Poll . . .What makes people who believe in the Chemtrail conspiracy tick. . ?. . Choo

What makes people who believe in the Chemtrail conspiracy tick. . ?.

  • They are primarily intuitive thinkers not concrete thinkers

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • They distrust the government and other authorities

    Votes: 10 52.6%
  • They understand history and know similar acts have happened and will happen again

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They are easily misled by rumor and supposition

    Votes: 10 52.6%
  • They have collected adequate evidence to support their belief

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They lack critical thinking skills

    Votes: 10 52.6%
  • They combine logic with intuition to form the closest match with reality

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • They are conspiracy junkies . . . believe almost anything

    Votes: 12 63.2%
  • They understand deceit and human behavior and some conspiracies are real

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They have no concept of atmospheric science and contrail formation principles

    Votes: 11 57.9%
  • They understand enough science to make an informed and valued decision on what they believe

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    19

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Poll . . .What makes people who believe in the Chemtrail conspiracy tick. . ?. . Choose the single most likely response . .

(See poll above)
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Poll . . .What makes people who believe in the Chemtrail conspiracy tick. . ?. . Choose the single most likely response . .

1) They are primarily intuitive thinkers not concrete thinkers

2) They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth

3) They distrust the government and other authorities

4) They understand history and know similar acts have happened and will happen again

5) They are easily mislead by rumor and supposition

6) They have collected adequate evidence to support their belief

7) They lack critical thinking skills

8) They combine logic with intuition to form the closest match with reality

9) They are conspiracy junkies . . . believe almost anything

10) They understand deceit and human behavior and some conspiracies are real

11) They*have no concept of atmospheric science and contrail formation principles

12) They understand enough science to make an informed and valued decision on what they believe . . .*
I tried to set up a poll but it failed. . . I was hoping to conduct this identical poll on a different Forum and compare and contrast the results. . . .
 

hemi

Senior Member.
5, 7, 9, 11 are all variations on a theme.

likewise 1, 2, 8, 12

You could boil the poll down to...

Why do people in believe in chemtrails?

1) They don't understand the science.
2) They assume something that might exist does exist, regardless of evidence.
3) Both of the above
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
hemi said:
5, 7, 9, 11 are all variations on a theme.

likewise 1, 2, 8, 12

You could boil the poll down to...

Why do people in believe in chemtrails?

1) They don't understand the science.
2) They assume something that might exist does exist, regardless of evidence.
3) Both of the above
You are missing the point. . . This poll is for both sides of the debate and includes the most frequently cited reasons for belief or disbelief . . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Some early result from other Forum . . .

POLL: What makes people who believe in the Chemtrail conspiracy tick. . ?.

5) They are easily misled by rumor and supposition **23.5% (4)
11) They*have no concept of atmospheric science and contrail formation principles **23.5% (4)
1) They are primarily intuitive thinkers not concrete thinkers **11.8% (2)
3) They distrust the government and other authorities **11.8% (2)
8) They combine logic with intuition to form the closest match with reality **11.8% (2)
2) They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth **5.9% (1)
6) They have collected adequate evidence to support their belief **5.9% (1)
9) They are conspiracy junkies . . . believe almost anything **5.9% (1)
4) They understand history and know similar acts have happened and will happen again **0% (0)
7) They lack critical thinking skills **0% (0)
10) They understand deceit and human behavior and some conspiracies are real **0% (0)
12) They understand enough science to make an informed and valued decision on what they believe . . . **0% (0)
Blank (View Results) (0)

Non-Blank Votes: 17
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I don't think the question and the supplied answers are really useful. "what makes them tick"? Surely you should be asking "why do they believe in chemtrails?"

All you answers are vastly open to interpretation. What on earth does "They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth" mean? It's doubly subjective, and hence essentially meaningless.

