International Chemtrail Association-FaceBook Hoax

Efftup

Senior Member.
Yeah, I mean the comments from people who believe it and are shocked and appalled appear to be from people who believe it's real.
The comments from people with the "ask to spray over YOUR kids' school" and the "I used to be a 4'9" Asian woman and now I am strapping 6' 2" Caucasian man all thanks to Chemtrails". I find very hard to find that people ACTUALLY think these are serious comments, but clearly some people do.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
"I used to be a 4'9" Asian woman and now I am strapping 6' 2" Caucasian man all thanks to Chemtrails"
Oh MAN!!!! That made my day!!! Hilarious wit, from some 'anonymous' contributor!!!

BTW? I'm a 'strapping 6'2" Causasion man'....not due to "chemtrails", though.....sadly, those boring things called 'genetics'....

(edit)...I am also about....I dunno....two stone (?) above my "preferred" weight?

A 'stone' is about 14 pounds....well...."IF" I dropped around 18 pounds, I'd be "perfect"
 
Last edited:

Efftup

Senior Member.
I also liked the follow up questions:
"Don't you miss your boobs?"
"I was Asian"
appealing to national stereotypes perhaps, but I thought it particularly funny in the light of people who can see ZERO sign of satire on that page.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
I am...(laughing so hard)...I find it difficult to type....because....

"Don't you miss your boobs?"....I don't even know the 'context' of that sentence....but it is STILL funny...(just me, with the thirteen-year-old boy inside me....oh wait, I need to re-phrase that.... ;) )....

I'm an adult who DOES NOT 'diddle" with under-age children....sorry to have to make this clear, and 'spoil' a bit of humor. But, this day and age....(??)
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
not to mention:
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
I am...(laughing so hard)...I find it difficult to type....because....

"Don't you miss your boobs?"....I don't even know the 'context' of that sentence....but it is STILL funny...(just me, with the thirteen-year-old inside me....oh wait, I need to re-phrase that.... ;) )....
it was a follow up question to the 6'2" guy who USED to be a 4' 9" Asian woman.

But to the (imaginary) teenager that inhabits all of us, it is funny whatever the context.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
But to the (imaginary) teenager that inhabits all of us
Yes, yes indeed....perfectly phrased.

'We (adults)' should all still have a little bit of the "child" in us, in what some call the 'heart', some call the "soul"...(PsssT: really....it's in the BRAIN!!!)..... :)
 

Lisa P

Active Member
Yes, we get the humour, there is a time and place for that. What I am trying to say here is Metabunk is doing a fantastic job and this kind of humour is detracting from the good work. Weed and Efft I think it is time to go to the naughty corner and read the Posting Guidelines & don't mess with the she dog!! ;-)

So, please:
  • Do not insult people either directly or indirectly
  • Do not call them names, such as "stupid", "ignorant", "uneducated", or "liar"
  • Do not describe their theory as "stupid", "moronic", "idiotic", "delusional", etc
  • Do not suggest they get an education, or take some classes
  • Do not criticize their spelling or grammar
  • Do not respond to the tone of their post instead of the content
  • Do not mock people, or make jokes at their expense
  • Do not suggest they are mentally ill, or that they need help
  • Do not suggest anyone who believes in [any particular theory] is mentally ill.
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
I think my intention in adding them to this thread was more to show that there is MUCH CLEAR EVIDENCE of satire on that page.

but I think we all agree here that it might be funny, but it is certainly NOT BIG OR CLEVER.

Instead of giving people actual facts to chew on, these kind of satire sites just mock people and also give them some more "evidence" that is it is happening. It really doesn't help address the problem and get people to see the actual truth, by understanding the science behind clouds and contrails.
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Yes, we get the humour, there is a time and place for that. What I am trying to say here is Metabunk is doing a fantastic job and this kind of humour is detracting from the good work. Weed and Efft I think it is time to go to the naughty corner and read the Posting Guidelines & don't mess with the she dog!! ;-)

