WHY do you debunk?

Nessa Celery

Nessa Celery

New Member
What stirred your interest in debunking, why do you put so much effort into doing so, and do you consider it important? :confused:

(I'm going to cheekily request here that this thread not be pulled too far off topic; please let's keep it nice and clear, and as relevant to the title as possible.)
 
SeriouslyDebatable said:
I am becoming increasingly convinced that the government is paying him to do it.
Click to expand...

SD, Why do you say that??? I think Mick is very dedicated to what he does . . . I don't always agree with his process but I don't think he is paid by the government to do what he is doing . . .
 
I wrote this on another forum (ATS), covering why I got into debunking chemtrails. debunking other stuff sort of grew from there as a general intolerance to people telling me drivel.

I won't put it in quotes as that would just make it longer!

"There's been a few posts in a thread lately where chemmies have "pondered" why it is people spend time debunking this hoax.

So I'm going to tell you why I do it.

The main reason is that it slanders me. I have worked for a couple of airlines - I have seen the aircraft I worked on leave persistent contrails that have spanned the horizon - I know they were the a/c I worked on because there were only a few large jets in the county I was in when I started my career as an aircraft mechanic in the 1970's.

Since then I have worked in various aspects of aircraft maintenance - I have overhauled components - fuel & pneumatic systems mainly. I have worked "on the ramp" - receiving and despatching aircraft on passenger flights.

I have planned the maintenance on large passenger jets - turning the manufacturer's recommendations into working instructions for mechanics and assembling those instructions into packages of work for them to accomplish over time frames from overnight to 4 weeks.

I have been a quality assurance engineer- auditing the work of every aspect of the airline maintenance activity from the Chief Engineer's carrying out of is duties to the cleaners using the correct detergents.

I have also worked for a civil aviation authority as a quality auditor - even unto interviewing the CEO's of airlines to ensure they are aware of their legal responsibilities, and, again, everything downstream of there. I have also been deeply involved in the investigation of aviation accidents (although I have never been a specialist investigator), and the analysis and provision of safety trend information.

My career is not actually untypical of many long-service mechanics and engineers as they move through different aspects of aviation.

I also work alongside a group of people with similar backgrounds in aviation - from former international pilots to ag-spray pilots to people who have owned their own aircraft maintenance firms and everything in between.

So it is my contention that if there was "something going on" then I would know about it.

And I have never seen anything remotely resembling what is postulated by the chemtrail myth.

So when you say it is happening, and that I am a paid Govt shill, etc., you are slandering me.

The myth is BS, and your accusations are more BS you have made up because you can't face being wrong.

And don't start with compartmentalisation, maybe my airline wasn't doing it, maybe they did it all when I wasn't around and all that other crap you come up with to try to save your myth.

The aircraft have no systems for spraying anything - except for those that we all know that do - Agricultural, pesticides, water bombers, etc.

The fuel is rigorously tested - the fuel components require the fuel to be as specified - start screwing with that and you will start getting fuel component failure which leads to engine failures. There are no unknown tanks on aircraft, no unknown systems - everything is documented and has to be in its place - heck even a bolt that is made by the wrong people is cause for a massive investigation!!

I don't expect this to convince many true believers.....but at least you don't have to ask stupid insulting questions about why I debunk any more! "
 
MikeC said:
I wrote this on another forum (ATS), covering why I got into debunking chemtrails. debunking other stuff sort of grew from there as a general intolerance to people telling me drivel.

I won't put it in quotes as that would just make it longer!

"There's been a few posts in a thread lately where chemmies have "pondered" why it is people spend time debunking this hoax.

So I'm going to tell you why I do it.

The main reason is that it slanders me. I have worked for a couple of airlines - I have seen the aircraft I worked on leave persistent contrails that have spanned the horizon - I know they were the a/c I worked on because there were only a few large jets in the county I was in when I started my career as an aircraft mechanic in the 1970's.

Since then I have worked in various aspects of aircraft maintenance - I have overhauled components - fuel & pneumatic systems mainly. I have worked "on the ramp" - receiving and despatching aircraft on passenger flights.

I have planned the maintenance on large passenger jets - turning the manufacturer's recommendations into working instructions for mechanics and assembling those instructions into packages of work for them to accomplish over time frames from overnight to 4 weeks.

