I am a Chemtrail Advocate . . . I believe there is an Aerosol Injection Program
- Thread starter George B
- Start date
- Status
solrey
Senior Member.
What?...Conveniently ignoring the last half of the sentence you partially highlighted? To wit: ...it also demonstrates that useful information can be obtained.
I find it very hard to believe that George has any sort of "experience with published research" outside of misinterpreting the work of actual scientists.
The purpose of student invovlement in the S'COOL project is to aid in validation of the instruments on the CERES satellites in the tradition of NASA's longstanding practice of outreach and education.
http://science-edu.larc.nasa.gov/SCOOL/index.php
The first four reasons for NASA getting kids involved are valid, the last two could only come from an extremely paranoid personality who also believes that...
Now...about Global Warming...
So, the observed global temperatures have been lower than the models say they should be? Couldn't be anything wrong with the models for a complex, chaotic system with many unknown feedbacks, could there? Nah, it must be due to a covert aerosol injection operation 'cause we all know all computer models are alway right 100% of the time so there must be something wrong with nature.
What a joke! I'm done with this foolishness.
[...] is quite the poignant description for George's comments, me thinks.
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Seeeems you have strong opinions . . . that is fine . . . so do I . . . it is not easy to communicate everything you know and have experienced which forms the way you process information and read between the lines . . . it is valid for me and rejected by you . . . I think the world is big enough for both of us . . .
I suspect George worked on something that was incredibly mundane, and entirely unrelated to top secret planet-saving 50 year long operations.
I've been thinking that "Don't debunk single-person conspiracies" might be a good debunker's rule. If after a thousand posts a person is incorrigible as ever, and they have an odd theory that only they hold, and it's based mostly on their "intuition" and cherry-picking data, then perhaps this is not the best use of a debunker's time.
I've been thinking that "Don't debunk single-person conspiracies" might be a good debunker's rule. If after a thousand posts a person is incorrigible as ever, and they have an odd theory that only they hold, and it's based mostly on their "intuition" and cherry-picking data, then perhaps this is not the best use of a debunker's time.
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Let me ask you . . . what do you think the mission of the Department of Defense is . . . ? If any natural or manmade situation threatens the US or its interests the threat is identified, studied, analyzed, contingency plans are formulated to deal with it, technology and countermeasures are constructed, tested, deployed and implemented . . . it is their job . . . anything else is unacceptable . . . so I don't think my theory is bunk . . . I think the individuals on the forum are too busy debunking with your formulas and axioms . . . and you are ignoring the obvious in front of your eyes . . .
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
1048 posts now
Did we break a rule . . . are we on double secret probation . . ?
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
" If after a thousand posts a person is incorrigible " Hmmmm. . . so I must bend to your will and logic or I am to be shunned by a rule you just made up . . . interesting concept . . .
I fail to see where anyone wrote any such thing! As usual...purposely misinterpret/manipulate what is written to suit you.
Why do you do that?!
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Then you tell me what I should take from the comments . . .
That he's got his own opinion and metric from which HE judges people as "incorrigible".
What does that have to do with being "shunned" or bending to any "rules".
I thought you were incorrigible after the first hour I spent discussing this subject with you....Did I "shun" you? Did I suggest that you bend to my will in any capacity?
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Seem most of the persons on this Forum are not use to people coming here and maintaining their position over several days. . . I get the feeling that they usually get their way or the people get mad or frustrated and leave . . I won't. . .
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
That's because you are incorrigible
Thank you and I have been right many, many more times than I have been wrong. . .
Kinda full of yourself...considering the complete lack of evidence...and all the assumptions and speculation.
I think that may be your whole problem...you have convinced yourself that you couldn't possibly be wrong because it isn't part of your nature.
It's kinda funny...considering...
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Yes, I have had to rely on informed inferences many-times to make critical and irreversible decisions. . . Life and circumstances often require such especially if you have been in a position of authority. . . .
Yeah, and one can only guess as to how many times you misinterpreted/misunderstood what the "informed references" meant...as you do in the case of "chemtrails". For example...your misunderstanding of how the Appleman Chart is actually used (which was funny in itself...considering you (sometimes) know the visible trails are contrails, except when it's AWAC) or how you misinterpret what scientists think the sources of (supposedly) elevated levels of sulfur are, and what certain treaties which allow access to airspace actually mean...
But go ahead...continue to assume that since you've always been right in the past (SURE!) that you must be "right" in the case of "chemtrails"...
I have to wonder if you ever had a position of authority. From what I can see...I can't see why anyone would put you in any such position.
What exactly was your title?
Oh yeah...
TOP SECRET! SHhhhhhhhh...........
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I have addressed all of the above many times which you have slanted to your biased view of me and do not want to shotgun all the answers . . . Please pick one you feel is most important and I will be happy to explain it completely. . . .
