Living with a CT believer, sometimes it is really difficult

blargo

Member
I found this site when my wife sent me this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-a...eering-on-climate-and-the-environment/5329489
I sigh every time I get these. She is a smart lady but really is fond of most conspiracy theories. I am thinking of pointing her here to look at the info that you folks provide in debunking this crap. I worked as a Jet Engine Mechanic in the Air Force from 85-90 and know how the whole propulsion system works and that the jet fuel has to meet specific specs in order to burn properly.

When I found this site I was really relieved that a group of people are spending a great deal of time debunking these wild theories that people just believe without any evidence. Wish I knew how to lead people to see things through evidence and not their beliefs...
 

JFDee

Senior Member.
Hi blargo,

if someone is smart, it could be a first step to ask him/her to follow each claim to the source.

Who brought it up first? Who presented the evidence? What is this person's qualification? Is the evidence sound?

Also, a 'meta' discussion point may be the high attractivity of conspiracy theories itself. Sometimes they serve as a form of entertainment.
I think if someone is fascinated by them, it can take a real mental effort to gain back a bit of objectivity.
 

lotek

Active Member
i couldnt do it... hate to sound vulcan, but logic is a prerequisite for love. the rational needed to grow the irrational... ah sweet religion free, science experiment performing, debunking love. so pure.

it wouldnt fix the issue but a quick fix is to illustrate how she is being had, and the only real conspiracy here is by the people pushing this junk science onto people unwilling or unable to look it up themselves. to make a buck.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Judging from my conversations with ct believers, I would not be able to do it. I had a conversation with a friend on my FB wall yesterday, this is someone I KNOW, who ridiculed me as a sheep who can go ahead and believe everything the MSM says, and basically watch American Idol and eat Big Macs.
 

lotek

Active Member
there is a lot of study about this as it is a real problem is science and society, not just our aggravated little holes of the internet. it typically does not come down to fact because their belief is just that, a belief, and not based in fact or mediated by logic. so you are left with what resembles sophistry and you can make an attempt to intentionally swindle them from their belief, facts aside. whether thats ethical or not is up to you lol.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I personally don't think I could be married to someone who had radically different ideas to me - especially if I though their ideas were entirely groundless. However people do it all the time. Athiests marry Catholics, republicans marry democrats, doctors marry homeopaths, and men marry women.

Personally I'd just want to debunk my wife, if I thought she were wrong. And I think that's something that's quite possible to do in a mutually respectful manner. If it's not, then there would be problems. But I think some people just live with the differences - the net mutual benefits outweighing a few "agree to disagree" issues.

Relationships are complicated and varied. It's hard to give advice. But we can debunk! :)
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
I have a brother whose world view comes verbatim from the pages of that wretched website. He hasn't embraced chemtrails yet, possibly because I've told him I will disown him if he does. Having a pilot for a brother may have been the only barrier to him sliding down that particular rabbit hole....time will tell I guess.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Personally I'd just want to debunk my wife
You'd throw her out of the bed?! :)

My husband is pretty conservative, I'm liberal, but believing in conspiracy theories is a horse of a different color!
 

blargo

Member
Thanks everyone, I am trying to figure out how to debunk her. Mick, we were married before she started down this track. I am a science guy and will go where the evidence leads me. She started down this track a few years ago when she "found" the memo that NASA sent to employees about Solar flares.

So now my challenge is to find the right time and the right angle to enlighten her. My fear is like one of the posters said is that she blows it off as msm bs. I gues sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for...
 

lotek

Active Member
so start with the memo. its pretty beaten to death. Do we have a solid bit on it here Mick? or figure out how to make a car analogy. people loooove car analogies.
 

Joe

Senior Member
Judging from my conversations with ct believers, I would not be able to do it. I had a conversation with a friend on my FB wall yesterday, this is someone I KNOW, who ridiculed me as a sheep who can go ahead and believe everything the MSM says, and basically watch American Idol and eat Big Macs.
He knows you well !
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
The problem with the Chemtrail believers is they have the visual reminder of persistent contrails and contrail induced cirrus cloud banks to fall back on no matter the logical, alternate explanations offered to them . . .

 
Last edited by a moderator:

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Further opinion on why people believe in Chemtrails. . . .

1) Debunkers say they are simply, misidentified condensation trails from high flying aircraft in the sky . . . They are persistent contrails and contrail-induced cirrus cloud banks and disseminated haze. . . .


