[Necro] Chem-trails poisoning our air

155	70445

offline

KnightDeclan

478 posts

Nomad

Posted June 26, '13 9:23pm UTC

Pretty sure NoName is a libertarian. Also, chem trails have nothing to do with libertarianism. That's just conspiracy theory crap.
NoName doesn't want freedom like a good libertarian does. He's just a moderator chosen to even the odds. And yeah, it has to do with liberatarianism (not a word lol). We don't want that poison in our air, so we shouldn't have to have it.

offline

KnightDeclan

478 posts

Nomad

Posted June 26, '13 9:29pm UTC

Yeah, see, here's why this entire argument is a farce. You're purposefully taking all the credible sources, and calling them a conspiracy against everyone. Then you take the -least- credible sources and try to say they make more sense than people who are EDUCATED in these matters and INDEPENDENTLY verify and research these things.

It's like going to ask a rocket scientist how rockets work, assuming he lied to you, then consulting your resident hobo and using that information to try and make a rocket. It don't work out well.

There are plenty of highly intelligent theists, conspiracy theorists, and libertarians.

*Facepalm headdesk fall out of chair hit wall roll over onto tack hit head on door*

-Picks you up and sits u back on chair-

It's always good to analyse critically what other scientists publish; if a scientists publishes something, it gets read and reread by colleagues and others. That's how we can make sure it is not complete BS.
How do you know the colleagues aren't BS

[i]Yeah, see, here's why this entire argument is a farce. You're purposefully taking all the credible sources, and calling them a conspiracy against everyone. Then you take the -least- credible sources and try to say they make more sense than people who are EDUCATED in these matters and INDEPENDENTLY verify and research these things.\r\n\r\nIt's like going to ask a rocket scientist how rockets work, assuming he lied to you, then consulting your resident hobo and using that information to try and make a rocket. It don't work out well.[/i]\r\n\r\nThere are plenty of highly intelligent theists, conspiracy theorists, and libertarians.\r\n\r\n[i]*Facepalm headdesk fall out of chair hit wall roll over onto tack hit head on door*[/i] \r\n\r\n-Picks you up and sits u back on chair-\r\n\r\n[i]It's always good to analyse critically what other scientists publish; if a scientists publishes something, it gets read and reread by colleagues and others. That's how we can make sure it is not complete BS.[/i]\r\nHow do you know the colleagues aren't BS

offline

KnightDeclan

478 posts

Nomad

Posted June 26, '13 9:31pm UTC

Can you explain to me how you can see the difference between chemtrails and contrails on a photograph? And can you explain to me how the orientation of the trails reflect a planned spray and not travel routes converging to airports?

http://artzgirl.hubpages.com/hub/US-Patents-for-Chemtrails
watch the vids

offline

Kasic

5,552 posts

Jester

Posted June 26, '13 9:31pm UTC

We don't want that poison in our air, so we shouldn't have to have it.

You first have to show that there is actually said poison in the air. Which you haven't. At all. The only thing you've managed is to make yourself look ignorant by claiming con trails are poison dropped by the government to cover the global warming hoax, for reasons unspecified. It makes absolutely no sense at all.

Blue went to Firefox broswer and jumped over the merry go round and betty kissed Jimmy goodnight.

That sentence above is your argument. It makes me scratch my head and try to figure out where the hell you're connecting things, when there's no connection to be found or reason to even think that.

offline

Freakenstein

9,504 posts

Jester

Posted June 26, '13 9:36pm UTC

How do you know the colleagues aren't BS

How do you know authors of your sources aren't BS?

See, that's the beauty of peer-reviewing. You have academics with Masters and Doctorates of this expertise all in this room verifying the data, cross-referencing the evidence, and making sure the premises line up with what we know.

They are all independent of each other, not some part of this secret league that intentionally warns us of impending doom to save our hides. But perhaps if they and the government all were, we wouldn't be in this predicament in the first place, because we wouldn't have lobbyists and pseudoscience trying to put their non-science on the same shelf as real science stopping them.

offline

pangtongshu

9,808 posts

Jester

Posted June 26, '13 9:52pm UTC

http://artzgirl.hubpages.com/hub/US-Patents-for-Chemtrails

Well that was lovely music.

1st video:
Literally the exact same trail, only difference is the alleged "chem-trail" is larger (made by a larger plane, so check-mark that for answered) and lasts longer. I already explained why some con-trails last longer than others..so check-mark that as answered.

2nd video:
Seems like it is trying to say that since some last a while, they are chem-trails. Again, I already answered how some con-trails last far longer than others.

