Is Belief in Chemtrails a Bad Thing?

NFLJACK

New Member
Having a public repository of these threats may be usefull to flag to the rest of the population that these chemtrail believers are not necessarily as benign as they may seem.

Wow. You take behavior that you oppose from a very small faction of a group and use it to make a blanket, and dishonest, statement about the entire group. Following your example, I wonder, are all Australians as dishonest and illogical as you?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Wow. You take behavior that you oppose from a very small faction of a group and use it to make a blanket, and dishonest, statement about the entire group. Following your example, I wonder, are all Australians as dishonest and illogical as you?
"Benign" simply means: "not a bad thing", or "having no ill effects". The point is not that all chemtrails believers want to shoot planes down, but that promoting the chemtrail belief encourages some people to shoot planes down. Hence promoting chemtrails (regardless of if you personally want to shoot planes down) can have bad effects, in that it bolsters the belief of those who want to shoot planes down.

So "these chemtrail believers are not necessarily as benign as they may seem." is a reasonable assessment, even if applied to all chemtrail believers. But here I think Greg might even have just meant "these chemtrail believers" - meaning just the ones that make threats.
 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
"Benign" simply means: "not a bad thing", or "having no ill effects". The point is not that all chemtrails believers want to shoot planes down, but that promoting the chemtrail belief encourages some people to shoot planes down. Hence promoting chemtrails (regardless of if you personally want to shoot planes down) can have bad effects, in that it bolsters the belief of those who want to shoot planes down.

So "these chemtrail believers are not necessarily as benign as they may seem." is a reasonable assessment, even if applied to all chemtrail believers. But here I think Greg might even have just meant "these chemtrail believers" - meaning just the ones that make threats.
My question is "why aren't the CT believers doing more?" While I don't want people to shoot down aircraft it seems the majority of CTers believe in FEMA camps, government spraying poison on us, etc. don't do anything but talk on the internet and hit like on a CT Facebook page. The chemtrail lawsuit went nowhere and raised very little money. It seems their belief is not that deep.
 

Mattnik

Moderator
Absolutely - if it takes too much effort it falls flat. Take Jay's advice on how to photography and identify planes. Ignored.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Those that stir up false stories and conspiracies should be considered to be aiding and abetting any criminal action that results from those actions. I am for freedom of speech, I am not for the right to 'yell fire in a theater'. That is what I see the CT conspiracy folks and others doing. I should be obvious by now that there those out there with untreated mental illness. Giving then a reason, is almost like loaning them a gun.

Just my opinion.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Wow. You take behavior that you oppose from a very small faction of a group and use it to make a blanket, and dishonest, statement about the entire group. Following your example, I wonder, are all Australians as dishonest and illogical as you?
NFLJack,
I've followed this thing for going on fifteen years now. At first it was very small, and some of the people involved were even having fun.
There were essentially no threats, maybe I would see one per year. This thread goes to ten pages now, in one and one half years.

I notice that you have no argument and expressed no opposition to these ideas, just insults.

You can't argue that this is an accelerating trend. Even one of the leaders, Dane Wigington, recently said "We all feel that way.", when someone brought up the idea of raising funds to bring down a plane. This may be a small faction, but the trend is heading more and more in that direction.

That should concern you much more than us bringing the ten pages of threats to light.
 

NFLJACK

New Member
I repeat: using a small faction from a group to make an all encompassing statement is dishonest. First, no one knows the number of people who believe in the chemtrail phenomenon, not even me. Therefore, it is completely unfair to make a statement and assign a negative characteristic to an entire group. You even did the same thing by quoting the person who said, "We all feel that way." I know you don't believe that whoever said that has talked to ALL believers and can now represent ALL of them. Do you?

As for me insulting the writer, what he did WAS dishonest and illogical. I pointed out why I think that based on facts and evidence provided by him. I did not call him a "crazy conspiracy theorist" or a "nut job" as many debunkers of conspiracies tend to do when trying to present an argument opposing the ones who believe in the conspiracy. THAT is a genuine insult.