So, please:
  • Do not insult people either directly or indirectly
  • Do not call them names, such as "stupid", "ignorant", "uneducated", or "liar"
  • Do not describe their theory as "stupid", "moronic", "idiotic", "delusional", etc
  • Do not suggest they get an education, or take some classes
  • Do not criticize their spelling or grammar
  • Do not respond to the tone of their post instead of the content
  • Do not mock people, or make jokes at their expense
  • Do not suggest they are mentally ill, or that they need help
  • Do not suggest anyone who believes in [any particular theory] is mentally ill.
Yes, I agree with this. I think the ICA page does more harm than good. I personally find it funny, but the humour is quite dry and it seems to go over a lot of people's heads. (No pun intended!)
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
Instead of giving people actual facts to chew on, these kind of satire sites just mock people and also give them some more "evidence" that is it is happening. It really doesn't help address the problem and get people to see the actual truth, by understanding the science behind clouds and contrails.
I agree. Most Believers are likely to either think its real ie; HiBird- or they get defensive and take the mocking as confirmation and dig in even harder.
 
Last edited:

Ray Von Geezer

Senior Member.
I'm kind of split on things like this. Whilst I can understand why a lot of you would be against it, I can see the value in showing how ridiculous a lot of "chemtrail" theory is. Lampooning may (and clearly does) go over a lot of the heads of those who already believe but for those new to it, it may be more persuasive in stopping them falling for it than any amount of facts, logic and debate.

I'm not sure whether those behind the ICA page are British, but "taking the pi**" to disempower a group is certainly a British trait, and quite a powerful one when done honestly by "real people" (as opposed to say, the media or politicians). I'm thinking of the likes of the "Britain Furst" group which spoofs the "Britain First" far-right nationalist party.

Don't get me wrong, I do think logic and debate should be the first choice, but I don't think I'm alone in seeing that a lot of believers just aren't interested in it, and they're often the ones most actively spreading the hoax by organising the spamming/trolling of meteorological pages and such and/or running the sites that rely on censorship of dissent.

Having said that, I do think maybe the ICA crosses a little too far into "Poe" territory - it could perhaps to with taking a leaf out of some of the other spoofs and being a bit more obvious, given who it's aimed at.

Ray Von
 

Rico

Senior Member.
There are times when I wonder, however, if some people would reassess the way they simply believe things when they've figured out that they have been fooled. Not saying this to support the ICA site, but the thought has crossed my mind a few times.

I was chatting with a chemtrail believer on youtube once, where the individual accused me of being a government shill, being blind, asleep, being a sheeple, etc., and then cited the ICA as one of her many sources as though I've never seen it before. When I explained to this individual that the ICA was duping her, and explain how a lot of the ICA content was ripped from somewhere else, she actually up-voted my comment.

I only bring this up because when it comes to debunking conspiracy claims, a lot of CTs think debunkers are evil anyways and are spewing nothing but "disinformation." These troll sites are really quite unusual in the fact that they aim to confirm the CT's belief, grabbing their attention, and yet leaving subtle clues that the content isn't necessarily true either. They leave the lesson to not believe everything you see on the internet. Some people still buy into it, but it does make me wonder if it can be useful in that regard.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Maybe someday those ICA people might just let those chemtrail believes know they've been had! ;)
 

Lisa P

Active Member
Yeah I get what you are all saying and maybe it does deter some but it didn't deter me. Even when I was a very fringe chemtrail believer I could see ICA was a joke pretty quickly. It left me not trusting any debunkers tho and that didn't help me. The reason I don't like the page is more about ethics which could be another discussion. It is a concern how upset people have become over chemtrails or thinking geoengineering is happening now (the latter being me a few months ago). I am still very interested in where the future of SRM or climate engineering is going however I see it in a different light now. I am hopping we won't have to deploy SRM however if it comes to that I will be ok, maybe not so ok with nuclear power tho. And I don't think I would be too concerned with field testing as long as it is transparent that it is happening and the results are open to the public. I appreciate your discussions it helps to keep the balance and I very much understand the frustration and the need for humour, just some of those people are my friends and I feel protective of them.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
I think my intention in adding them to this thread was more to show that there is MUCH CLEAR EVIDENCE of satire on that page.

but I think we all agree here that it might be funny, but it is certainly NOT BIG OR CLEVER.
OK....I am now ashamed, and thoroughly chastised.

