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 . . .*
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
MikeC said:13) they like the look of their own posts
Mick said:I've made it into a real poll.
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. . .
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 . . .
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 . . .
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 . . .Let's not forget that you think "new technology" is being used to intentionally place a new type contrail into the sky.
Correct??
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?
2) I think the high efficiency engines have produced a new species of contrail which is contributing to the situation
Really? Why no panic in the streets then?
Nobody pays any attention to contrails. Except nerds and conspiracy theorists.
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 . . .
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.
Oh yes, I'm having trouble with the 'reply with quote' button as well. Server too busy, all that jazz.
Anyone else?
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.
Oh yes, I'm having trouble with the 'reply with quote' button as well. Server too busy, all that jazz.
Anyone else?
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 . . .
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)
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?
There are lots of differences in the way people think. It's not a simple spectrum.
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.