Again..please answer how you can tell the difference between the two. Your first video tried to answer the question..but its trying to answer the question consisted of pointing to two different trails and seemingly going "You see dis?! You see dis?! Day different! Look at dis! Duh! Look!"

They offered no evidence on how to tell the difference between the two..just arrows pointing at different trails and calling them different names.

Here's a fun game
Take the names given to the different trails, and swap them. Now, the larger one is the con-trail and the smaller is the chem-trail. Notice how, with how the video purports the difference of the trails, this swap seems perfectly liable.

[quote]http://artzgirl.hubpages.com/hub/US-Patents-for-Chemtrails[/quote]\r\n\r\nWell that was lovely music. \r\n\r\n1st video:\r\nLiterally the exact same trail, only difference is the alleged "chem-trail" is larger (made by a larger plane, so check-mark that for answered) and lasts longer. I already explained why some con-trails last longer than others..so check-mark that as answered. \r\n\r\n2nd video:\r\nSeems like it is trying to say that since some last a while, they are chem-trails. Again, I already answered how some con-trails last far longer than others.\r\n\r\nAgain..please answer how you can tell the difference between the two. Your first video tried to answer the question..but its trying to answer the question consisted of pointing to two different trails and seemingly going "You see dis?! You see dis?! Day different! Look at dis! Duh! Look!"\r\n\r\nThey offered no evidence on how to tell the difference between the two..just arrows pointing at different trails and calling them different names. \r\n\r\n[b]Here's a fun game[/b]\r\nTake the names given to the different trails, and swap them. Now, the larger one is the con-trail and the smaller is the chem-trail. Notice how, with how the video purports the difference of the trails, this swap seems perfectly liable.

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted June 27, '13 1:05am UTC

FIRST of all, just because I'm the only libertarian on here, it doesn't mean I'm the only on in the world, if that's what you meant.

You're not the only Libertarian here and believing ridiculous conspiracy theories is not what makes someone a Libertarian.

PLENTY of people I know care about chem trails.

The people you know are idiots.

You, however, don't show critical analysis skills. You reject it "en bloc" without giving proper reasons,

Declan on this point. I've tried to help you improve on the aspect of critical thinking and you have patently ignored or thrown it in my face.

He's just a moderator chosen to even the odds.

He was chosen as a mod for being highly respected (which he earned) and fare in judgement.

Not everything is a strategically placed conspiracy.

We don't want that poison in our air, so we shouldn't have to have it.

They aren't spraying poison in the air. There would be nothing to gain from any of this.When a company or government pollutes it's a by product of some sort of self gain, usually money. There would be no gain in loading planes up to intentionally poison the environment. There would be no gain in hoaxing a global warming.

What are you going to go further off the deep end and start in on lizard people? (which coming from you wouldn't surprise me.)

And another thing!

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y163/MageGrayWolf/junk/quotebuttonmofo_zpse3352484.jpg

[quote]FIRST of all, just because I'm the only libertarian on here, it doesn't mean I'm the only on in the world, if that's what you meant. [/quote]\r\n\r\nYou're not the only Libertarian here and believing ridiculous conspiracy theories is not what makes someone a Libertarian.\r\n\r\n[quote]PLENTY of people I know care about chem trails.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThe people you know are idiots.\r\n\r\n[quote]You, however, don't show critical analysis skills. You reject it "en bloc" without giving proper reasons,[/quote]\r\n\r\nDeclan on this point. I've tried to help you improve on the aspect of critical thinking and you have patently ignored or thrown it in my face.\r\n\r\n[quote]He's just a moderator chosen to even the odds.[/quote]\r\n\r\nHe was chosen as a mod for being highly respected (which he earned) and fare in judgement.\r\n\r\nNot everything is a strategically placed conspiracy.\r\n\r\n[quote]We don't want that poison in our air, so we shouldn't have to  have it.[/quote]\r\n\r\nThey aren't spraying poison in the air. There would be nothing to gain from any of this.When a company or government pollutes it's a by product of some sort of self gain, usually money. There would be no gain in loading planes up to intentionally poison the environment. There would be no gain in hoaxing a global warming.\r\n\r\nWhat are you going to go further off the deep end and start in on lizard people? (which coming from you wouldn't surprise me.)\r\n\r\nAnd another thing!\r\n[img]http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y163/MageGrayWolf/junk/quotebuttonmofo_zpse3352484.jpg[/img]

offline

SSTG

13,055 posts

Treasurer

Posted June 27, '13 8:33am UTC

If you have the chance to watch this episode of Nova, you'll learn a lot of interesting stuff about the Earth, what it does and our interaction with it. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html
If you can't watch the episode, read the transcript, you'll be amazed.
I just watched it and my brain is throbbing from the orgasm of data it just received!