I have been a quality assurance engineer- auditing the work of every aspect of the airline maintenance activity from the Chief Engineer's carrying out of is duties to the cleaners using the correct detergents.

I have also worked for a civil aviation authority as a quality auditor - even unto interviewing the CEO's of airlines to ensure they are aware of their legal responsibilities, and, again, everything downstream of there. I have also been deeply involved in the investigation of aviation accidents (although I have never been a specialist investigator), and the analysis and provision of safety trend information.

My career is not actually untypical of many long-service mechanics and engineers as they move through different aspects of aviation.

I also work alongside a group of people with similar backgrounds in aviation - from former international pilots to ag-spray pilots to people who have owned their own aircraft maintenance firms and everything in between.

So it is my contention that if there was "something going on" then I would know about it.

And I have never seen anything remotely resembling what is postulated by the chemtrail myth.

So when you say it is happening, and that I am a paid Govt shill, etc., you are slandering me.

The myth is BS, and your accusations are more BS you have made up because you can't face being wrong.

And don't start with compartmentalisation, maybe my airline wasn't doing it, maybe they did it all when I wasn't around and all that other crap you come up with to try to save your myth.

The aircraft have no systems for spraying anything - except for those that we all know that do - Agricultural, pesticides, water bombers, etc.

The fuel is rigorously tested - the fuel components require the fuel to be as specified - start screwing with that and you will start getting fuel component failure which leads to engine failures. There are no unknown tanks on aircraft, no unknown systems - everything is documented and has to be in its place - heck even a bolt that is made by the wrong people is cause for a massive investigation!!

I don't expect this to convince many true believers.....but at least you don't have to ask stupid insulting questions about why I debunk any more! "
Click to expand...
Excellent background . . . you obviously know much about the nuts and bolts of commercial aviation . . . I personally don't think anyone in the mainline industry is knowingly involved and never have . . . the question is can operations exist without being detected by people like yourself . . . you don't think that is possible . . . I do . . .
 
Everyone here both debates AND debunks. It is a matter of pride. It depends on how you take a loss, that determines your bias towards any given subject. Most people I see have a hard time admitting when they are wrong. I have seen Mick correct himself twice... once over a words definition and another over the source of a claim. Albeit those corrections were insignificant as they were irrelevant to debunking the main point, it is more than I have seen from anyone else on the debunker side of the issue.

If you want to convince a true believer that there are no chemtrails, then you cannot be a true believer (of contrails) yourself. You must convince a chemtrail believer that you don't know about the possibility of chemtrails, not that you KNOW that they don't exist. You must re-affirm it constantly. Tell people that it is possible, but that there is no direct evidence. Facts are a tricky subject because of what facts might be missing, and how facts are verified.

Since chemtrails would be a man made phenomenon, it also helps to line up suspects as to who might be capable and willing to do this... and check their track records.

Why do certain people debunk? I think EVERYONE debunks. Why do people debunk certain topics? Because enough people that they interact with are either interested in the topic or are totally opposed to their opinion. That's it. Nothing more. I have never seen a topic with only one adherent believing in it.

I am mainly interested in discussing liberty... and secondly 9/11 and government coverups. Chemtrails appeals to me because of the government coverup aspect. Obviously a coverup HIDES evidence so... just discussing the direct evidence is limiting the possibilities that you use to form a decision.

I would be interested in how many people think chemtrails is a hoax, but believe in the man made global warming myth. Are there any debunkers here that believe in man made global warming?
 
SeriouslyDebatable said:
If you want to convince a true believer that there are no chemtrails, then you cannot be a true believer (of contrails) yourself. You must convince a chemtrail believer that you don't know about the possibility of chemtrails, not that you KNOW that they don't exist. You must re-affirm it constantly. Tell people that it is possible, but that there is no direct evidence. Facts are a tricky subject because of what facts might be missing, and how facts are verified.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to say "don't be confrontational," here?
 
HappyMonday said:
Are you trying to say "don't be confrontational," here?
Click to expand...
That would certainly help. If you walk into a sports bar with the wrong jersey on you might get bashed. If your salsa is made in New York City, you might be hung... and if you talk bad about conspiracies to a conspiracy theorist, then you might become part of the conspiracy.
 
George B said:
Excellent background . . . you obviously know much about the nuts and bolts of commercial aviation . . . I personally don't think anyone in the mainline industry is knowingly involved and never have . . . the question is can operations exist without being detected by people like yourself . . . you don't think that is possible . . . I do . . .
Click to expand...