Please don't presume to tell me what should concern me. You don't know me.
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
NFLJACK, I did not take Greg's statement to include any more people than those who were posting threats. I think you are reading far more into the statement than is actually there.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
...
Please don't presume to tell me what should concern me. You don't know me.
The presumption of what warrants concern was made on the basics of a common ethics it seems safe to presume is shared by all - ie, that threats of violence or any subtle validation of it are wrong and of disturbing morality.
Not that much of a far-out thing to presume one would hope.
 

NFLJACK

New Member
More derogatory language based on false analogies. I fail to see how someone thinking something could be dangerous and asking questions about it so he can better understand it can be equated with someone yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

Do you also think the U.S. government never intentionally injected syphilis in a group of rural black men without their knowledge in Tuskegee, Alabama, to do a study between 1932 and 1972?
 

NFLJACK

New Member
As I said, you don't know me. You don't know what I am concerned about nor the level of that concern. Not seeing evidence of something is not sufficient enough to say it does not exist.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Wow, you seem determined to misunderstand and be offended.
What derogatory language did I use?
What does past abuses of government have to do with this?
This is not about someone thinking something could be dangerous and asking questions about it so he can better understand it, it's about someone thinking some-thing's being done to them, based on a complete and continued lack of evidence, getting worked up to the point where pre-emptive violence seems a logical action.
 

NFLJACK

New Member
... but that promoting the chemtrail belief encourages some people to shoot planes down.
So Christians believing in the Bible encourages some other Christians to bomb abortion clinics?

I'm definitely seeing a pattern here on this site. Would it be too much to ask, when trying to have a serious, rational debate (which if I'm correct is what you intended with this site), to expect people not to make assumptions, avoid the fallacies and stick with facts and evidence?
 

NFLJACK

New Member
Wow, you seem determined to misunderstand and be offended.
What derogatory language did I use?
What does past abuses of government have to do with this?
This is not about someone thinking something could be dangerous and asking questions about it so he can better understand it, it's about someone thinking some-thing's being done to them, based on a complete and continued lack of evidence, getting worked up to the point where pre-emptive violence seems a logical action.
Apologies. That was made in response to Carienn.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
...Would it be too much to ask, when trying to have a serious, rational debate (which if I'm correct is what you intended with this site), to expect people not to make assumptions, avoid the fallacies and stick with facts and evidence?
I'm pretty sure the answer to that would be an enthusiastic 'absolutely!'
It would give great joy to all involved to not have it assumed that they support covert government abuses of the population or are paid secret agents trying to put people off the trail.

Edit... ah my apologies, I should have figured that out.
I'm too used to seeing a large disconnect between what was said and a vehement response that makes large leaps of assumption.
 

NFLJACK

New Member
I'm pretty sure the answer to that would be an enthusiastic 'absolutely!'
It would give great joy to all involved to not have it assumed that they support covert government abuses of the population or are paid secret agents trying to put people off the trail.

Edit... ah my apologies, I should have figured that out.
I'm too used to seeing a large disconnect between what was said and a vehement response that makes large leaps of assumption.
That statement was not directed at you.
 

brent_brent

New Member
I'd like to ask you something. Pretend for a minute that these conspiracy theorists are correct, and that you are one of them. How would you go about getting proof?

To answer your other question about past government abuses, I was hoping to get Carienn to consider those men in Tuskegee and how they would feel if they knew they were being experimented on, said something about it only to be called mentally ill by others when they sought help. That's all.
Why would you believe in something that has no proof then?

If a contrail can persist (proven science) then how can it be a chemtrail?

Simple science, seriously how is it that hard to work out?
 

Ross Marsden

Senior Member.
Getting back to this:

Then you need to read it again. It says what it says.
In response to Ross Marsden.
OK, I read it again, and indeed it says "these threats" and "these chemtrail believers" meaning those who had made the threats. If he meant all chemtrail believers, he would have said "all" to make it clear. I get the impression that GregMc takes care to be very clear in his posts.