I need to leave the "humour" to the professionals....like Bill Cosby...(oops)...maybe "Jon Stewart" and "Stephen Colbert"??
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
I am hopping we won't have to deploy SRM however if it comes to that I will be ok
Yes....well "IF" we ever reach such a stage, as a GLOBAL plan? I, too, hope this never happens.

BUT....since it would have Global implications...(**)...that crossed defined arbitrary defined "country" boundaries? THIS is why the current "meme" of "chem"trails" is such nonsense.

On a 'secondary' note....our (Earth's) ozone layer is getting better, LIKELY because we HUMANS noticed, and DID SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!

http://research.noaa.gov/News/NewsA...le-signs-that-ozone-layer-is-recovering-.aspx

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/

GOOD news (finally).....

(**)...I keep 'editing'...."SRM" is actually happening, although a bit "unintentionally"....as we raze the Amazon rain forest. (JUST 'one' example)...

i could "go on"...but others do it far more brilliantly than I, online....
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
Yeah I get what you are all saying and maybe it does deter some but it didn't deter me. Even when I was a very fringe chemtrail believer I could see ICA was a joke pretty quickly. It left me not trusting any debunkers tho and that didn't help me. The reason I don't like the page is more about ethics which could be another discussion. It is a concern how upset people have become over chemtrails or thinking geoengineering is happening now (the latter being me a few months ago). I appreciate your discussions it helps to keep the balance and I very much understand the frustration and the need for humour, just some of those people are my friends and I feel protective of them.
i dont like ICA myself as i dont think they make the satire clear enough in their main threads. and not everyone reads 'comments'. And i respect what you are saying about being protective of your friends.

Unfortunately, not every chemtrail believer is cut from the same cloth. Some actually ARE mentally ill, some are mentally ill but in the normal way like alot of us are, some are just trolls, some really are uneducated - especially in areas like 'how' to research or how to discern good data from 'wonky' data. And some CTs really are liars... just like ICA are liars.

Just like there are many different types of debunkers/skeptics there are different types of CT believers. There is no 'one strategy' that cures all.
If there was our jobs would be alot easier.

But yes, i think skeptics (as well as CTs) need to be conscious of 'blanket statements' and use more modifiers. And keeping our frustration in check, although skeptics are human too! Contrary to popular opinion, we arent trained in intervention and behavior modification techniques as they apply to CTs. SO far there is no manual on this topic.

And while you are correct, in that outside observers are reading these threads, i think say in this instance, it is obvious the comments are a direct result of a specific poster and what he has posted. I doubt you or your friends could relate to him. HE is the one, right here and right now, skeptics are trying to reach. we've tried the super polite, evidence tactic with him, but it doesnt work at all. so we try different tactics because different people learn in different ways.

I am probably being too unclear here. so i'll just hope you get the jist of what i'm saying.
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
Some actually ARE mentally ill, some are mentally ill but in the normal way like alot of us are, some are just trolls, some really are uneducated - especially in areas like 'how' to research or how to discern good data from 'wonky' data. And some CTs really are liars... just like ICA are liars.
PLEASE do not "diminish" yourself.....YOU are very, very smart.


NEVER "let go" of this fact. I have seen it in your "responses".....YOU are quite intelligent, DO NOT let ANYONE tell you otherwise!!!!

Tim
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
Yeah I get what you are all saying and maybe it does deter some but it didn't deter me. Even when I was a very fringe chemtrail believer I could see ICA was a joke pretty quickly. It left me not trusting any debunkers tho and that didn't help me. The reason I don't like the page is more about ethics which could be another discussion. It is a concern how upset people have become over chemtrails or thinking geoengineering is happening now (the latter being me a few months ago). I am still very interested in where the future of SRM or climate engineering is going however I see it in a different light now. I am hopping we won't have to deploy SRM however if it comes to that I will be ok, maybe not so ok with nuclear power tho. And I don't think I would be too concerned with field testing as long as it is transparent that it is happening and the results are open to the public. I appreciate your discussions it helps to keep the balance and I very much understand the frustration and the need for humour, just some of those people are my friends and I feel protective of them.
Hi Lisa, I really appreciate your input and perspective...it always helps to hear from people who have viewed
things very differently than ones self. That said, I think I want to kind of steal the essence of Deirdre's comment:
I too think that people have a lot of different reasons for odd beliefs, and will probably respond very differently
to different approaches (and some, sadly, will probably never get out of the rabbit hole).

