|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
 Sun Jul 14, 2002 4:55 am
|
 |
|
quote:
: I apologize for NOT being more thorough in posting sophomoric paraphrasing of a document with whom I did not know the origins nor could I verify such origins.
Thank you. Better late than never.
quote:
I retract my statements based on something that I could never possibly verify on my own
Thanks again. I'm sure you will be more cautious in the future.
quote:
Speaking of lies, Mr. Chem, you're doing a great job misleading the people on these boards to think that... I have done things (like make threats) that I haven't ever engaged in.
Does the Air Force offer a remedial reading course? It might be something you'd want to look into.
quote:
Rense also states that the generals were going to DC to arrest Clinton under their UCMJ authority
Okay... I get it. You're actually a chemtrail activist attempting to discredit the enire debunking community with your ineptitude. Welcome to the team. Claiming that Jeff Rense stated the above when Sherman Skolnick's name appears directly above the article you referenced (especially after a such an eloquent apology for your poor research) is a stroke of pure genius.
quote:
Chem, pretty soon YOU will look like the silly one
I don't think you look silly at all, Pacer.
What would make you think that?
|
| |
|
|
PacerLJ35
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 456
Location: Millbrook, AL, USA |
|
Sun Jul 14, 2002 5:15 am
|
|
|
Fine, Chem. If you wanna play net-lawyer and get all nit-picky, here's a something I should throw out there:
When I mention the term "Rense", as in "Rense's website" or "Rense says", etcetera, it does not necessarily mean that Rense himself has said such things, however it DOES mean that it appears on his website. In a way, if Rense allows it on his website without any critical disclaimer, then he at the very least is providing a voice for the original quote. |
| |
|
|
hooligan
Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Posts: 76
Location: Seattle |
|
Sun Jul 14, 2002 5:48 am
|
|
|
Pacer, Why don't you give Jeff Rense the information you are going on about here? The Rense site often presents conflicting opinions. Perhaps they would like to post your opinion as well. Just a thought.
Interesting thread. |
| |
|
|
David
Joined: 20 Oct 2000
Posts: 1381
|
|
Mon Jul 15, 2002 12:15 am
|
|
|
Pacer. Why would you want to post here on CTC when you are such a non believer of chemtrails?
If you do not want your comments to be associated with the airforce, you should never have disclosed the fact that you were an airforce pilot.
The other board that you call home, and maverick, are doing nothing more than pimping you out, and you cannot see it.
I just had a long visit with the board of mavericks and could find nothing there in regards to research, investigations or anything else meaningful, just hate talk and slander, and you guys have the balls to talk about us who do believe.
http://pub31.ezboard.com/fcontrailsandchemtrails22884frm1.showMessage?topicID=616.topic
Mavericks site is nothing more than a group of hate talkers with over inflated egos that have nothing better to do than slam everyone about everything. Ask yourself two questions, why does his board exist, what is the purpose, research?, hardly. It is to stroke maverick and his cronies. It’s a losers board Pacer, you can do better than that.
Case in point---Maverick talking about chem11 and others:
“Nobody in the USAF believes in chemtrails (the few who have even heard of them,) and most certainly would slap this dumb ass silly if he ever had the balls to tell them in person the crap that he says online. Dave (Chem11) is a pot stirrer, just like David and DonSucks and Guided Muscle and many others”.
“The few that have heard of them” how ridicules a statement is that. Is he saying you guys can’t read, or your audio input sensors (ears) are defective?
“Slap his silly ass” violence is maverick’s answer to everything,as it is for most small people,that is why he was tossed from this, CTC, board. He once threatened both chem11 and myself. Loser talk.
Do yourself a favor and lose these guys, then and only then will you have some credibility…
I don't dislike you pacer, just quality of the company you keep.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by David on 07-14-2002] |
| |
|
|
PacerLJ35
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 456
Location: Millbrook, AL, USA |
|
Tue Jul 16, 2002 5:01 am
|
|
|
If you were to tell everyone who you worked for, that doesn't automatically mean that every time you post a message, you're now speaking on behalf of your employer. |
| |
|
|
Ellyn
Joined: 16 Jul 2000
Posts: 3996
|
|
Tue Jul 16, 2002 8:36 am
|
|
|
Here is a timely article concerning lies, deception and manipulation.