Here it is again:

Having a public repository of these threats may be usefull to flag to the rest of the population that these chemtrail believers are not necessarily as benign as they may seem.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Wow. You take behavior that you oppose from a very small faction of a group and use it to make a blanket, and dishonest, statement about the entire group. Following your example, I wonder, are all Australians as dishonest and illogical as you?

Would you agree that it is troubling that there are so many documented examples of people with a desire to blow up a plane with living beings on it? That there may be more such people who do not publish their intents on the internet, or that do but we just haven't come across them? Don't you think that it may be dangerous for some people to "egg on" others about "chemtrailing", because there is a danger someone will actually take action against a passenger plane?
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
So Christians believing in the Bible encourages some other Christians to bomb abortion clinics?

I'm definitely seeing a pattern here on this site. Would it be too much to ask, when trying to have a serious, rational debate (which if I'm correct is what you intended with this site), to expect people not to make assumptions, avoid the fallacies and stick with facts and evidence?
Would you agree that it is dangerous when a fundementalist Christian puts a poster on their website with photos of doctors who provide abortions as targets? One was murdered as a result.

I would say a rational debate might start as soon as you take the chip off your shoulder.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
I'd like to ask you something. Pretend for a minute that these conspiracy theorists are correct, and that you are one of them. How would you go about getting proof?
I might actually get a job in at an airport in some capacity or otherwise infiltrate the system. Supposedly we've been being "sprayed like bugs" for years but no one has thought of that apparently, or if they have they've found nothing, as expected, and disappeared from the scene.
 

GregMc

Senior Member.
Wow. You take behavior that you oppose from a very small faction of a group and use it to make a blanket, and dishonest, statement about the entire group. Following your example, I wonder, are all Australians as dishonest and illogical as you?
I made a specific reference to threats. Threats I documented with screen captures.
THESE threats I identified and THESE chemtrail believers who made the threats are not necessarily benign in their intentions should be a fairly logical deduction. When some of THOSE threats specified murdering pilots and shooting planes out of the sky, I'm not entirely convinced THOSE people who wrote the comments have the best intentions of non-violence at heart .

My sister in law is a Chemtrail believer as are many of her friends I have met. Do I think she or they are a danger to the public?
No. (crime against good dress sense sure)

Was I referring to them in my comments?
No.
Their beliefs COULD have serious effects if it led to unstable people becoming obsessed with chemtrail belief and deciding to stalk and murder pilots or shoot at planes landing.
Are there unstable and potentially violent people in the population?
Ask a prison guard or mental health worker.
We know that some Australian believers have been trying to identify qantas pilots and their Home addresses and have discussed unspecified "actions" "taking it up another level" against them.
In Australia the chemtrail meme is that it is commercial airliners that are "chemspraying" and Australian chemtrail believers think American believers are all "asleep" in their belief that trails are left by military planes.
They have taken the step that very few American or UK believers have the initiative to take and that is to actively identify the planes using flight trackers and telescopes.
That leads to the ability here in Australia of believers to stalk specific flights all the way to the airports and wait to confront pilots and crew. This is not hypothetical but a reality that has ALREADY happened at Sydney Airport .

I haven't noticed in any of your posts I've seen any indignation or horror that people are threatening to shoot down passenger jets and murder pilots and even murder the people who patiently try to explain atmospheric physics to the general public. Perhaps I missed it.

I noticed you used the phrasing "You take behavior that you oppose from a very small faction of a group " . Yeah, I DO oppose that behaviour of making murder and shoot down threats.
Would you mind clarifying if you oppose it too?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
So Christians believing in the Bible encourages some other Christians to bomb abortion clinics?
That's certainly a plausible argument to make, and indeed many people make it. With the basic idea being "is religion a force for good or a force for bad". Believing in the Bible is essentially a belief in the arbitrary, and an opportunity for the individual to create their own interpretations of what they read. There's no defined meaning to the words in the Bible, ideed christians are encouraged to seek their own meaning, so it's easy to use them as justification for what are essentially hate crime.