Your personal circumstances are illuminating...but you might not be the most typical former believer.
In fact, the very fact that you're here now suggests that you are probably not typical of "believers."
 

Lisa P

Active Member
Your personal circumstances are illuminating...but you might not be the most typical former believer.
In fact, the very fact that you're here now suggests that you are probably not typical of "believers."
Yes you are right I wasn't typical and from these discussions even tho I still don't 'get it' (ICA), I am much less frustrated with them now, so thanks and I appreciate the chat.
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
I do see what you, and others are saying though. I haven't "liked" the page on FB cos I don;t want to give it any more publicity.
The COMMENTS are obvious satire but the actual articles are little different from the rubbish that actual CT sites make up and post, with a bit of photoshop and taking things out of context.
 

Hevach

Senior Member.
An integral part of most conspiracy theories is that disinformation/psiops are spreading false information not just against them, but within them by making outrageous or easily disproven claims in their midst. See for example the recent feuds within the chemtrail community.

While you might catch the occasional person in a "is this really what I've been believing?" moment, I think Lisa is correct that you'll drive more of them deeper into the hole, since hoaxes like the ICA are exactly what they claim is being done to discredit them.
 

Peter

Member
Personally I don't have a problem with the ICA page. If you don't see it for what it is, then I don't think there's much anyone can do for you anyway... they're like a lost cause.

On the other hand.. the deeper in the rabbit hole you are, the more likely you're going to come to the point where you might be asking some questions about your beliefs, if there's still a strain of reality left in you.

People have been making fun of Niburu, UFO's, Ghosts, religions, psychic phenomenae, near death experiences, alien abductions, etc forever, and I feel it helps put things into perspective. Some of the things in that list actually have better evidence for their reality than chemtrails, which has precisely zero..

If we're going to give in to the sensitive big toes of the chemtrail believers, I think that's no better than giving in to fundamentalist demands, such as the idea that you can't make cartoons of Mohammed.

Whether there's a page making fun of chemtrail believers or not isn't going to make much of a difference to a mind that's conditioned to spin every kind of input into something that affirms a preconceived belief anyway. If they want a skeptical place that takes them seriously, they have this place to go to.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
If they want a skeptical place that takes them seriously, they have this place to go to
i think thats what @Lisa P was getting at, that mocking people or calling them uneducated (here at MEtabunk) does not equal 'taking people seriously'.

BUT, even though it sometimes comes off that way, Metabunk is NOT about conspiracy theories. Individual members may hold strong feelings about particular conspiracy theories simply because they have dealt with those CTs for so long. In many cases, the skeptics know more about the conspiracy then the CTs do (evolution, claims of evidence (debunked a million times or not debunked yet), former believers and what got them out of the rabbit hole, etc etc)

Metabunk is about bunk. It doesnt matter who is spreading the bunk. ICA is spreading bunk. (hence the debunks of their claims).

Personally, its pretty hard for me to take the "look-a-like" claims seriously...that fake snow thing, well forget it - as someone who has shoveled and rolled ALOT of snow in her lifetime, there is no way to take seriously that the gov was responsible for half of america and parts of canada to be covered in inches and inches of fake snow. :confused:

THAT's why Metabunk is so great. (and has a politeness policy)
I dont have to take you seriously to show evidence that a "theory"/claim of evidence is wrong or right. And you dont have to take me seriously to show me MY claim of evidence is wrong.
 

Peter

Member
Metabunk is about bunk. It doesnt matter who is spreading the bunk. ICA is spreading bunk. (hence the debunks of their claims).
In part they are, yes. However, I think what they do mostly is taking the bunk generated by the chemtrail guru's and believers, and then exaggerating it to comedic effect.

To me it seems they share the same goal that metabunk does, in the big picture. And since the original claims are so nonsensical (such as the fake snow you mention, but of course that's just the tip if the proverbial iceberg, no pun intended), they're getting a laugh out of it as they go along.