I am sure you can construct a scenario that would not involve me knowing about it. Just like I can construct a scenario where you are actually Prince Charles' love child with a Reptilian mercenary soldier from Angola. Your memory has been altered and your parents and public records co-opted.

Scenarios can be fun, can't they ;)

but they are not evidence.

The original scenario for chemtrails is that was originally that are done by commercial aircraft, etc. and THAT is something I would know about.

Various attempts to redefine chemtrails to get around the inconventient lack of actual evidence, and the persistence of debunking evidence such as my experience, fail to address the core issue - there is simply no evidence that they exist AT ALL. Such attempts are red herrings and disinfo designed to allow maintenance of the cognitive dinnonance betwen that total lack of supporting evidence while insisting that chemtrails do really exist.

the phenomena of postulating ever changing scenarios in response to not actually being able to provide any good evidence is known in some circles as "last thursdayism" - which is specifically a response to young earth creationism, but the cap fits this too.
 
MikeC said:
I am sure you can construct a scenario that would not involve me knowing about it. Just like I can construct a scenario where you are actually Prince Charles' love child with a Reptilian mercenary soldier from Angola. Your memory has been altered and your parents and public records co-opted.

Scenarios can be fun, can't they ;)

but they are not evidence.

The original scenario for chemtrails is that was originally that are done by commercial aircraft, etc. and THAT is something I would know about.

Various attempts to redefine chemtrails to get around the inconventient lack of actual evidence, and the persistence of debunking evidence such as my experience, fail to address the core issue - there is simply no evidence that they exist AT ALL. Such attempts are red herrings and disinfo designed to allow maintenance of the cognitive dinnonance betwen that total lack of supporting evidence while insisting that chemtrails do really exist.

the phenomena of postulating ever changing scenarios in response to not actually being able to provide any good evidence is known in some circles as "last thursdayism" - which is specifically a response to young earth creationism, but the cap fits this too.
Click to expand...
Label it what you will . . . I still feel it is possible . . . there exist historical precedent . . . Motive . . . Capability . . . Budget . . . you keep debunking . . . I will keep looking for evidence . . .
 
I think persistent contrails ARE evidence. I remember seeing them as a child and I kept my eye on them. There was nothing else to do while I was riding in the car. While I had seen them persist sometimes ALMOST horizon to horizon, I never remember them lingering long after the plane was gone, and I never had seen them spreading out. Ever. This is not a scenario that I constructed. It is observed evidence. I never thought much about it until the chemtrails theory became prevalent, but it raises questions for me today.
 
SeriouslyDebatable said:
I think persistent contrails ARE evidence. I remember seeing them as a child and I kept my eye on them. There was nothing else to do while I was riding in the car. While I had seen them persist sometimes ALMOST horizon to horizon, I never remember them lingering long after the plane was gone, and I never had seen them spreading out. Ever. This is not a scenario that I constructed. It is observed evidence. I never thought much about it until the chemtrails theory became prevalent, but it raises questions for me today.
Click to expand...
I never associated cirrus clouds or any clouds with contrails before . . . they may have been there but I never noticed . . .
 
George B said:
I never associated cirrus clouds or any clouds with contrails before . . . they may have been there but I never noticed . . .
Click to expand...
I never associated them before either, but that it because I never thought much about it... but that is good evidence that something has changed otherwise I should have noticed and therefore thought about it. Noticing something would mean that you are engaged in thinking about it. It is on examination now that I never remembered noticing anything like that. I can not specifically say that I can remember that I was LOOKING for a contrail to expand and it never happened, just that looking back now, of all the contrails that I remember, none of them persisted as long as they do today and I do not remember any of them spreading out. I have seen contrails do that now that I am an adult and I never did a comparison of what I seen then, and what I notice now. I remember sometimes they had vastly long white lines behind them, but they were always really thin lines and I could always see the end of the line after the plane was gone.
 
Nessa Celery said:
What stirred your interest in debunking, why do you put so much effort into doing so, and do you consider it important?
Click to expand...

For the greater good.

When people believe irrational falsehoods, their actions tend to hurt others. I believe less of that in the world is a good thing.

As Mick says: "Debunking is a good thing, because it removes bunk using science and reason, so simultaneously shows people the truth of a particular situation, and demonstrates the utility of science and reason".
 