The large number of people who place some faith in the Bible IS an encouragement for the more militant people that their convictions are just and true. If there's a lot of people who believe that homosexuality is an abomination, is that not encouragement for people to discriminate against homosexuality? And even encouragement for a minority of unhinged people to actually attack homosexuals?

So yes, promoting belief in chemtrails does encourage those who might end up shooting a pilot. There ARE crazy people out there.
 

captfitch

Senior Member.
So, as someone who may be directly affected by the worst possible outcome of the various threat examples here, my question is: is there a past example or specific study that indicates whether or not the type of personality who strongly believes in a conspiracy theory is also the same type of person who would act on their beliefs even in the face of the consequences of such action?

My feeling, quite honestly, is that may not be the case. I think the act of believing is much like a drug or something that satisfies a need. Or the desire for vindication is more thrilling than actually being vindicated. Much like those who believe in "end time" prophecies deep down probably don't want the prophecy to come true. It must be very exciting imagining the day when they are proven right.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
So, as someone who may be directly affected by the worst possible outcome of the various threat examples here, my question is: is there a past example or specific study that indicates whether or not the type of personality who strongly believes in a conspiracy theory is also the same type of person who would act on their beliefs even in the face of the consequences of such action?

My feeling, quite honestly, is that may not be the case. I think the act of believing is much like a drug or something that satisfies a need. Or the desire for vindication is more thrilling than actually being vindicated. Much like those who believe in "end time" prophecies deep down probably don't want the prophecy to come true. It must be very exciting imagining the day when they are proven right.
It really does not matter if they are the type of person who are more likely to act in a given situation. What matters is that they have a lot more reasons to act. The conspiracy theories give them those reasons,and the conspiracy theories create targets. So all things being equal they are more likely to do do something.

People who don't believe in conspiracy theories have less reason to do something terrible. If someone thinks that the UN is going to take over the US, then seems highly plausible that they would be more likely to blow up a federal building, like Timothy McVeigh did. The target was not random. The target was created by the conspiracy theory.

So the chemtrail conspiracy theory creates targets (planes, pilots, debunkers, politicians, meteorologists climate scientists), and creates a reason (they are poisoning us), and so may spur people to specific action.

However, is as you seem to suggest, the conspiracy theorists are less active than usual, then this might balance out. But there's cross-section out there, and some of them have already taken some action like PeeKay going to chat to pilots, or people secretly filming at Weather Modification Inc, or various people organizing and attending chemtrail conferences, or setting up booths and handing out leaflets.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
...I think the act of believing is much like a drug or something that satisfies a need. Or the desire for vindication is more thrilling than actually being vindicated. Much like those who believe in "end time" prophecies deep down probably don't want the prophecy to come true. It must be very exciting imagining the day when they are proven right.
I think a manufactured or exaggerated feeling of oppression and futility is a form of addiction to certain personality types.
I certainly have a negative personality that has on occasion held-on to feelings of being morally wronged and feeling sorry for myself at various times in my life. But I'm also very passive, and would never really do anything to 'solve' it, just sort of shrug and go 'life sucks' and pretend I'm wiser for my stoic acceptance of negativity.
The point is, to those addicted to feeling powerless, taking action is contradictive to the addiction.

(spell check tells me contradictive isnt a word. Contraindicative?.)
 

Mattnik

Moderator
I think a manufactured or exaggerated feeling of oppression and futility is a form of addiction to certain personality types.
I certainly have a negative personality that has on occasion held-on to feelings of being morally wronged and feeling sorry for myself at various times in my life. But I'm also very passive, and would never really do anything to 'solve' it, just sort of shrug and go 'life sucks' and pretend I'm wiser for my stoic acceptance of negativity.
The point is, to those addicted to feeling powerless, taking action is contradictive to the addiction.

(spell check tells me contradictive isnt a word. Contraindicative?.)
Well put - this is very similar to how I've often felt. Also, and I think this may echo a comment I've read on here previously, I think some people (in my personal experience certainly) take use the feeling of oppression as an excuse to continue ignoring issues; not engaging with the political process for instance. eg. "Oh, well everything is run by the Illuminati so what's the point?"
 