2) People became more aware of these persistent trails and cloud banks because they have increased significantly because of three main factors. . . . Along with significant scientific studies, publicity and curiosity by NASA, NOAA, DoE, and their British and European counterparts . . . Due to Global Warming all things atmospheric are now in vogue . . .


A. Simply more air traffic. . . Increasing dramatically over the decades . . . Especially over certain air corridors


B. In the last few decades the altitudes at which aircraft . . . Especially long haul aviation has increased well into the 30,000 feet cruising altitudes making the likelihood that persistent contrail form statistically more likely . . .


C. Engine efficiencies have increased from .20 to .30 and even higher over the last few decades . . . Therefore, more and more efficient engines are being added every year. . . More efficient engines increase the relative humidity and lowers the plume temperatures of engine exhaust allowing persistent contrails to form in air that was suboptimal for such formation before. . . .


3) The above misidentifications happened due to lack of adequate atmospheric science awareness and the advent of alternative communication and information sources like the Internet, etc. Which created the proliferation of conspiracy mania. . . .


A. The publication of usually unknown and/or minimally known misadventures of the authorities has become sometimes viral. . . North wood Papers, Gulf of Tonkin incident, Watergate, 911 Conspiracy, etc. Failure and cover-ups from most institutions once trusted without question by most people now questioned by all . . . i.e. Sex scandals by the Church, the President, Congress, Presidential Candidates and celebrities . . . Fraud by the financial, academic, medical, pharmaceutical and scientific institutions, the bail out on and on and on . . .


B. The hype from the Global Warming Advocates that something should and must be done as soon as possible. . . . Has skeptical people searching for alternative motives and gave fuel to the chemtrail advocates who jumped on every rational explanation for their position. . .


C. The media and entertainment industry through fiction, documentaries, and historical fiction has proliferated much concern about the potential demise of mankind . . . Further energizing the search to explain anything misunderstood . . .


D. The publication of well meaning but inaccurate or misinterpreted elevations of metallic ions in the environment such as Aluminum, Barium, etc. . . .these metals are very abundant in the natural environment and have multiple alternative sources which can concentrate dramatically due to: natural mineral deposits, disseminating winds, run off, acid rain, leaching, manufacturing, mining, transportation corridors, military activities, and agricultural practices, etc . . .


E. The existence of a few whistle blowers who appeared to give inside information but who have not been able to sustain through documentation or supportive evidence of anything but their own word or testimony. . . Their motives . . . Simply to fan the flames of mistrust . . .
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Further opinion on why people believe in Chemtrails. . . .

1) Debunkers say they are simply, misidentified condensation trails from high flying aircraft in the sky . . . They are persistent contrails and contrail-induced cirrus cloud banks and disseminated haze. . . .


2) People became more aware of these persistent trails and cloud banks because they have increased significantly because of three main factors. . . . Along with significant scientific studies, publicity and curiosity by NASA, NOAA, DoE, and their British and European counterparts . . . Due to Global Warming all things atmospheric are now in vogue . . .


A. Simply more air traffic. . . Increasing dramatically over the decades . . . Especially over certain air corridors


B. In the last few decades the altitudes at which aircraft . . . Especially long haul aviation has increased well into the 30,000 feet cruising altitudes making the likelihood that persistent contrail form statistically more likely . . .


C. Engine efficiencies have increased from .20 to .30 and even higher over the last few decades . . . Therefore, more and more efficient engines are being added every year. . . More efficient engines increase the relative humidity and lowers the plume temperatures of engine exhaust allowing persistent contrails to form in air that was suboptimal for such formation before. . . .


3) The above misidentifications happened due to lack of adequate atmospheric science awareness and the advent of alternative communication and information sources like the Internet, etc. Which created the proliferation of conspiracy mania. . . .


A. The publication of usually unknown and/or minimally known misadventures of the authorities has become sometimes viral. . . North wood Papers, Gulf of Tonkin incident, Watergate, 911 Conspiracy, etc. Failure and cover-ups from most institutions once trusted without question by most people now questioned by all . . . i.e. Sex scandals by the Church, the President, Congress, Presidential Candidates and celebrities . . . Fraud by the financial, academic, medical, pharmaceutical and scientific institutions, the bail out on and on and on . . .


B. The hype from the Global Warming Advocates that something should and must be done as soon as possible. . . . Has skeptical people searching for alternative motives and gave fuel to the chemtrail advocates who jumped on every rational explanation for their position. . .


