Sine metu
New Member
in a good way. So much misleading information leading to bad deductions, so little time 
Brevity is important, so here goes:
- Background in theology and philosophy. Conspiracy theory realm was/still is the burgeoning police state.
- 2010, moved to California - you can see already where this is going?
- Talk of chemtrails came into my sphere. Until then, I was completely unaware of the term.
- In exploring this issue and other conspiracies, I instinctively rejected most websites and much of youtube. Too overly dramatic. But I did discover Michael Murphy at that time, who has a calm and seemingly well reasoned demeanor and makes a compelling argument (for those of us unfamiliar with the topic). From there - a link perhaps? or a forum discussion? no lo recuerdo - I found A&E for 911 Truth. I'm married to an engineer and also worked with engineers. I like process thinking that leads to logical deductions. This site spooked me due to it's convincing arguments by so many educated people, so I added 'truther' to my repetoire. Oye vey.
I'm a 'big picture' person and always, always look for that in explanation and theory; however, scientific terminology (outside of paleontological discussions, a great passion) is often lost to me. So someone like a Dane Wigington can throw around scientific sounding words and it sounds authentic to my untrained ears. In other words, you can't get much past me if we're discussing metaphysics, but you got me if it's physics. lol
How did I get here? About 2 months ago max, I heard Dane Wigington being interviewed on a GCN or RBN radio show. Then he was on another show, then another, then another, all within days. I'd never heard of him before. With each subsequent interview, I started to notice a pattern of vagueness combined with exaggerations. For example, I looked up his reference to Arctic methane leaks and found a sound refutation to his claims. I sent it to him, asking for his feedback. No response. He has an interesting style of calm hysteria and psychological techniques, so I got more suspicious (I always trust my instincts), and found this site in a search just last week. Voila. All my questions about chemtrails answered in one handy dandy site, with excellent citations for further exploration.
Bonus: other fear mongering gossip addressed here.
In the welcome thread, I believe it was Deirdre who had an excellent comment re: the mountain effect; that is, with some people, once one conspiracy is debunked, they all topple. This is true for me.
However, like any dysfunction, whether it is a way of thinking, an addiction, etc, one has to
1) acknowledge something is wrong 2) have correct information to understand what is wrong 3) be in the right psychological place to change.
In my case, little things kept nagging at me that didn't quite make sense, even though the particular conspiracies I mentioned were argued very welll at the sources I referenced.
Thank you to all who contribute on both sides of each issue. While I am not qualified to contribute to this site, it's on my daily go-to list to stay up to date, and I'll be sharing it with many. I appreciate the mature style of debate and Mr. West's fair moderation to ensure that all stay on point without insult and/or sidetracks. (I have a particular fondness for the 'curmudgeons' - it's an efficient, but often misunderstood style.)
Respectfully,

Brevity is important, so here goes:
- Background in theology and philosophy. Conspiracy theory realm was/still is the burgeoning police state.
- 2010, moved to California - you can see already where this is going?
- Talk of chemtrails came into my sphere. Until then, I was completely unaware of the term.
- In exploring this issue and other conspiracies, I instinctively rejected most websites and much of youtube. Too overly dramatic. But I did discover Michael Murphy at that time, who has a calm and seemingly well reasoned demeanor and makes a compelling argument (for those of us unfamiliar with the topic). From there - a link perhaps? or a forum discussion? no lo recuerdo - I found A&E for 911 Truth. I'm married to an engineer and also worked with engineers. I like process thinking that leads to logical deductions. This site spooked me due to it's convincing arguments by so many educated people, so I added 'truther' to my repetoire. Oye vey.
I'm a 'big picture' person and always, always look for that in explanation and theory; however, scientific terminology (outside of paleontological discussions, a great passion) is often lost to me. So someone like a Dane Wigington can throw around scientific sounding words and it sounds authentic to my untrained ears. In other words, you can't get much past me if we're discussing metaphysics, but you got me if it's physics. lol
How did I get here? About 2 months ago max, I heard Dane Wigington being interviewed on a GCN or RBN radio show. Then he was on another show, then another, then another, all within days. I'd never heard of him before. With each subsequent interview, I started to notice a pattern of vagueness combined with exaggerations. For example, I looked up his reference to Arctic methane leaks and found a sound refutation to his claims. I sent it to him, asking for his feedback. No response. He has an interesting style of calm hysteria and psychological techniques, so I got more suspicious (I always trust my instincts), and found this site in a search just last week. Voila. All my questions about chemtrails answered in one handy dandy site, with excellent citations for further exploration.
Bonus: other fear mongering gossip addressed here.
In the welcome thread, I believe it was Deirdre who had an excellent comment re: the mountain effect; that is, with some people, once one conspiracy is debunked, they all topple. This is true for me.
However, like any dysfunction, whether it is a way of thinking, an addiction, etc, one has to
1) acknowledge something is wrong 2) have correct information to understand what is wrong 3) be in the right psychological place to change.
In my case, little things kept nagging at me that didn't quite make sense, even though the particular conspiracies I mentioned were argued very welll at the sources I referenced.
Thank you to all who contribute on both sides of each issue. While I am not qualified to contribute to this site, it's on my daily go-to list to stay up to date, and I'll be sharing it with many. I appreciate the mature style of debate and Mr. West's fair moderation to ensure that all stay on point without insult and/or sidetracks. (I have a particular fondness for the 'curmudgeons' - it's an efficient, but often misunderstood style.)
Respectfully,