Joe

Senior Member
Those that stir up false stories and conspiracies should be considered to be aiding and abetting any criminal action that results from those actions. I am for freedom of speech, I am not for the right to 'yell fire in a theater'. That is what I see the CT conspiracy folks and others doing. I should be obvious by now that there those out there with untreated mental illness. Giving then a reason, is almost like loaning them a gun.

Just my opinion.
Im glad its just your opinion sounds a little extreme to me . Is it ok for our government to use fear as they do ? yet a American cant ? Take global warming for instance . There are a lot of us that think thats a big conspiracy . People have been killed over that . There are unstable people everywhere . Anyone who makes a threat to injure or kill should be dealt with , But dont blame others for their beliefs . Educate them instead . http://www.nbcnews.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/#.UTqEFxz_l8E
 

Mattnik

Moderator
Im glad its just your opinion sounds a little extreme to me . Is it ok for our government to use fear as they do ? yet a American cant ? Take global warming for instance . There are a lot of us that think thats a big conspiracy . People have been killed over that . There are unstable people everywhere . Anyone who makes a threat to injure or kill should be dealt with , But dont blame others for their beliefs . Educate them instead . http://www.nbcnews.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/#.UTqEFxz_l8E
I find the your comment " Is it ok for our government to use fear as they do ? yet a American cant ?" odd, as the government are elected by the people. They're not mutually exclusive. To what extent government is representative is arguable, I'm not discounting the influence business has on policy, but they are representative of the majority.

I find it interesting you bring up climate change again as I'm still waiting for your response to my questions on the data in the IPCC 2007 report in this thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Joe

Senior Member
I find the your comment " Is it ok for our government to use fear as they do ? yet a American cant ?" odd, as the government are elected by the people. They're not mutually exclusive. To what extent government is representative is arguable, I'm not discounting the influence business has on policy, but they are representative of the majority.

I find it interesting you bring up climate change again as I'm still waiting for your response to my questions on the data in the IPCC 2007 report in this thread.
Its the first thing that came to my mind was the fear mongering from the alarmist . Whether or not it exist there is a lot of bogus fear being pushed . I hope it gets warmer I hate cold weather . My point is even thouigh Im considered a Chemmie I dont belive they are dangerous . If someone doesnt take it as a threat to their health or life they be less apt to violence ?
111016_obama_dedication_ap_328.jpg
Would Obama be here if the trails were toxic ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mattnik

Moderator
Its the first thing that came to my mind was the fear mongering from the alarmist . Whether or not it exist there is a lot of bogus fear being pushed . I hope it gets warmer I hate cold weather . My point is even thouigh Im considered a Chemmie I dont belive they are dangerous . If someone doesnt take it as a threat to their health or life they be less apt to violence ? WView attachment 1986ould Obama be here if the trails were toxic ?
I think you're trolling. Please, prove me wrong.
 

Joe

Senior Member
I think you're trolling. Please, prove me wrong.
Trolling ? For what ? My thoughts on GW doesn't matter on this thread that was to prove a point that someone was driven to the extreme by his fears . Whether real or not . I dont believe any one should be labeled because of their beliefs . Most terrorist are Muslims does that mean all that practice Islam are bad and we should ban the religion ?
 

Rico

Senior Member.
Anyone who makes a threat to injure or kill should be dealt with , But dont blame others for their beliefs.
In some respects, I agree, but only partially. I think people are entitled to their beliefs, but it also depends on the context of such belief and how it influences others.

Chemtrails, in my opinion, isn't exactly a healthy belief. It is nothing like spirituality or anything that is there to benefit individuals. The interest in chemtrails lies strictly in conspiracy and/or a proposed threat. The greater problem of this particular theory adds to the fact that it targets real airplanes with real people no matter which angle you support. We're not just talking about governments here; people are looking up at real planes and saying they are a threat, and this has escalated to the point where some people are trying to do something about it through violence. To make this problem worst, much of the proposed evidence involves pictures taken showing regular civilian airliners and nothing else substantial. It is precisely the same as framing someone for a crime going off suspicion alone without sufficient evidence to prove it.

