, I've been called a lot more offensive and abusive things by these [...] in the last 24 hours since I came clean about the fact I trolled them.

 

[ChrisBovey]

youre comparing Metabunk to this Bovery guy?

Can you spell my last name correctly please?

 

[Hama Neggs]

I'm not missing the point. you missed the point of my post so I was responding to that.

No, I didn't.

People aren't going to believe anything new Chris says because he is an admitted liar and hoaxer.

And people don't believe Metabunk for the same "reason".

As for your shill premise:

If CTs want to say Metabunk lies ... well, they are wrong. simple as that. and they cant prove they are right -because they aren't.

If they say Chris B is a liar. well, they are right and they can prove that cause Chris admitted it.

As if CT people legitimately PROVE stuff before declaring it to be factual?

 

[Hama Neggs]

.
Except I'm nothing to do with Metabunk and these people are [...] and call anyone who disagrees with them a shill. I made them look completely stupid, so of course they are going to call me a shill ... trust me, I've been called a lot more offensive and abusive things by these [...] in the last 24 hours since I came clean about the fact I trolled them.

Welcome to the club!