Secondly, I was a high ranking officer, I held many positions of authority. . . have MICK google my name and Congress. . . . he can verify at least my rank, service, corps and career area. . . .He can also verify my Name associated with at least two career areas of advanced technology . . . what it won't tell you is I was in charge or Commander of Functional
units most of my career. . . . The smallest about 15 people . . . The largest over 1,000 personnel. . . it won't tell you that I worked for years as a high level representative across multiple governmental divisions. . . DoD, VA and the Department of Interior . . . It won't tell you I was on the leading edge of development, testing, and implementation of a specific advanced technology. . . .and deeply involved in the Reinvention of Government process. . .
Hey George...I have never been wrong...also.
It's true...because I say so on the internet.
No evidence required...
Yeah, i have seen your attempts at addressing these misinterpretations of yours. These attempts have had the same effect on me as they have on the others here...VERY little...
Just because you were high ranking, doesn't mean everything you believed to be true...is true. Sorry...that sounds like ego to me...
Are you actually trying to suggest that high ranking officers can't be dumbasses?!? Many high ranking officers have made decisions that have cost the lives of thousands..unnecessarily.
I don't give a shit about what a google search for your name won't tell me.
I don't believe a word of it...I think it's all part of your delusion.
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
You were the one questioning . . . If I had held a position of authority. . . .and we agree on something. . . .just because someone held a high ranking position does not confer knowledge, wisdom or capability. . . .
Where did I write that a position of authority means anything to me?
And didn't you post on GLP that you worked in conjunction WITH the military...and that you weren't actually a military officer.
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Actually both are true . . . I have not been in the military for quite some time now and have worked in the private sector
in positions that contracted with the US government and military. . . .I never said I was not ever a military officer. . . .
Your first statement seems to be strong implying that which your second is denying.
If you want to focus on something, focus on sulphur emissions. In particular why do you think sulphur is being deliberately added to fuel when:
1) All regulatory action in the western world, (and increasingly in China) is strongly aimed at reducing sulphur emissions (and continuing to reduce the limits).
2) Any increase the background level can be attributed to China's increase in coal-fired power stations
3) The increase in the background level is no different now than in the 70s and 80s, but level decreased in the 90's, correlating with the West's clean air acts.
PCWilliams
Senior Member.
LOL! I stop by this thread occasionally to see if George B has actually coughed up any evidence. Nope ... 27 pages and still nothing.
At what point do we declare his evidence proves he doesn't have any evidence?
In my best Arnold Schwarzenegger voice: I'll be back!
George B
Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I will be happy to answer all your questions in order but don't have the time right now. . . I will return when I am able. . . .
I've Googled George's full name, and "congress", and there's a record of his promotion to fairly high rank. I don't know what "at least two career areas of advanced technology" is referring to though. His work does not appear to be technological, except in that it uses computers and statistical analysis.
Of course rank does not make you immune to woo. Consider former FBI Los Angeles chief Ted Gunderson, and his bizzare beliefs of gang stalking, "death dumps", and child kidnapping and prostitution in congress.
Or former Lieutenant General Tom McInerney, and his rambles on Fox News - particularly his insistance (which he strongly based on his vast experience) that the mystery contrail was a missile. He was dead wrong. And he's a bit of a "birther".
So really George, you'd be better off making your case without reverting to the argument from authority.
You also might want to cut out the use of ellipses (. . . ), as that is normally used to indicate a deliberate omission. It makes your posts hard to read, as I keep wondering what you cut out or are implying by omission. A comma or period would serve you better, if communication is your goal.
No biggie though, just a suggestion. I'm all for clarity.
No biggie though, just a suggestion. I'm all for clarity.
PCWilliams
Senior Member.
It doesn't. In fact, such people can be more prone to woo. They can be so confident in themselves their egos don't allow them to be objective once they've made up their minds to believe an idea. They will also go out of their way to defend bad ideas they've bought in to because now their egos are on the line.
I disagree about ellipses. I have always used them myself and all I used it for is a pause. Of course it isn't proper usage..but, does it really matter? I have never had a problem reading any posts which include them.
No biggie is right though...
It's quite interesting that when someone is promoted to a higher rank..they automatically assume that the majority of what they believe must be correct, despite a lack of any sort of education in the subject.
It does seem to be what George is suggesting...right?
No, I think he's suggesting that he's got a lot of first-hand experience with how government and the military work, and his rank is just evidence of that (as you can't get to that rank without participating in the machine.)
Of course, tens of thousands of other people could make similar claims, and they don't.
That's because you . . . use them.
Yup...
What was his rank?
Welcome to Metabunk George. You've got the MO just right. In fact, having just returned from one myself, I can feel a George metabunk style ban coming on. The signs are there. Ref: Belfort Group Case Orange thread on chemtrails on this very site. Also, 9/11 an Inside Job? now locked but still, I think, available to view here. It's worth a look to see the pattern you're locked into....
I hate to quote myself - but...........I've also just noticed that all the 'thanks' I've given previously, however ironically, have been 'removed' - or was that 'airbrushed'? - from existence. Were you just removing 'bunk' there, Mick?
- Status
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Science - If bigfoot is there, it could be a bear.
- Latest: Todd Feinman