To me it's also an interesting experiment. It's interesting to see how far one can take the chemtrail subject before a believer starts having doubts.

The way we develop our sense of what's real and what's not usually isn't just a scientific process in which we test all of our beliefs against reality. Just debunking stuff obviously isn't cutting it for a lot of believers, since they have a mechanism in place to deal with that, no matter how well you debunk anything. So i guess something like the ICA page can provide another way to throw a wrench into the wheels of the chemtrail machine.

Changing beliefs is a process, usually. It's not just a matter of acknowledging a bunch of facts and then taking them for granted. People often need to go through a process in which old beliefs somehow need to let go of so new beliefs can take their place. Being entrenched into a social environment such as the chemtrail movement (which is in many ways a subculture of a bigger thing, it seems) isn't going to make that easier. They regard themselves as the 'awakened ones', while we are regarded as 'sheeple'. They stand for truth, freedom and all sorts of other lofty goals, while we are defending enslavement by the government, destruction of the planet and well essentially we're responsible for (the defense of) what in their mind is the biggest act of terrorism ever conducted on humanity.

So that's what we're up against. ICA takes these notions and gives the chemtrail believers exactly what they want, and then exaggerates it. Slogans such as 'A dimmer sky for a brighter future' should be a dead giveaway, or how about a name like 'International Chemtrail Associaction', which spells out the chemtrail moniker. No government agency would give their game away like that if it's to be some kind of dark and secret program.

So those are dead giveaways, and there are many more. I mean if it isn't obvious to you that this page is in jest, then I guess you're getting what you deserve.

Of course the ICA page is bound to backfire and confirm the beliefs of chemtrail believers. But that's also true for metabunk and contrail science. The very fact that we're sitting here debunking chemtrails all day means there's must be something to it, to the CT mindset. So should we stop doing it then?

What's also interesting is that a site like geoengineeringwatch doesn't seem to do anything to debunk the ICA page either, unless I missed it.
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
The very fact that we're sitting here debunking chemtrails all day means there's must be something to it, to the CT mindset. So should we stop doing it then?
I have seen this argument put forward a few times.
If it;s not happening, then why are you devoting so much time to telling me it isn't?

Well how about because I don't want the world slipping into a new dark ages,devoid of reason and sense, but full of superstition and fear, where I can be burnt as a witch simply because I understand some real science, or because I weigh the same as a duck.

but in the ct world, the existence of a debunker is now more supposed proof that the CT must be real
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
As someone not all that interested in the details of this topic, still sounds like a typical CT site (and name) to me when i read it. The only give away for me is a few of the comments (which could be shills trolling). Just saying, i think its too 'technical' for CTs to get the satire maybe. And not every nationality can grasp satire.

So no, i dont think the goal is the same as Metabunk. I think its just a venting page for frustrated chemskeptics. (not that i really care one way or the other)
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
Well how about because I don't want the world slipping into a new dark ages,devoid of reason and sense, but full of superstition and fear, where I can be burnt as a witch simply because I understand some real science, or because I weigh the same as a duck.
Nicely said.

It would be swell if there were no cause to pay attention to groundless junk,
but there remain people out there, relentlessly trying to push fantastical alternate realities
into the mainstream. This makes it harder for truth to win the day. Or month.

I've always reluctantly embraced the quote:
“One must keep repeating the truth.”

(often--but not always--attributed to Goethe)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
To me it seems they share the same goal that metabunk does, in the big picture.
Perhaps they think they do, but their actions are not compatible with those goals. There's simply no way this is helpful. It just adds noise. Those who recognize it as satire think that it's just there to cloud the truth - a form of disinformation. Those who do not recognize it as satire just fall deeper down the rabbit hole. It does not help anyone, it just makes it harder to debunk things. Yes it's funny, but it's a problem.
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
Perhaps they think they do, but their actions are not compatible with those goals. There's simply no way this is helpful. It just adds noise. Those who recognize it as satire think that it's just there to cloud the truth - a form of disinformation. Those who do not recognize it as satire just fall deeper down the rabbit hole. It does not help anyone, it just makes it harder to debunk things. Yes it's funny, but it's a problem.
Mick, I feel really weird disagreeing with you on this, since you've spent so much more time debunking than I have
(I wouldn't presume to tell Michael Jackson how to moonwalk, or Madonna how to be slutty)
but you just seem soooooooo convinced that this stuff is always counter-productive, and I'm just not sure it is.