 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
NOTE: The other Forum only allows on choice . . . Not multiple responses. . . . Early compare and contrasts

View Poll Results: What makes people who believe in the Chemtrail conspiracy tick. . ?.Voters 5. You have already voted on this poll

They are primarily intuitive thinkers not concrete thinkers 00%
1) They are primarily intuitive thinkers not concrete thinkers **5.6% (2)

They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth (1) 20.00%
2) They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth **13.9% (5)

They distrust the government and other authorities (2) 40.00%
3) They distrust the government and other authorities **5.6% (2)

They understand history and know similar acts have happened and will happen again 00%
4) They understand history and know similar acts have happened and will happen again **0% (0)

They are easily misled by rumor and supposition (2) 40.00%
5) They are easily mislead by rumor and supposition **13.9% (5)

They have collected adequate evidence to support their belief 00%
6) They have collected adequate evidence to support their belief **8.3% (3)

They lack critical thinking skills (3) 60.00%
7) They lack critical thinking skills **0% (0)

They combine logic with intuition to form the closest match with reality 00%
8) They combine logic with intuition to form the closest match with reality **11.1% (4)

They are conspiracy junkies . . . believe almost anything (3) 60.00%
9) They are conspiracy junkies . . . believe almost anything **11.1% (4)

They understand deceit and human behavior and some conspiracies are real 00%
10) They understand deceit and human behavior and some conspiracies are real **5.6% (2)

They have no concept of atmospheric science and contrail formation principles (4) 80.00%
11) They*have no concept of atmospheric science and contrail formation principles **19.4% (7)

They understand enough science to make an informed and valued decision on what they believe 00%
12) They understand enough science to make an informed and valued decision on what they believe . . . **5.6% (2)
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Mick,

1) I present the photos to spur discussion. . . I made no comments or analysis. . . These photos can be argued either way . . . Thay can support either side of the debate. . .
2) I have never taken the position that persistent contrails and cirrus cloud banks did not exist before. . .
3) I would argue possibly the number, frequency, and probability of inducing cirrus cloud banks has increased. . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
You would argue that possibly the probability has increased? Hardly a worthwhile thing to argue.

The context of photos is important. Chemtrail believers are bombarded with photos of the most extreme examples of contrail covered skies. This makes them think that those extreme cases are both frequent, and something new.

If you did the same survey, but just showed photos of blue skies and short contrails, or just persistent contrails from WWII, then would you get the same result?
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I actually believe you would. . . IMO The belief in the conspiracy is reenforced every time they see persistent contrails in the sky. . . It is an emotional response, I have felt it myself. . . .no mater what anyone says there is a primeval, instinctive fight or flight response to something in the sky that is man made . . . Instinctive or irrational, it still is there . . .
 

Noble1965

New Member
Banned
Mick,

1) I present the photos to spur discussion. . . I made no comments or analysis. . . These photos can be argued either way . . . Thay can support either side of the debate. . .
2) I have never taken the position that persistent contrails and cirrus cloud banks did not exist before. . .
3) I would argue possibly the number, frequency, and probability of inducing cirrus cloud banks has increased. . .

Let's not forget that you think "new technology" is being used to intentionally place a new type contrail into the sky.

Correct??
 

Noble1965

New Member
Banned
I actually believe you would. . . IMO The belief in the conspiracy is reenforced every time they see persistent contrails in the sky. . . It is an emotional response, I have felt it myself. . . .no mater what anyone says there is a primeval, instinctive fight or flight response to something in the sky that is man made . . . Instinctive or irrational, it still is there . . .

Interesting, I have never felt any such thing in relation to the trails in the sky. I wonder why...

Could it be that I'm more knowledgeable about what I see, so I know there is no reason to fear them?

Is it also not a normal position to take that since I know that they aren't anything to fear, and I have the knowledge, that I should try to help those who don't understand what they are seeing, to understand? Or, does that make me a "shill" who works for "them"? Which is the reasonable position?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I actually believe you would. . . IMO The belief in the conspiracy is reenforced every time they see persistent contrails in the sky. . . It is an emotional response, I have felt it myself. . . .no mater what anyone says there is a primeval, instinctive fight or flight response to something in the sky that is man made . . . Instinctive or irrational, it still is there . . .
Really? Why no panic in the streets then?

Nobody pays any attention to contrails. Except nerds and conspiracy theorists.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Let's not forget that you think "new technology" is being used to intentionally place a new type contrail into the sky.