A Call To Break Up
America's Media Monopoly
7-15-2
http://www.rense.com/general27/call.htm
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Ellyn on 07-16-2002] |
| |
|
|
Dan Rockwell
Joined: 10 Dec 2001
Posts: 1988
Location: Stamford, CT, USA |
|
Tue Jul 16, 2002 8:48 am
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alpha-Theta:
A lot of the less intelligent people think debates are won with vulgarity. Those of us who are educated realize that once the opponent resorts to vulgarity, they have thereby lost the debate, and with it their credibility.
You're absolutely right Alpha. I've seen it happen many times and I've been debunked a feew times myself. The debunker, finding himself backed up against the wall, usually does resort to name calling and then vulgarity and sometimes even an occasional temper tantrum. Interesting behavior indeed.
|
| |
|
|
PacerLJ35
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 456
Location: Millbrook, AL, USA |
|
Tue Jul 16, 2002 6:29 pm
|
|
|
I don't ever recall being "backed up against a wall" nor do I recall ever using vulgarity. Again, a clever way to quietly condition chemtrail believers into thinking that "debunkers" are rude, crude and uninformed.
I saw a post on Carnicom's recently, in reference to attempting to post chemtrail info on other aviation bulletin boards. One person suggested posting on the flightinfo.com board.
I'd be interested to see the results of that. After the people over there pounce on the chemtrail theories and tear them apart, are you then going to declare everyone on that board (all of whom are pilots ranging from private pilots to air transport pilots) part of the "debunker" conspiracy and tell them that they are ignorant about these supposedly "unusual" contrails (which they see daily at work)?
I'd be very interested.
Unfortunately, I doubt any of you have the guts to go over there and debate with them. After all, having a handful of pilots dismissing your claims on your territory is fine...you can easily label them "debunkers" or disinfo agents, whatever. But having a couple hundred pilots laugh, criticize and generally throw out the chemtrail arguement? Well, you can't have that, can you?
Just in case anyone wants to take a stab at it:
http://forums.flightinfo.com
I could be wrong...maybe you would get a few that might agree with your theories....who knows. But to date, I've yet to see a pilot (with a verifiable background) claim to believe in chemtrails.
You'd think that you guys would be trying to get a word in edgewise at these professional pilot boards, and the other aviation-related boards....but I haven't seen a peep from anything related to chemtrails. |
| |
|
|
KrissaTMC2
Joined: 05 Feb 2002
Posts: 472
Location: Greenwich, CT, USA |
|
Tue Jul 16, 2002 11:10 pm
|
|
|
Now from time to time Pacer, the government has conducted covert operations that, for the most part, at the time were not considered to be harmful to its citizens as well as its military personal but were later found to indeed be harmful. The exposure to both US forces as well as combatants and civillians to Agent Orange in Nam is just one example.
Agent Orange's toxic legacy
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/asia-pacific/newsid_1023000/1023133.stm
There is also the long standing controversy as to whether or not US and Coalition forces were exposed to chemical and/or biological weapons during the Gulf War. I still have questions as to what I may have been exposed to over there.
I have found some information for you to consider and in respose to a few of your comments.
quote:
Thousands of eyewitnesses -- including pilots, police officers and military personnel -- report seeing up to eight or more tankers laying chemtrails in X patterns, parallel rows, tic-tac-toe or crosshatched lines.
http://www.nso.lt/chemtrails/faq.htm
quote:
Active duty military personnel, police officers, pilots and defense specialists - as well as hundreds of everyday Americans quite used to seeing aircraft contrails and normal flight operations near airports or over long-established routes - independently confirm the presence of multiple "lines in the sky" being purposefully laid by large jet tankers (usually white in color and always without identifying markings) over cities and rural areas.
http://www.cybernaute.com/earthconcert2000/Chemtrails.htm
quote:
ENS has learned that samples of oily fallout collected by farmers, truck drivers and pilots in Maryland and Pennsylvania were tested by Aqua- Tech Environmental of Marion, Ohio in September, 1997 and found to contain ethylene dibromide (EDB). An extremely hazardous pesticide, EDB was banned by the US Environmental Protection Agency in 1983. But in 1991, the composition of jet fuel used by commercial and military jet aircraft in the U.S. was changed from JP4 to somewhat less flammable JP8.