SeriouslyDebatable said:
I think persistent contrails ARE evidence. I remember seeing them as a child and I kept my eye on them. There was nothing else to do while I was riding in the car. While I had seen them persist sometimes ALMOST horizon to horizon, I never remember them lingering long after the plane was gone,
Click to expand...


Horizon to horizon can be as much as 400 miles - that sounds to me like theywould be lingering "long after het plane was gone"!!

...and I never had seen them spreading out. Ever. This is not a scenario that I constructed. It is observed evidence. I never thought much about it until the chemtrails theory became prevalent, but it raises questions for me today.
Click to expand...

I don't remember them sperading out either - and like you I do recall them, occasionally, spanning the sky.

But I don't remember lots of things - that doesnt mean they didn't happen, or if I see tehm happening now that it is a conspiracy - it just means either I did not see them, or I forgot about them.

anecdotes like yours and mine are not actually good evidence for or against chemtrails.
 
MikeC said:
I don't remember them sperading out either - and like you I do recall them, occasionally, spanning the sky.

But I don't remember lots of things - that doesnt mean they didn't happen, or if I see tehm happening now that it is a conspiracy - it just means either I did not see them, or I forgot about them.

anecdotes like yours and mine are not actually good evidence for or against chemtrails.
Click to expand...


I don't remember this either, and I've been an aviation buff since I was a kid. Of course, here's the thing: how often do we really pay attention to those contrails anyway? Despite having a love for the sky, I certainly never paid them much mind when I grew up, and I sure looked up a lot. It's only after I heard about the chemtrail theory a month or two ago when I looked at them a different way, and I've flown planes for a number of years. So yeah, like Mike, I don't remember a lot of things either and it could have been happening before my eyes.

Planes were also built a little differently, and there were fewer of them back then too, so we likely didn't see them as often.
 
Rico said:
I don't remember this either, and I've been an aviation buff since I was a kid. Of course, here's the thing: how often do we really pay attention to those contrails anyway? Despite having a love for the sky, I certainly never paid them much mind when I grew up, and I sure looked up a lot. It's only after I heard about the chemtrail theory a month or two ago when I looked at them a different way, and I've flown planes for a number of years. So yeah, like Mike, I don't remember a lot of things either and it could have been happening before my eyes.

Planes were also built a little differently, and there were fewer of them back then too, so we likely didn't see them as often.
Click to expand...

I did the classic 'They were different when I was younger' too,when a CT friend of mine hit me with the theory,and I then started noticing them and confirming my own idea.

I started looking for another explanation when I watched the truly awful Don't Talk About the Weather youtube doc, during which it occurred to me that I was agreeing with the existence of a vast global conspiracy involving thousands of people for some nefarious aim,when a simpler explanation was much more likely.

As for the thread topic,I wouldn't say I debunk without putting in a lot more work than I do, though I think it's vastly important.There are a lot of people unhealthily mired in this kind of thing.
 
Funny how suggestion can influence perception of the present and of memory. Once people are convinced of chemtrails they may see chemtrails and weather manipulation everywhere and insist that what they are seeing now is unnatural because they don't remember seeing it before. Spiderwebs and various cloud formations are now often offered as proof of the "theories" on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjkakKP1btk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F27CwBAhHj0&feature=channel&list=UL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LymA7EZYwws&feature=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G36qyF674j0&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYQg72de_a8&feature=plcp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGDu0GWDcxA&feature=plcp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHaAwvIJktI&feature=plcp
http://www.youtube.com/user/cajunmiracle/videos?view=0


Just type "haarp cloud" and "chemweb" into searches on youtube and there are a lot of videos of this sort.

Sadly these people are threatening pilots, showing up at county and city commission meetings and wasting everybody's time, sending money to scammers like Clifford Carnicom, etc...
 
I'm part debunker, part believer and part curious. What motivates the former in me is the notion people are being taken advatage of. One of my main areas of interest there is channeled material linked to 2012, especially allegedly coming from ET's, which is often pretty nasty in terms of coercive persuasion. That somehow led me to CT's. There I mainly stick to bad reporting of facts since it's rare getting past the point where one can get objective proof or disproof. The part where I am a believer has to do with psychic phenomena and what tends to be called peudo-sciences in skeptic circles (astrology, numerology, runes/tarot). What I'm curious about are topics I got into from personal experience, like UFO's and chemtrails, or at least something that looks quite offbeat for contrails.