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted June 27, '13 9:53am UTC

If you have the chance to watch this episode of Nova, you'll learn a lot of interesting stuff about the Earth, what it does and our interaction with it. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html
If you can't watch the episode, read the transcript, you'll be amazed.
I just watched it and my brain is throbbing from the orgasm of data it just received!

I will get to that later myself. If you were referring Declan the problem is he will think most if not all of it is a lie built on multi-level conspiracies. He needs to start relying on the evidence instead of what ever happens to sound good in his head and needs to learn how to critically examine new information.

offline

partydevil

5,129 posts

Jester

Posted June 27, '13 11:27am UTC

I believe I was mistaken when I said 17,000, of course if there are almost twice as many people backing my point then I'll go with that.

beside them, ALL others do acknowledges it. thats way more then your few people. (even if it's twice that much it's still nothing. and the 32 scientists working on climatology that do agree whit it, should all get fired on the spot.)

but is there a petition where many Climatologists sign for the argument of global warming.

science doesn't use petitions. why should there be any when the facts are so obvious?

.1%

.1% sounds good and normal when you say it. but for reading it would be easier if we said 0.1%

Secondly, your links are from scientists, who I'm kinda going against. I see them just as trusty reference as a catholic website, which I put on a few of the threads.

your basic stance is to refuse anything we will come up whit no matter what it is. as soon we give evidence you are denying it.
at the same time you close yourself off from all information and stay whit the limited information source of a religion that has no idea what it is talking about...

"Science adjusts its views. Based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation. So that belief can be preserved." -Tim Minchin "Storm"

your links are from scientists, who I'm kinda going against.

so we can say you dont love science then? why did you lie?

It's like going to ask a rocket scientist how rockets work, assuming he lied to you, then consulting your resident hobo and using that information to try and make a rocket. It don't work out well.

+1

He's just a moderator chosen to even the odds.

the world is one big conspiracy for you, or what?
why would your god make a world full of conspiracy's? isn't that just cruel?

We don't want that poison in our air, so we shouldn't have to have it.

do you ever use deodorant? it's poison that you spray in the air. just imagion how many we all spray in the air every day. why your not crying about that? do you know the amount of poison that comes out of the amazon? natural poison. should we destroy the amazon faster so it will be gone?
instead of those few planes. why dont you think of cars? the smog is very unhealthy. probably more unhealthy then your planes.
the world is full whit poison and deadly stuff. and the chem-trails are not the biggest problem. (if it is even true what you say. and that i can't tell from a source like you or your links...)

How do you know the colleagues aren't BS

the beautiful thing about science is that if you after all the evidence and replicated research. you still dont believe it. you can always go out and do the tests yourself and see by yourself the outcome of the research when youve done it all by yourself.
(and if you can't trust yourself whit this knowledge, then your name is kurt wise.)

[quote]I believe I was mistaken when I said 17,000, of course if there are almost twice as many people backing my point then I'll go with that.[/quote]\r\nbeside them, ALL others do acknowledges it. thats way more then your few people. (even if it's twice that much it's still nothing. and the 32 scientists working on climatology that do agree whit it, should all get fired on the spot.)\r\n[quote]\r\nbut is there a petition where many Climatologists sign for the argument of global warming.[/quote]\r\nscience doesn't use petitions. why should there be any when the facts are so obvious?\r\n\r\n[quote].1%[/quote]\r\n.1% sounds good and normal when you say it. but for reading it would be easier if we said 0.1% ;)\r\n\r\n[quote]Secondly, your links are from scientists, who I'm kinda going against.  I see them just as trusty reference as a catholic website, which I put on a few of the threads.[/quote]\r\nyour basic stance is to refuse anything we will come up whit no matter what it is. as soon we give evidence you are denying it.\r\nat the same time you close yourself off from all information and stay whit the limited information source of a religion that has no idea what it is talking about...\r\n\r\n"[i]Science [b]adjusts its views[/b]. Based on what's[b] observed[/b].\r\nFaith is the[b] denial of observation[/b]. So that [b]belief [/b]can be preserved.[/i]" -Tim Minchin "Storm"\r\n\r\n[quote]your links are from scientists, who I'm kinda going against.[/quote]\r\nso we can say you dont love science then? why did you lie?\r\n\r\n[quote]It's like going to ask a rocket scientist how rockets work, assuming he lied to you, then consulting your resident hobo and using that information to try and make a rocket. It don't work out well.[/quote]\r\n+1\r\n\r\n[quote]He's just a moderator chosen to even the odds.[/quote]\r\nthe world is one big conspiracy for you, or what?\r\nwhy would your god make a world full of conspiracy's? isn't that just cruel? \r\n\r\n[quote]We don't want that poison in our air, so we shouldn't have to  have it.[/quote]do you ever use deodorant? it's poison that you spray in the air. just imagion how many we all spray in the air every day. why your not crying about that? do you know the amount of poison that comes out of the amazon? natural poison. should we destroy the amazon faster so it will be gone?\r\ninstead of those few planes. why dont you think of cars? the smog is very unhealthy. probably more unhealthy then your planes.\r\nthe world is full whit poison and deadly stuff. and the chem-trails are not the biggest problem. (if it is even true what you say. and that i can't tell from a source like you or your links...)\r\n\r\n[quote]How do you know the colleagues aren't BS[/quote]\r\nthe beautiful thing about science is that if you after all the evidence and replicated research. you still dont believe it. you can always go out and do the tests yourself and see by yourself the outcome of the research when youve done it all by yourself.\r\n(and if you can't trust yourself whit this knowledge, then your name is kurt wise.)