A Department of Defence source says the move "has saved some lives" in air crashes. Ethylene dibromide is a key component of JP8. The 1991 Chemical Hazards of the Workplace warns that repeated exposure to low levels of ethylene dibromide results in "general weakness, vomiting, diarrhea, chest pains, coughing and shortness of breath, upper respiratory tract irritation" and respiratory failure caused by swelling of the lymph glands in the lungs. "Deterioration of the heart, liver and kidneys, and hemorrhages in the respiratory tract," can also result from prolonged contact with JP8.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's hazardous materials list: "Ethylene dibromide is a carcinogen and must be handled with extreme caution." A seven-page summary of this pesticide's extreme toxicity notes that EDB may also damage the reproductive system. According to the EPA, "Exposure can irritate the lungs, repeated exposure may cause bronchitis, development of cough, and shortness of breath. It will damage the liver and kidneys".
Mark Witten, a respiratory physiologist at the University of Arizona in Tucson where an official US Air Force study on JP8 was carried out, told Scientist in March, 1998 that crew chiefs "seem to have more colds, more bronchitis, more chronic coughs than the people not exposed to jet fuel." EDB is 6.5-times heavier than air.
Unlike normal contrails, the thick white streamers being sprayed from downward-pointing tailbooms over at least 39 states does not dissipate, but spreads into an overcast that refracts a purple color in sunlight and appears suddenly as an oily film in puddles and ponds.
Hundreds of photographs and videotapes made by ground observers show pairs or larger formations of aircraft spreading a white mist that thickens and drifts toward the ground. More than 200 eye-witnesses - including police officers, pilots, military and public health personnel - have provided detailed accounts of aerial spraying in characteristic "X"s and east- to-west grid patterns, followed by occluded skies - and acute auto-immune reactions and respiratory infections throughout affected regions.
http://www.ettracker.com/index-9a.html
quote:
Larry Harris brought the controversial sample to Aqua Tech for
analysis. A registered microbiologist who once worked on top U.S. biowarfare projects, Harris says that a lab technician immediately
identified his sample as JP-8 aviation fuel similar to dozens of samples being brought in by sick pilots and ground crew.
But after the harassing phone calls began, another chemtrails investigator who was with Harris when he submitted the fuel sample to
Aqua Tech told ENS that the "lab went cold" and would no longer confer with them.
A copy of Aqua Tech's report on Harris' sample has been obtained bythis reporter. Submitted on September 17, 1997 and labeled "Jet Fuel,"lab report number MEL 97-1140 identifies more than 15 toxic petroleum
products - including toulene and styrene, as well as traces of the banned pesticide ethylene dibromide (EDB). Currently used as a JP-8 jet fuel additive, EDB was banned by the EPA in the late 1970s as a known carcinogen capable of causing severe upper respiratory reactions at repeated low-level exposures.
http://www.cybernaute.com/earthconcert2000/Biowarfare.htm
As for whether or not, chemtrails alone are harmful to the environment and civilians, JP-8 could prove to be.
As to whether the Airforce has any involvement with the matter, I cannot say for certain since other agencies within the Federal Government do have access to the same types of aircraft as the Airforce does. I myself feel that this operation is under the control of a higher agency. Of course, certain factions in branches of the military have from time to time been involved with certain questionable top level operations in the past and may still be involved to a certain extent.
The reasons for such an operation to be carried out without the notification of civilian authorities for a wide variety of reasons including the mop-up of an accidental release of certain chemicals or biologicals that were once thought to be harmelss all the way up to an attempt to fix a potential problem with the ozone layer. Who knows for certain Pacer, but it is clear that something is going on here.