Back to topic, what made me get involved in helping people spot disinfo is the way it almost always ends up disconnecting them from reality and leading them to follow someone else's agenda without realizing it. It also often creates a lot of unnecessary anger, frustration and sometimes hopelessness in some believers.
 
I have found that ther is also a fascination with the slow train wreck element of conspiracy theories - watching peole get even more weird or further into denial as their pet theories get debunked has a sort of macabre humour about it.

If these were not real people screwing up their real lives the story lines would fit right at home in British comedies such as Monty Python, Young Ones and Blackadder!

The inventive elements of some theories are quite impressive too - right up there as works of fiction IMO, and can also be read as such for pure entertainment.

So afte a couple of years since I was first exposed to CT's through chemtrails I confess to finding a morbid fascination that keeps me coming back beyond my initial interests.
 
During college (art school, BFA, Painting 1984) my fine art subject matter was roughly "the debate between science and religion". These were collages (torn book images) and painted medical illustrations.....combined together.
I won't brag......I was not a heavy book reader or a scholarly information gatherer at the time. I sourced my information from gut feelings, and life experiences.
This continued into Graduate School, where I additionally led my art into images of.....invented meaningless symbols superimposed onto landscapes, where I subtly proposed the idea of "man's mark (symbols) onto the earth (landscape).

dscn3882.jpg


DSCN3828.JPG


Then, after some success as an exhibiting artist, the need for a "job" ($$) took over, and I found work in Hollywood, which has paid well over the years.
During this time, I regained some hobbies up to the current day -- DIY electronics, and photography.
I discovered the internet later than most....and I was surprised at one subject of great debate....911 conspiracy theories.
I realized that most of these 911 ideas made little sense, and seemed to stem from a general distrust of gov't.
It seems from the start (college), that I had always been interested in dichotomies of thought, and had always had an interest in weighing and comparing social opinion extremes.
On-line, I noticed unsubstantiated bias, (especially regarding 911) and found it fairly easy to dispute the rather wild claims being proposed. Posting on social media, I was met with anger and stubbornness.
So instead of "lightly analogizing" this in my art (with a limited audience and exposure) , I guess I felt better to go (speak, respond) directly to the sources, on-line.

From the the familiarization of 911 conspiracies, I then came across the "chemtrail conspiracies", which were equally absurd ....to me.
These conspiracies were so fanciful, that they replanted/replaced my former interest of religion (in my art), but the science portion was still in place.
So instead of "religion vs science", it is now "conspiracies vs science".

I guess that's how I tie it all together, these days, and that's why I am here.
 
Last edited:
For me, it's been at least partially an interest in learning about the science. I learned quite a bit about astronomy and astrophotography which I never would have learned had I not looked into, and eventually spent time debunking, the "Planet X" claims. Same with "chemtrails" and learning about aviation and meteorology. Then there is the natural desire to push back when one sees total BS being passed around and consumed like it was coffee cake.
 
Hama Neggs said:
For me, it's been at least partially an interest in learning about the science. I learned quite a bit about astronomy and astrophotography which I never would have learned had I not looked into, and eventually spent time debunking, the "Planet X" claims. Same with "chemtrails" and learning about aviation and meteorology. Then there is the natural desire to push back when one sees total BS being passed around and consumed like it was coffee cake.
Click to expand...
Same here; I've learned a lot about evolution in debunking creationism (my particular bugbear, if for no other reason than the way it's pushed to the willfully blind detriment of our educational system). And the thing is that you don't really even have to know all that much, it's not necessary (usually) to be an evolutionary biologist to counter creationist thinking- since it's almost always basic concepts they get wrong (like not being able to comprehend that evolution is not a normative process- there are no aims, only outcomes), all it takes is basic knowledge to debunk. As with things like the Apollo Hoax CTs, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to get right what it didn't take one to get wrong. But the opportunity to become at least better informed is a plus in arguing with people who refuse that opportunity.
 
turingtest said:
Same here; I've learned a lot about evolution in debunking creationism (my particular bugbear, if for no other reason than the way it's pushed to the willfully blind detriment of our educational system). And the thing is that you don't really even have to know all that much, it's not necessary (usually) to be an evolutionary biologist to counter creationist thinking- since it's almost always basic concepts they get wrong (like not being able to comprehend that evolution is not a normative process- there are no aims, only outcomes), all it takes is basic knowledge to debunk. As with things like the Apollo Hoax CTs, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to get right what it didn't take one to get wrong. But the opportunity to become at least better informed is a plus in arguing with people who refuse that opportunity.
Click to expand...