C. The media and entertainment industry through fiction, documentaries, and historical fiction has proliferated much concern about the potential demise of mankind . . . Further energizing the search to explain anything misunderstood . . .


D. The publication of well meaning but inaccurate or misinterpreted elevations of metallic ions in the environment such as Aluminum, Barium, etc. . . .these metals are very abundant in the natural environment and have multiple alternative sources which can concentrate dramatically due to: natural mineral deposits, disseminating winds, run off, acid rain, leaching, manufacturing, mining, transportation corridors, military activities, and agricultural practices, etc . . .


E. The existence of a few whistle blowers who appeared to give inside information but who have not been able to sustain through documentation or supportive evidence of anything but their own word or testimony. . . Their motives . . . Simply to fan the flames of mistrust . . .
George,
You really should add to your list the consistent lack of openness among the main chemtrail promoters. They remain hypervigilant to never allow themselves to appear in a venue where their claims can be challenged openly or where they could be forced to respond to criticism. If they were open and responsive it would have all been over long ago.

Instead, they have favored a COMMAND/CONTROL approach where anything approaching criticism is eliminated down the memory hole, and the person asking questions is banned forever. There is never a correction, never an admission of error, and among the faithful believers no one sees anyone ever getting their glass house stoned.

That isn't the way the real world works. It is an imaginary make-believe world constructed to maintain a lie.

And it is very wrong.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
George,
You really should add to your list the consistent lack of openness among the main chemtrail promoters. They remain hypervigilant to never allow themselves to appear in a venue where their claims can be challenged openly or where they could be forced to respond to criticism. If they were open and responsive it would have all been over long ago.

Instead, they have favored a COMMAND/CONTROL approach where anything approaching criticism is eliminated down the memory hole, and the person asking questions is banned forever. There is never a correction, never an admission of error, and among the faithful believers no one sees anyone ever getting their glass house stoned.

That isn't the way the real world works. It is an imaginary make-believe world constructed to maintain a lie.

And it is very wrong.
Jay, I have no doubt you are correct; however, I don't have experience with them because I don't visit their sites. . . you speak from experience . . .I would be using your experiences. . . .the only thing I can say with a clear conscience is believers don't necessarily use the websites as evidence of Chemtrails. . . .
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
George,
You really should add to your list the consistent lack of openness among the main chemtrail promoters. They remain hypervigilant to never allow themselves to appear in a venue where their claims can be challenged openly or where they could be forced to respond to criticism. If they were open and responsive it would have all been over long ago.

Instead, they have favored a COMMAND/CONTROL approach where anything approaching criticism is eliminated down the memory hole, and the person asking questions is banned forever. There is never a correction, never an admission of error, and among the faithful believers no one sees anyone ever getting their glass house stoned.

That isn't the way the real world works. It is an imaginary make-believe world constructed to maintain a lie.

And it is very wrong.
AND they control their forums and any dialog. Last night I was on FB when my friend posted a photo (I posted it here) and said it was a plane at 12K feet. When I called him on it (asked how he knew that), we got into a discussion and he called in Russ Tanner, so I was having a 2 hours diatribe from Russ Tanner, which bascially consisted of what a sick guy he is and how I am a government shill. Numerous times he told me HS friend to delete all my posts, which of course prompted me to point out how Orwellian that was. I would post the entire thread here but it would marginally violate the politeness policy. :)
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Here are a few excerpts from my discussion last night. Remember, this was not on Global Skywatch, this is on my friend's personal page:

Of course, he did, for about another hour.


Okey doke, don't let the door hit ya. . .

It devolved from there with dramatic exits, re-entrances and essentially a continual suggestion to remove my posts and statements that I am a disinfo sellout. So basically, someone I actually knew who only "woke up" in the past year or so called in Daddy to fight his battle. Which made me think, oh no, can you imagine you begin dating someone and find out they believe this? I sincerely hope your wife "wakes up!" to reality soon. In the meantime, keep her off FB, LOL.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
russ1.jpg

Russ calls his private army to watch out for me, and I suppose to rally to my friend's page and back him up. Unfortunately for him, they all think my name is "Roger" instead of the page is Roger's.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Thanks everyone, I am trying to figure out how to debunk her. Mick, we were married before she started down this track. I am a science guy and will go where the evidence leads me. She started down this track a few years ago when she "found" the memo that NASA sent to employees about Solar flares.