It makes me think of those documentaries on the teenage brain: how, until a certain stage,
teens simply have significant wiring differences, compared to adults.
Their brains are not functioning in the same way ours are, but with just less info in there...

Likewise, I think that those who are inclined (I'm thinking of the Lakoff/Mooney, etc. books) to believe
that global warming is "a hoax," that 9/11 was "an inside job" and the Boston Marathon "false flag" theater,
are operating on a whole different set of wiring than most posters here. Brains wired differently.

In other words, I think that you're right, that ICA-type stuff is counterproductive, re. many people...
but I also think that some people on the margin--trying to decide whether to take 'chemtrails' seriously--
will see that believers are being viewed/mocked as gullible clowns, and head the other direction.
I don't claim to know how the numbers would break down (those who run away vs. those who become more entrenched) ...but I find it very hard to accept the notion that this kind of stuff is always bad...
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
will see that believers are being viewed/mocked as gullible clowns, and head the other direction.
yea but what percentage? women are mocked for nagging ALL the time everywhere and we still do it. (because we're right : )

say .001% of believers will head teh other way, then figure what are the chances those particular .001% will even see this page OR understand it as satire?
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
yea but what percentage? women are mocked for nagging ALL the time everywhere and we still do it. (because we're right : )

say .001% of believers will head teh other way, then figure what are the chances those particular .001% will even see this page OR understand it as satire?
What if it's 25%? 30%?

And yes, I deliberately steered clear of the "toilet seat needs to be down so I don't haveta look where I put my bare butt at 2:25am" female psychology angle...but thanks, Deer-drah. :p
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
we'll do an experiment. i'll mock 10 of you over the next few weeks and we'll see if any of you change your behaviors ;):)
Okay, you should probably start your mocking w/ WW ;), but remember,
I'm talking about observers who are curious...not full in, so they aren't really being made fun of...
 

WeedWhacker

Senior Member
I will try not to "mock". Today I nearly went "DefCon 1"...a customer who could clearly see that I was on the phone, dealing with another.

The customer on the phone heard the lady clearly, and suggested that I just go ahead and deal with her instead (thank you, to this un-named wonderful person!!).

But, once I focused on the person face-to-face, was able to defuse and then 'satisfy' all the questions she had. leaving (I hope) a positive experience in this person's mind. (She actually apologized...)....

ETA: Trying to find a "spin" to this, to comport with the "Topic"....maybe just the overall "mantra" as Mick has developed here....politeness to the "nth" degree, no matter what the maelstrom in your brain is telling you to "do"....

There just has to be a better way to inform people of the hoax of "chem"trails other than "mocking" and "shaming"...nobody advances when made to feel belittled. We've all been there, I think, at some point in our lives....it happens when we are children, of course. Peer pressures, social understanding as we grow into adulthood.....
 