AND, I have learned a great deal about the Human ability to apply confirmation bias to the detriment of all logic. I found it difficult to accept that people actually believed the wild and demonstrably wrong "Planet X" claims, but in moving on to "chemtrails" and the like I see that they absolutely DO believe them.
 
I don't think not noticing something means something has changed. Once your reticular activing system is activated you notice all kinds of things.

To answer your original question....

I have always been interested in urban legends, since I was a teenager way back when in the 70s and people would spread tales about some street where kids necked and, well you know the story about the HOOK, I'm sure. Later, in the 80s I'd hear these wild tales about people being drugged and then missing their livers or some such nonsense, and the old "welcome to the world of AIDS" urban legend, and when people would repeat it, I'd want to jump up and say "that's not true! It's an urban legend!" but the first time I did it the person assured me a friend of their cousin's friend had it happen to them.

Why do I keep doing it? Why do I read all I can about astronomy? WHy do I collect beach glass? It's a hobby!

Why did I debate evolution vs creationism for a long time? Because I don't want to be ignorant and I want to educate people about their false beliefs.
 
Nessa Celery said:
What stirred your interest in debunking, why do you put so much effort into doing so, and do you consider it important? :confused:

(I'm going to cheekily request here that this thread not be pulled too far off topic; please let's keep it nice and clear, and as relevant to the title as possible.)
Click to expand...

Honestly, for me, it really started in earnest when I came to MB. Ive always had a drive to make sure things were accurate, and itd drive me crazy when Id hear people pull bullshit out of their ass and claim it as fact when it was dead wrong. I dont mind if its your OPINION but state it as such. My dad was notorious for bullshitting about things.. drove me nuts.

When I came to Metabunk though, and I cant even remember how or WHY I came here.. I found people who were interested in the same thing. Not being right, or pushing their own views but using evidence and research to burn away irrelevancies... the Scientific Method in action. I found people who enjoyed talking about things rather than screaming at one another. Its like being in a debate with people who may not agree with you, or dispute your evidence, but dont have any ego involved.. so there's no butt hurt.

The more Im here, the more I speak to people here.. the more I get to know the crowd that hangs out here, the more respect I have for them and the more enjoyable debunking becomes. It makes it easier for me to talk to the friends I have elsewhere, and explain to them that Nibiru isnt real.. or that Mars isnt going to be the size of the moon and what the amount of chaos it would cause if mars ever DID appear to be that large in teh sky.. and I can do it in a way that they understand without them feeling like Im talking down to them, or making them feel stupid.

An educated people, are a happier people.. they're more likely to be peaceful and begin to think critically rather than relying on Fox or MSN or Facebook etc to see whats going on in the world.. it makes me happier knowing that people can start seeing through the crap and form their own opinions rather than having them fed to them.. debunking gives people that option, the skills you pick up removing bunk make you a better person overall... but thats just me.
 
Because conspiracy/tinfoil hat nonsense can cause serious harm. Anti-vaccine hysteria has led to pertussis outbreaks, for example.
 
The main reason is that I used to believe in bunk myself. Maybe "believe" is a strong word but I did consider many conspiracy theories believable. I fooled myself by not looking at contradicting evidence, it was much easier to only read the articles that supported my beliefs. Believing in a conspiracy makes you feel special, you are part of something bigger and possess information that others don't..

But so much for history. Why do I debunk? I really enjoy it. I love going through piles of information to find the essential. I also love pointing out where someone else is wrong ;-). I actually started a website (and I wish to remain anonymous) a year ago and really enjoy debunking various subjects. I wish the government would pay me to do it, but so far it is a hobby :D.
 
I'm certainly not a 'professional' debunker like some of you guys, but definitely enough of a smartass to want to go "Errr..." on some of the posts I see around. Like I said in the other thread, the volume and sheer ridiculousness of it caught me by surprise. And it's the friends who think they are the most radical and free-thinking who seem to be the worst (and probably took the most drugs :confused:).
So that's where it started. Chemtrails and 9/11. Plus the comments section on sites like YouTube where I started thinking how much more attractive the rational people were and how I'd much rather go to their parties than the other lot. I found myself taking sides, very naturally. I became a RationalWiki fan as well.
And this was all around the time I started getting deeply in atheism. *Click*.