Correct??
1) I think it is a deliberate policy decision (a slow roll) to not mitigate the increase in the number, frequency, and persistence of trails and cirrus cloud banks . . .
2) I think the high efficiency engines have produced a new species of contrail which is contributing to the situation
3) I also think the marked up skies are good cover for any experimentation which could leave visible evidence . . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Interesting, I have never felt any such thing in relation to the trails in the sky. I wonder why...

Could it be that I'm more knowledgeable about what I see, so I know there is no reason to fear them?

Is it also not a normal position to take that since I know that they aren't anything to fear, and I have the knowledge, that I should try to help those who don't understand what they are seeing, to understand? Or, does that make me a "shill" who works for "them"? Which is the reasonable position?
I think your approachis counterproductive . . . making people angry and upset contributes toirrational reactions and emotional behavior . . . it does not make peopleevaluate their beliefs it makes them more stubborn and resistant . . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Really? Why no panic in the streets then?

Nobody pays any attention to contrails. Except nerds and conspiracy theorists.

Nobody pays attention to membrane theory except nerds . . . so . . . no onetalks about chemtrails except on the internet . . . it is a small marketfranchise . . . the people upset are most likely the same group that believes inTPTB and they feel helpless to change things . . . why would chemtrails be anydifferent . . .

 

Noble1965

New Member
Banned
1) I think it is a deliberate policy decision (a slow roll) to not mitigate the increase in the number, frequency, and persistence of trails and cirrus cloud banks . . .
2) I think the high efficiency engines have produced a new species of contrail which is contributing to the situation
3) I also think the marked up skies are good cover for any experimentation which could leave visible evidence . . .
1) I disagree. I see no reason for them to do any such thing. Unless they want to appease some kooks on the internet.

2) A contrail is a contrail is a contrail. Be definition. The only thing that is different, is the amount of water vapor produced, and how that added vapor reacts with the atmosphere. The trail itself is a contrail. There is no debate.

3) Of course you do. I understand why. But, I disagree because I think it's speculation and assumption based on a "different" world view.
 

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
You would argue that possibly the probability has increased? Hardly a worthwhile thing to argue.

The context of photos is important. Chemtrail believers are bombarded with photos of the most extreme examples of contrail covered skies. This makes them think that those extreme cases are both frequent, and something new.

That's because they are new - both the frequency and the extremity. As I've said before: if the sky where I am - over one of the world's largest cities, London - is, at some point in any given day, covered either partially or completely by cloud cover created by aircraft emissions in 35 to 50 per cent of given days in one year, then does that not indicate both the extremity of the condition, and the frequency? Use Occam's Razor, if you like.

Hi George, I was looking forward to answering your question from the thread Mick decided to censor. I'll get to it at some point, one way or another. Mick censored another thread after a good 15,16,17? can't remember how many pages. It was just getting going, I thought.

What I don't understand, Mick, is this: when you've had enough of arguing the point with someone, why don't you just go and chat elsewhere? There's so much more you could be doing. If other people want to argue then why not let them? It seems you either always have to be there, supervising, or you ban or close thread. When it gets juicy, or you get bored?, you tell people they're 'incorrigible', or 'you've got no evidence' that's a good one. Have you looked up lately?
 

lee h oswald

Banned
Banned
Oh yes, I'm having trouble with the 'reply with quote' button as well. Server too busy, all that jazz.

Anyone else?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I want to encourage more focussed discussion. I'm fine with people starting new threads on particular topics. Long threads are pointless as repositories of debunking, as they are too hard to navigate.

And it's hardly like I didn't let either you or George say your pieces :)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Oh yes, I'm having trouble with the 'reply with quote' button as well. Server too busy, all that jazz.

Anyone else?
There have been problems since the vBulletin software "upgrade". This is just running on spare space on the contrailscience.com server, which is running a really old version of Ubuntu. I need to upgrade, but it's a bit of a pain.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
That's because they are new - both the frequency and the extremity. As I've said before: if the sky where I am - over one of the world's largest cities, London - is, at some point in any given day, covered either partially or completely by cloud cover created by aircraft emissions in 35 to 50 per cent of given days in one year, then does that not indicate both the extremity of the condition, and the frequency? Use Occam's Razor, if you like.
The amount of contrail cloud cover is a subject of intensive ongoing study around the world.