So now my challenge is to find the right time and the right angle to enlighten her. My fear is like one of the posters said is that she blows it off as msm bs. I gues sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for...
My advice would be to be respectful of her beliefs, but get her to back them up, very slowly, one thing at a time, and in great depth. Focus on individual claims of evidence. Tell her that if she can back it up, then you'll believe it.

It's important for you to understand WHY she believes as she does. Why does she find the NASA memo suspicious (I assume that's some 2013 solar storms warnings combined with the NASA Family/Personal Preparedness Plan?). An average person would be unlikely to find an emergency plan suspicious (especially if they live in an Earthquake or Hurricane region) - so why does she? What additional information is she applying? What misconceptions does she have?

You can't just say "that's just a normal plan, of course they have one, nothing to see here!" You need to undersand where her thinking has gone wrong, so you can address THAT, address the underpinnings of her misconception, and it will collapse by itself.

Does she realize that emergency preparedness plans are very common, and that all large business or government agencies have one?

Does she realize that there are extensive national guidelines for emergency preparedness?
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/emres/business.html

Does she realize that the plan specifically lists the threats that are being prepared for, and they include: earthquake, fires, floods, severe storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, or even terrorist attacks. They do not include solar flares, asteroid impact or anything space based.

Does she recognize how useful such a plan would be in the event of an Earthquake? Has she ever been in a disaster herself.

Is she conflating the normal solar flare warnings with the emergency plan? Has she seen some YouTube video that makes that connection, and then assumes the YouTube video is true? Why does she think that the emergency plan is connected to solar flares?

What will it mean to her when the supposed doomsday warnings for solar storms in 2013 do not pan out? Will that change anything?

These are not necessarily questions you would ask her directly. But they are things you want to find out, by talking about the subject, gently prompting her to think about it.
 

HappyMonday

Moderator
My advice would be to be respectful of her beliefs, but get her to back them up, very slowly, one thing at a time, and in great depth. Focus on individual claims of evidence. Tell her that if she can back it up, then you'll believe it.

It's important for you to understand WHY she believes as she does.
This.

Just be careful not to strengthen her beliefs inadvertently - http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/the-backfire-effect/
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
This whole conspiracy theory cult IMO is reaching critical mass. Once someone is on the hook, the ones already in the cult circle the wagons and draw them away from reality.
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
With some CTs the person has to hit bottom. They themselves have to make that realization if they are far enough down the rabbit hole. I mean how do you convince someone with assymetrical rules for evidence. Your evidence comes from certified and educated specialists and experts. You draw stats from neutral international agencies and reports from well known and cited news agencies. Unfortunately they are often dismissed as slightly flawed, propaganda, disinfo, or being in on it. Meanwhile you have to consider uncited sources and annonymous authors with dubious or nonexistent credentials, visual "evidence" which could not be faked, and "proven analysis" from amatuers making basic errors.
I hope the best for you but rationality often cannot defeat faith.
 

JRBids

Senior Member.
Seemed like the place to post this humorous screen cap:

RUSSbanned.jpg
Somebody hit him with the ban hammer. The one he uses frequently. When it's used on him he's so insulted.
 

joelb79

Active Member
My mother is a CT believer and actually her belief in this (among other CT's like Aliens, Aliens built the pyramids, Illuminati, Freemasons) has caused a ripple in our relationship to the point where I avoid her and will not talk to her. I actually had to hear the words come out of her mouth that if I didn't believe in her pet theories that we could no longer have conversations. She has called me abusive, she has screamed at me at the top of her lungs; all over conspiracy theories. No matter how much of my college education in Aviation I use, no matter how much I assure her against her theories; it only serves to further push a gap between herself and I. Honestly; I lost whatever relationship I had with my mother to CTs. It's beyond the point of effecting my health.
To put it lightly, living with a CT believer is very difficult for me. I would assume it depends on the person and the relationship and there is no rule that all CT's are hard to live with and talk to. Perhaps it is statistically interesting, but I'm not in a spot to make that analysis given my confirmation bias on the matter of CT's being difficult to live with. In short, don't give up. But be aware that you can become part of the conspiracy to the person you love very easily.
 

JeffreyNotGeoffrey

Active Member
I feel for you joelb. Some CTs won't let certain topics alone. My former friend just would not let up on OK City, 9/11, and basically all things Alex Jones. He even [...] preferred The Articles of Confederation over the Constitution. He also did not know felons could have their voting rights restored. Very opinionated but not at all knowledgeable.
 
Top