Quite frankly though, I don't mind if a person just believes in chemtrails. It's when they band together and spew out poor evidence, non-contextual information, and making claims saying they are true in-spite of it all while antagonizing real planes and real people where belief in chemtrails can indeed be a bad thing.
 

Joe

Senior Member
In some respects, I agree, but only partially. I think people are entitled to their beliefs, but it also depends on the context of such belief and how it influences others.

Chemtrails, in my opinion, isn't exactly a healthy belief. It is nothing like spirituality or anything that is there to benefit individuals. The interest in chemtrails lies strictly in conspiracy and/or a proposed threat. The greater problem of this particular theory adds to the fact that it targets real airplanes with real people no matter which angle you support. We're not just talking about governments here; people are looking up at real planes and saying they are a threat, and this has escalated to the point where some people are trying to do something about it through violence. To make this problem worst, much of the proposed evidence involves pictures taken showing regular civilian airliners and nothing else substantial. It is precisely the same as framing someone for a crime going off suspicion alone without sufficient evidence to prove it.

Quite frankly though, I don't mind if a person just believes in chemtrails. It's when they band together and spew out poor evidence, non-contextual information, and making claims saying they are true in-spite of it all while antagonizing real planes and real people where belief in chemtrails can indeed be a bad thing.
A belief in a lot of things could be bad . I dont know anyone that would want a airliner to be shot down ? other the Al Queda . People who say these things are cowards and never act on those , Its the Sandy Hook shooter types that never say any thing are the ones that commit violent acts . I would agree however some people come up with the craziest theories . I would rather convince them they are not in danger and their is no risk to them . Thats what I try myself . debunk their fears not their belief . If they have no fear most will forget it and move on .
 

Rico

Senior Member.
A belief in a lot of things could be bad . I dont know anyone that would want a airliner to be shot down ? other the Al Queda . People who say these things are cowards and never act on those , Its the Sandy Hook shooter types that never say any thing are the ones that commit violent acts . I would agree however some people come up with the craziest theories . I would rather convince them they are not in danger and their is no risk to them . Thats what I try myself . debunk their fears not their belief . If they have no fear most will forget it and move on .
Debunking their fears would work, but in a sense, chemtrails is one of those theories that are based on fear, for why else would people have interest in chemtrails? Mostly the concerns that people bring up with regards to chemtrails boils down to either planes are out there trying to poison us, or they are out there trying to solve global warming while consequently also negatively affecting our health. Whichever way it is, they don't like it, and the only reason not to like it boils down to some kind of fear. If the belief is that it won't affect us in anyway, I don't see the chemtrail theory gaining much traction in interest.
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
If the folks that never say anything are the most dangerous, then what is dangerous is the BELIEF itself. The belief, couped with the natural fear that some have of anything they don't really understand. Fertile ground for someone to react.