That contrails contribute significantly to cloud cover is not in issue. Even back in 1980 they knew this. It's been steadily increasing since the 1950s.

It does not bother most people. Maybe it should. But I'm not sure if there's a debatable issue there. Personally I'd much prefer clear skies to contrail skies, and the skies here are mostly blue. I imagine it's a lot worse where you live.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I want to encourage more focussed discussion. I'm fine with people starting new threads on particular topics. Long threads are pointless as repositories of debunking, as they are too hard to navigate.

And it's hardly like I didn't let either you or George say your pieces :)
It would have been nice to have had a chance for a one post summation . . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
NOTE: The other Forum only allows on choice . . . Not multiple responses. . . . Early compare and contrasts

View Poll Results: What makes people who believe in the Chemtrail conspiracy tick. . ?.Voters 5. You have already voted on this poll

They are primarily intuitive thinkers not concrete thinkers 00%
1) They are primarily intuitive thinkers not concrete thinkers **5.6% (2)

They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth (1) 20.00%
2) They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth **13.9% (5)

They distrust the government and other authorities (2) 40.00%
3) They distrust the government and other authorities **5.6% (2)

They understand history and know similar acts have happened and will happen again 00%
4) They understand history and know similar acts have happened and will happen again **0% (0)

They are easily misled by rumor and supposition (2) 40.00%
5) They are easily mislead by rumor and supposition **13.9% (5)

They have collected adequate evidence to support their belief 00%
6) They have collected adequate evidence to support their belief **8.3% (3)

They lack critical thinking skills (3) 60.00%
7) They lack critical thinking skills **0% (0)

They combine logic with intuition to form the closest match with reality 00%
8) They combine logic with intuition to form the closest match with reality **11.1% (4)

They are conspiracy junkies . . . believe almost anything (3) 60.00%
9) They are conspiracy junkies . . . believe almost anything **11.1% (4)

They understand deceit and human behavior and some conspiracies are real 00%
10) They understand deceit and human behavior and some conspiracies are real **5.6% (2)

They have no concept of atmospheric science and contrail formation principles (4) 80.00%
11) They*have no concept of atmospheric science and contrail formation principles **19.4% (7)

They understand enough science to make an informed and valued decision on what they believe 00%
12) They understand enough science to make an informed and valued decision on what they believe . . . **5.6% (2)
Update from other Forum. . .

POLL: What makes people who believe in the Chemtrail conspiracy tick. . ?.
2) They have a proper view of reality and understand the truth **25.0% (18)
11) They*have no concept of atmospheric science and contrail formation principles **18.1% (13)
6) They have collected adequate evidence to support their belief **11.1% (8)
12) They understand enough science to make an informed and valued decision on what they believe . . . **9.7% (7)
5) They are easily mislead by rumor and supposition **6.9% (5)
8) They combine logic with intuition to form the closest match with reality **6.9% (5)
9) They are conspiracy junkies . . . believe almost anything **6.9% (5)
10) They understand deceit and human behavior and some conspiracies are real **6.9% (5)
3) They distrust the government and other authorities **5.6% (4)
1) They are primarily intuitive thinkers not concrete thinkers **2.8% (2)
4) They understand history and know similar acts have happened and will happen again **0% (0)
7) They lack critical thinking skills **0% (0)
Blank (View Results) (13)

Non-Blank Votes: 72
 

Noble1965

New Member
Banned
I see nothing surprising. That "other forum" is a conspiracy forum, right? GLP?
I'm sure I could guess most of the 18.

Nope, there is no way they could be mistaken. Right?
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I see nothing surprising. That "other forum" is a conspiracy forum, right? GLP?
I'm sure I could guess most of the 18.