This site comes up a lot when you Google "[whatever] conspiracy" and I found a lot of stuff about chemtrails written by people seriously smarter than me and probably anyone I know. And links, very useful links. So I took some of that back to Facebook and acted like the frustrated investigative journalist that I surely am, and felt really pleased with myself. The conversation went quiet after that, apart from "Well, I don't know about any of that stuff, but I do know that..." which was just horribly weak and WTF?
That made me realise that all most conspists are doing is drifting from link to link and clicking 'Share', like automatons.

But all that gave me this sort of thirst for knowledge, to go deeper into things. I did some lurking here and there was a 'debate' somewhere with all the Metabunk dudes staying cool and calm and the interloper grinding his teeth and clenching his fists more and more. Which I admit was just entertaining. :rolleyes:

These days I find it hard to pass by conspist posts even though I know I don't have time for it. Although I'm not seeing so much of it now tbh - maybe because I explained to someone how to set up a post with 'Don't include: Gretchen' on it.

Anyway, enough about me. Hope I can be of some use, even if it's just quips and low-rent philosophy. :D
 
I used to take a passing interest in conspiracy, mainly for the entertainment value, trying to work out how people could put two and two together and come up with 36. However following 9-11, and then the London 7-7 attacks some of the claims I began reading about began to concern me. I began to see that the wilder conspiracy claims were not just fun but actually harmful, as innocent people were being accused of horrific crimes for no reason other than paranoid dot joining. Around that time I became involved in a local radio station, as a rock and metal Dj, and came into contact with a certain fairly well known UK conspiracy theorist who also had and still has a show on the same station (I wont mention the name, but he is known to a few others here). After listening to him spout his well meaning, but completely unfounded rants, I started to debate with him, got branded as a sheeple and a shill, but my interaction with this so called 'truther' made me even more determined to look at conspiracy with an evidence based and rationalist view point, although at this point my 'debunking' efforts were limited to informal pub debates and the odd email exchange.

Then about two years ago one of my closest friends suddenly, or so it appeared, fell under the spell of David Icke, and all of a sudden I was being bombarded with alien lizard people this, nwo that... and it was driving me up the bloody wall. He kept filling my facebook wall with bullshit straight out of the deepest part of the rabbit hole (this guy didn't just wander into it, it was a running swan dive right down the middle) and as some of his family and friends were beginning to go down with him, I felt that someone had to take a stand against the insanity so started looking for good source of arguments to counter his.

That's when I found Metabunk. For the first year I lurked as a guest, avidly reading the treads and following the evidence; and sharing the threads around social media, then a year back I discovered a thread I could comment on, I forget what it was, but I joined and commented. This got me thinking. I'm no expert on many of the subjects, but I am a trained copywriter, someone trained in turning facts into readable text, I've got fairly good research skills and a knack in finding information plus I've been interested in history, politics, aviation, science and other stuff for many years, and have a fascination with disasters - explosions, plane and train crashes, ship wrecks etc, why the happened and what lessons can be learned from them (ever since I was a kid I've always read as much non-fiction as I have pulp fiction), so thought I might have something to offer Metabunk so got more involved.

And this place has now become my bolt hole for sanity where I can escape the 'proof' of shape shifting royalty, holographic aircraft and grand Illuminutty plots, and debate these subjects with intelligent and rational people.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mick West
Sean Kirkpatrick's Interview With Daniel Lavelle at The Guardian [Transcript]
Replies
26
Views
3K
MapperGuy
M
AllTheQuestionsToday
What is your "red line" that would make you unambiguously and sincerely say with full belief, "Aliens are real and are or have been on Earth"?
5 6 7
Replies
248
Views
21K
Mendel
Mendel
LilWabbit
Claim: Generative AI is Sentient
2 3
Replies
85
Views
9K
tobigtofool
tobigtofool
Mendel
AARO Historical Report vol.1 press conference with Tim Phillips
Replies
2
Views
540
Mendel
Mendel
Z.W. Wolf
Claim - The Brother of Nick Davies (AKA Phuket Word) Speaks
Replies
5
Views
1K
Mendel
Mendel

Latest posts

Back
Top