Last edited:
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
H The International Chemtrail Association General Discussion 69
Getoffthisplanet International Space Station (ISS) Live Stream from 2/21/2020 - Unidentified Object Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 6
Mick West Book Review: "9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation" 9/11 28
ki_cz International upper atmosphere relative humidity maps General Discussion 1
Mick West Debunked: "Fake" live chat from the International Space Station (ISS) with Boise State Flat Earth 10
Mick West Spiral Contrails viewed from the International Space Station Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 12
Mick West How to take Photos of the ISS (International Space Station) with a P900 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Mick West Triangulating the Position and Height of the International Space Station (ISS) Flat Earth 48
MikeC International day of action June 30? Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Mick West GeoengineeringWatch Chemtrail Posters fly-posted in Sydney Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Mick West Do Polls and Google Trends show Chemtrail Belief Declining? Contrails and Chemtrails 11
Mick West TFTRH 9: Joe - Former Chemtrail Conspiracist, Current New World Order Conspiracist Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 51
Mick West YouTube adds Encyclopedia Britannica article on Contrails to "Chemtrail" Videos Contrails and Chemtrails 18
StratMatt777 How to effectively talk to chemtrail folk Practical Debunking 9
Leifer Claim: magnetic dust on cars proves chemtrail fallout Contrails and Chemtrails 11
cmnit Malpensa technician whistleblower on chemtrail activities in airport Contrails and Chemtrails 10
Mick West A Conversation with "Chemtrail" activist Patrick Roddie Contrails and Chemtrails 5
Trailblazer Explained: Vatican "chemtrail spraying" coin [part of set depicting Pope's travels] Contrails and Chemtrails 4
deirdre J.Marvin Herndon tries to pass off Bird Poop as evidence of "chemtrail" spraying Contrails and Chemtrails 24
TEEJ Claim of "UFO" interacting with "Chemtrail", Paris, France, 28th September 2016 Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 2
JRBids "Chemtrail off your left wing": Air Traffic Controller Contrails and Chemtrails 18
MikeG Debunked: Air Force Verifies Chemtrails are Real Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Mick West Why "Chemtrail" Tests on the Ground Find Metals That Don't Occur Naturally Contrails and Chemtrails 14
MikeC New Zealand Ministry of Environment reply to "chemtrail" query Contrails and Chemtrails 6
MikeG Debunked: Geoengineering Killing Great Barrier Reef Contrails and Chemtrails 4
Tapir-mâché Curious-- how low can persistent contrails form? Contrails and Chemtrails 25
Trailblazer Chemtrail response from Swiss Federal Office of the Environment Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Mick West Persistent Trails Survey Shows Chemtrail Believers Only Recently Noticed Persistent Trails Contrails and Chemtrails 32
MikeC Aircraft weight and balance in the real world Contrails and Chemtrails 5
Trailblazer Another photoshopped chemtrail poster: Michael J Murphy Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Jay Reynolds Chemtrail Believers' predictions of "years left" before disaster Contrails and Chemtrails 6
A Augie Snyder's contrail/chemtrail questions Contrails and Chemtrails 18
Mick West Debunked: Rise In Respiratory Mortality from 4th to 3rd Cause of Death. "Chemtrail Flu" General Discussion 13
Mick West How Rogue Scientist J. Marvin Herndon Disproved the Last Resort of the Chemtrail Theory Contrails and Chemtrails 31
Trailblazer Photoshopped "chemtrail" images on Geoengineeringwatch.org Contrails and Chemtrails 76
JFDee New fuel dump "chemtrail" video [Munich, Thai Airways Flight 925] Contrails and Chemtrails 33
Critical Thinker Why we debunk and who do we reach. Practical Debunking 2
Trailblazer Identified: Chemtrails Project UK's "chemtrail plane" (Air France A340) Contrails and Chemtrails 2
Mick West Debunked: Kylie Jenner's Chemtrail Meme Tweet Contrails and Chemtrails 54
S Contrail shadow Contrails and Chemtrails 15
Trailblazer Video of helicopter leaving "chemtrail"? Contrails and Chemtrails 8
TEEJ Chemtrail Fleet - Peter A. Kirby Contrails and Chemtrails 10
cmnit Chemtrailists articles on Las Vegas Tribune (in 2005) Contrails and Chemtrails 5
Critical Thinker San Diego Chemtrail group to 'educate' & Protest Scientists/Doctors Contrails and Chemtrails 3
TWCobra Madisonstar Moon posts 59 year old photo of B47's contrailing. Contrails and Chemtrails 0
S Black exhaust, contrail, or chemtrail? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 7
Mick West The Best Book for Explaining Contrails to Chemtrail Believers Contrails and Chemtrails 39
Husband of chemmy Help me! Wife is Chemtrailing... Contrails and Chemtrails 69
Jacob Aman J. Marvin Herndon's chemtrail letter to San Diego City Council Contrails and Chemtrails 39
A Dr. Kirkby 2009 CERN presentation: "Clouds Seeded by Jets" [Misunderstanding by Chemtrail Theorists] Contrails and Chemtrails 28
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top