Nope, there is no way they could be mistaken. Right?
Just what are you afraid of Noble. ?. . it is just an experiment to compare and contrast two different types of discussion Forums. . . I don't know what the eventual outcomes will be or what it might mean but I have enough patience to wait and see. . . .
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Do you think there is a difference in how people think . . . don't know if right brain/left brain is a sound theory but it seems to make some sense at a practical level . . . [link to www.web-us.com]

Left Side

RationalResponds to verbal instructions

Problem solves by logically and sequentially looking at the parts of things

Looks at differences

Is planned and structured

Prefers established, certain information

Prefers talking and writing

Prefers multiple choice tests

Controls feelings

Prefers ranked authority structures



Right Side


IntuitiveResponds to demonstrated instructions

Problem solves with hunches, looking for patterns and configurations

Looks at similarities

Is fluid and spontaneous

Prefers elusive, uncertain information

Prefers drawing and manipulating objects

Prefers open ended questions

Free with feelings

Prefers collegial authority structures
 
Last edited by a moderator:
U

Unregistered

Guest
I see nothing surprising. That "other forum" is a conspiracy forum, right? GLP?
I'm sure I could guess most of the 18.

Nope, there is no way they could be mistaken. Right?
The same forum you were thrown off from for your abusive and intimidating behaviour.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
D How do you think about debunking? General Discussion 29
Oxymoron Poll: Should the U.S Attack Syria? General Discussion 51
Rroval Man Claims Mars Space Station Discovered On Google Mars (VIDEO, POLL) UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 2
SR1419 New Poll: Conspiracy Beliefs Fall Along Party Lines General Discussion 0
Mick West Conspiracy Theory Poll Results Shows Party/Age/Race Splits on Chemtrails, etc. Contrails and Chemtrails 21
Clock Poll: Do you think that threads should be closed after being debunked? Site Feedback & News 6
Critical Thinker Your views on 'What makes a source (of information) reliable'? General Discussion 9
skephu New tool ChimeIn makes all web sites commentable Practical Debunking 4
C Debunked: Boston bombing recovery photo makes no sense from medical point of view Conspiracy Theories 47
ssfor27 How Dutchsinse makes his "HAARP ring" forecasts.... HAARP 14
Critical Thinker The Anti Media, makes bogus claim that "CDC admits Ebola could be airborne" Conspiracy Theories 75
Pete Tar Debunking just makes people believe the bunk - 'motivated reason' Practical Debunking 67
Joe Newman What makes something "debunked"? General Discussion 195
Leifer Debunker makes a cloudbuster.... Contrails and Chemtrails 0
PCWilliams The UCC makes our Constitution irrelevant? Conspiracy Theories 152
Mick West Debunked: "you become the leader of a country, someone else makes all the decisions." Quotes Debunked 2
T Is it less rational to believe in several conspiracy theories than only one? Conspiracy Theories 31
Mick West TFTRH #30 - Tom: 9/11 - Why We Believe and Change Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 5
Steve Funk Does Guy McPherson believe in chemtrails? [No] Contrails and Chemtrails 21
Leifer Erin Brokovich does not believe in chemtrails. Contrails and Chemtrails 64
Leifer What to do when family members believe in bunk ? General Discussion 273
Mick West Greek Survey suggest 1 in 3 Greeks believe they are being sprayed Contrails and Chemtrails 3
Jimbo 12 of the Weirder Things Americans Still Believe Conspiracy Theories 31
Leifer Citizen Journalism...what to believe ? General Discussion 0
Mat Reasons to believe in Chemtrails Contrails and Chemtrails 9
FreiZeitGeist FB: Airline Pilots Who Believe that Chemtrails are Real Contrails and Chemtrails 28
F4Jock Why do people believe? General Discussion 83
Dan Wilson Why do people believe conspiracies? General Discussion 86
Mick West Do you believe in any paranormal or supernatural abilities? General Discussion 106
George B I am a Chemtrail Advocate . . . I believe there is an Aerosol Injection Program Contrails and Chemtrails 1316
Mick West Debunked: "A conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists" (Hoover) Quotes Debunked 116
tryblinking How many people actually believe in 'chemtrails'? Contrails and Chemtrails 2
Pogopoint99 Does Rosalind Peterson believe in chemtrails? Contrails and Chemtrails 17
Steve Andrews How I came to believe and disbelieve in chemtrails Escaping The Rabbit Hole 6
Steve Andrews Chemtrails and other conspiracy theories I don't believe Conspiracy Theories 3
Related Articles



































Related Articles

Top