At Michael J. Murphy's Facebook page there are two excellent questions asked which he is not answering:
Is there a good explanation somewhere of how it is that what appear to be lingering contrails are not possible and therefore must be 'chemtrails'? I can't remember that being covered in the documentary. Maybe I missed it?
Like · Comment · 7 hours ago ·
Well, Michael, how do you respond to that?
Then there's this:
WHO in the world is doing the spraying? Who is flying the plane? Who is giving the orders? This is treason.
10 hours ago.
Ulcered Megalith and Angela both have been left with questions which, if they had seen a true documentary about chemtrails, should have been fully answered. A true documentary always goes deeply into the who what where, how, and why, and shows multiple viewpoints on each facet.
If it describes an event, a timeline should be given so that the documentary viewer comes away with a historical context of the described event.
I'm fully convinced that Michael J. Murphy's movie wasn't a documentary, since it failed to convey a complete picture of almost all of the above elements listed above.
One question leads to another, and this is likely the main reason why "What In The World Are They Spraying" fails, but I have come to understand that part of this was a planned event. The plan was twofold at least, and the omissions go further than just failing to show a complete story.
Michael has already spoken to how he considers his intended audience too immature, childish, even, to "accept as reality" what he is saying.
He hides his true intent, and has advised others to do the same.
Here is an example:
Originally Posted by Michael J. Murphy
@ 37:50 There are several levels of truth, and several agendas associated with these programs, most of the agendas are far beyond what many people would even accept as reality. And what I mean by that it's similar to math, and algebra, and I was a teacher for a number of years, I taught third through eighth grade, and while I could introduce basic levels of math to the third graders, and algebra to the eighth graders, I couldn't come in with that algebra to the third graders, and in introducing any issue, you have to know who your audience is, you have to know the levels of the issue that they are able to comprehend and accept, and that's the most important, so while I believe that there is a depopulation agenda associated with these programs, and Bill Gates who has spoken about eugenics, I don't think thats the most prudent way to address it when you are going in to a public official, because essential that's probably something that many of them have never heard and it could be beyond the reality...
Our agenda is not to tell everybody as much truth as we know. Our agenda is to teach, educate these people, and move towards getting these programs stopped. So it's sort of, if you look at truth, truth is a very powerful weapon, but you put a weapon in a child's hands, that does not have the wisdom to use it, they could do a lot of damage, and unfortunately that's something that we experienced here, but I can't stress the importance of knowing the audience that you speak to, and addressing it at a level that they'll not only comprehend but be able to to accept.
The second part of the plan was, in my opinion, strictly commercial. He could have told much more of the who, what, where, why, and how, as well as the other elements, except that he likely planned a series of movies dragging out the subject over a course of years to provide him with a steady income and a growing following. This course also gave him time, but he hasn't realized that time is his greatest enemy, and thisstretching out is a grave error.
From my experience, most of the major chemtrails promotions have a short lifespan of popularity, some people start to catch on, and even when the promoters provide a steady flow, conspiracy claims are like a drug, the effect of a new 'revelation' is always less than the last, and unless it leads directly towards something significant and verifiable, the effect on the consumer, just like the effect on any addict, is always less than the first. In other words, drug users and conspiracy consumers need ever-stronger fixes if they are to be sustained. A tolerance develops.
The more reality based consumers begin to have doubts first, and it takes very little to turn that back, sometimes even a lack of corroboration is enough to effect a change.
Those further over the edge hang onto just about any speculation seeking that next fix.
Michael J. Murphy has seriously underestimated what he has gotten into. His delay has cost him much momentum. The further-out believers he now has gathered around him have proven to be poor spenders, likely they are finnacially unsuccessful and have not stepped forward to fund Michael J. Murphy's plan. That's the way I see it.