Most scientists agree that the Earth is entering a period of major climate change. At the least, there is ample evidence that human activity is making it worse. Just because you prefer warm weather to cold, doesn't mean we can afford to ignore the impact on others. Of course, one would need to care about folks in other areas.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
M Bornong Can Belief in Chemtrails and/or other Conspiracy Theories Lead to Violence? Contrails and Chemtrails 4
Dan Page Is Belief in "Chemtrails" Growing? Contrails and Chemtrails 63
Mick West The Epistemology of UFOs - No Longer a Matter of Belief? UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 15
Mick West Do Polls and Google Trends show Chemtrail Belief Declining? Contrails and Chemtrails 11
Wiggles I could have spiralled into flat earth belief. Escaping The Rabbit Hole 36
David Fraser Legal implications of conspiracy belief. General Discussion 2
JFDee "Escaping the Prison of Belief" - Science as a Remedy, by Ex-Scientologist General Discussion 2
SeanDWalker gauging belief in conspiracy General Discussion 0
Dan Wilson Debunked: Bruce Lipton and The Biology of Belief Health and Quackery 216
Mick West TFTRH #13: Professor David Keith – Geoengineering Research and the Chemtrails Conspiracy Theory Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 2
Mick West TFTRH #11: Jim Lee – Chemtrails, Geoengineering, Conspiracies, and Semantics Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 1
Trailblazer Explained: video of concentric circular "chemtrails" (E-3 Sentry AWACS plane, Feb 1 2019) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
Ben Geddy Happy to have found this site and Mick thru JRE! Practical Debunking 4
Mick West YouTube adds Encyclopedia Britannica article on Contrails to "Chemtrail" Videos Contrails and Chemtrails 18
FlightMuj Claims of Predictions of Chemtrails in Old Texts Contrails and Chemtrails 3
skephu Solar geoengineering and the chemtrails conspiracy on social media Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Mick West Chemtrails and the Anti-Vaccine Movement Contrails and Chemtrails 34
MikeG Debunked: Air Force Verifies Chemtrails are Real Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Mick West Banff Chemtrails Billboard Worries David Keith Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Mick West Quantifying Expert Consensus Against Covert Geoengineering / Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 116
skephu Debunked: Dutch Government Admit Chemtrails Exist Contrails and Chemtrails 7
mrfintoil Debunked: CIA Director admits chemtrails, geoengineering, stratospheric aerosol injection Contrails and Chemtrails 24
C Strange Flickering in Contrail Video Posted in Earlier Thread [Focussing artifacts] Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Trailblazer Russ Tanner accidentally debunks chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 2
Mick West Demythologizing Prince's reference to "Chemtrails" Contrails and Chemtrails 5
ParanoidSkeptic Chemtrails: Experiments on the Public Contrails and Chemtrails 5
MikeC New Zealand Ministry of Environment reply to "chemtrail" query Contrails and Chemtrails 6
F Explained: Video of plane leaving "6 chemtrails, then 2" [Mixed Exhaust and Aerodynamic Contrails] Contrails and Chemtrails 6
Mick West Debunked: Article: "Court Takes Child From Mother After She Mentions Chemtrails At School" Contrails and Chemtrails 92
skephu Chuck Norris on chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Mick West Vice: 'It Was Like a Cult': Leaving the World of Online Conspiracy Theories Escaping The Rabbit Hole 4
skephu Paul Beckwith (climate scientist) on chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 19
JFDee Debunked: Lichens and Moss on Trees Caused by Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 4
Sausalito Spectral analysis of alleged "chemtrails" Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Jay Reynolds Safya Yassin, Missouri ISIS supporter and chemtrails believer arrested for threats Contrails and Chemtrails 1
Trailblazer Chemtrail response from Swiss Federal Office of the Environment Contrails and Chemtrails 3
MikeG Climate Change War Games Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Mick West Persistent Trails Survey Shows Chemtrail Believers Only Recently Noticed Persistent Trails Contrails and Chemtrails 32
Dan Page idea: a "Debunked" Stamp Practical Debunking 9
Z 3 military helicopters Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 14
Mick West Debunked: AnonSec's NASA Hack, Global Hawk Hijack, Evidence of Chemtrails [Public Domain Data] General Discussion 32
MikeG Giant Snowflakes [Rimed Dendrites] Contrails and Chemtrails 24
Balance Blatant photoshop deceit of BP refueling tank Contrails and Chemtrails 2
Dan Page Claim: Mobile app uses atmospheric data to prove chemtrails vs contrails Contrails and Chemtrails 12
MikeG Futurism and Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 4
MikeG Accidental Geoengineering Contrails and Chemtrails 7
MikeG Debunked: HAARP Caught in Action Contrails and Chemtrails 28
Ray Von Geezer Ian Simpson / Look-up.org.uk debunks chemtrails & geoengineering Contrails and Chemtrails 13
skephu Parallel lines of clouds (Virginia Beach) Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 3
Ray Von Geezer George Monbiot in the Guardian on "Chemtrails" & Look-up.org.uk Contrails and Chemtrails 26
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top