offline

MageGrayWolf

9,462 posts

Farmer

Posted June 27, '13 12:49pm UTC

(and if you can't trust yourself whit this knowledge, then your name is kurt wise.)

In case you don't know who that is.

Kurt Wise's science career was destroyed by religion

offline

KnightDeclan

478 posts

Nomad

Posted June 27, '13 2:35pm UTC

The people you know are idiots.

I guess that counts as direct attack

offline

Kasic

5,552 posts

Jester

Posted June 27, '13 4:55pm UTC

I guess that counts as direct attack

Honestly, at this point, the lines are so blurred I'm not sure. What you are saying is literally so ridiculous, that we cannot even comment on them without it sounding like we're trying to insult you. You continually say that everyone you know believes what you believe - and what you believe had been shown to be so flawed, hateful, ignorant, and more, we cannot adequately address the scope of their inaccuracy with kinder words.

offline

SSTG

13,055 posts

Treasurer

Posted June 27, '13 5:35pm UTC

I will get to that later myself. If you were referring Declan the problem is he will think most if not all of it is a lie built on multi-level conspiracies. He needs to start relying on the evidence instead of what ever happens to sound good in his head and needs to learn how to critically examine new information.

Everybody should watch it because it throws you the facts in the face with amazing videos of satellite data. It shows you how the Ocean current is created and where it starts, how the planet regenerate itself, the interaction of the Sahara desert with the Amazon, the lighting producing nitrate, wildfires accelerating the fertilization process, the magma sifting under the ocean floor and being absorbed by the plankton that feed the animals and create oxygen, the ice reflecting the Sun, what does the Earth magnetic field do, and so on.
It's definitely my favorite episode of Nova. Even someone with an average IQ can understand it as long as he or she's willing to sit and watch for 2 hours. Toward the end it shows what the human is doing to accelerate the warming process. Anyway people watch it, it's worth the 2 hours.

[quote]I will get to that later myself. If you were referring Declan the problem is he will think most if not all of it is a lie built on multi-level conspiracies. He needs to start relying on the evidence instead of what ever happens to sound good in his head and needs to learn how to critically examine new information.[/quote]\r\nEverybody should watch it because it throws you the facts in the face with amazing videos of satellite data. It shows you how the Ocean current is created and where it starts, how the planet regenerate itself, the interaction of the Sahara desert with the Amazon, the lighting producing nitrate, wildfires accelerating the fertilization process, the magma sifting under the ocean floor and being absorbed by the plankton that feed the animals and create oxygen, the ice reflecting the Sun, what does the Earth magnetic field do, and so on.\r\nIt's definitely my favorite episode of Nova. Even someone with an average IQ can understand it as long as he or she's willing to sit and watch for 2 hours. Toward the end it shows what the human is doing to accelerate the warming process. Anyway people watch it, it's worth the 2 hours.

offline

pangtongshu

9,808 posts

Jester

Posted June 27, '13 6:12pm UTC

Kurt Wise's science career was destroyed by religion

Don't try..already pointed out Kurt Wise to him before and he said something about Kurt Wise being wiser because of it...or some religious fanatic b.s.

do you ever use deodorant? it's poison that you spray in the air. [...]

While we are going through common poisonous things..did you know that chocolate is poisonous? We just don't eat it in lethal enough doses.
I believe 32lbs is the amount that would kill us.

Categories

Quests

Community

Forums → WEPR → [Necro] Chem-trails poisoning our air