[Edited 2 times, lastly by KrissaTMC2 on 07-16-2002] |
| |
|
|
PacerLJ35
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 456
Location: Millbrook, AL, USA |
|
Wed Jul 17, 2002 1:18 am
|
|
|
Krissa,
You posted quite a few quotes that claim military pilots, et al have spotted tankers involved in some kind of spraying operation. Funny, but in 11 years of being in the military, and having quite a few friends throughout the military aviation community, not a single one has made such a claim. I've sent a couple of emails to most of them with links to some of the chemtrail sites. Not one has said "hey, I've seen stuff like that".
They all either laugh and dismiss it, or make remarks that you guys don't have a clue. Even with my friends outside the military, who fly for civilian operations (both part 135 commercial and part 121 air carrier ops), I get the same results.
I'm not what you people often make me out to be....when I first discovered the chemtrail conspiracy, I didn't believe it. But just to make sure, I mentioned it to alot of people that I work with, and those that I know that also fly, to see if maybe you guys might have a sliver of merit.
The ONLY thing that I found was a meterologist whose column I read regularly did mention that contrails have been shown to alter solar heat radiation, and thus alter the Earth's weather. But this reference was made to NORMAL contrails blocking a small percentage of the normal sunlight, versus your version of ABNORMAL purposeful contrails involved in some black operation.
So I did give your theory a shot. I presented it to the people who, if they had seen anything weird, would say so. And no one even seemed remotely swayed by the chemtrail theory.
I also posted the chemtrail theory (links to the various chemtrail websites) on the flightinfo.com website, as well as the ufly.com website (which is no longer operation), and it was presented on the TSA (Trans State Airlines) website. Again, it was dismissed, without a single believer or even anyone who gave the theory even a small amount of support.
Krissa, the quotes you provided prove nothing in the way of pilots and other aviation professionals believing in chemtrails. Your sources do not list names. Anyone can make the claim that "military, pilots, etc" have been seeing weird contrails and tanker operations, post it on a message board, and watch it grow into a huge rumor mill.
I'm sick of hearing the old cop-out..."I know a pilot who saw chemtrails, but won't admit to it because he'd lose his job" or some other nonsense like that. If an American Airlines captain sees a tanker spraying, then talks about it, who's going to fire him? American? Why would American care? And if he did get fired for talking about what he saw, he could raise a huge public stink about it.
In my experience, pilots haven't been afraid to tell things like it is. Military pilots, as well as civilian pilots have openly criticized the government and other agencies for various reasons without retribution. NASA has a system called ASRS, which is used by pilots to report dangerous activity.
The bottom line is that pilots are professionals. They have families. And if they saw a program that was obviously dangerous to them or their family, they'd speak up. I know I would. But hey guys, I just haven't seen it. Ever. And neither has anyone else that I know, for that matter.
Again, if you REALLY want to convince me that there are pilots out there who have seen chemtrailing, or may believe that there is some suspicious activity going on, then post at the flightinfo.com message board. Many of them are tanker pilots, etc. Next to their posts is a list of the aircraft they've flown. There are alot of them who've flown KC-135s or KC-10s. There is a huge range of experience over there. Pilots who are new and don't have to worry about losing that $200,000 a year airline job, and some retired pilots as well. And there's everything in between.
Here's something to consider: If you DON'T post over there and ask the question, I'll simply assume that you're too afraid of being exposed as a fraud. It's mighty funny that the only message boards I've seen serious chemtrail talk are on the purpose-made chemtrail sites, anti-government/conspiracy sites, and sites that cater to the paranormal/UFO crowd. I've NEVER seen chemtrails mentioned on mainstream aviation boards, except when friends of mine or myself have posted the information.
So here's your chance. I'll keep checking the flightinfo.com web site to see if you decided to show face. |
| |
|
|
PacerLJ35
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 456
Location: Millbrook, AL, USA |
|
Wed Jul 17, 2002 2:08 am
|
|
|
Alpha:
You missed my point. No, I wouldn't expect someone deeply involved in a conspiracy to admit to it openly. But Krissa posted numerous quotes that military personnel, pilots and controllers having witnessed unusual contrails or tanker operations. I haven't met anyone that has ever made such a claim.
On a side note, I know several tanker pilots. Here is a synopsis, with names withheld for privacy:
One flys for the 319th ARW at Grand Forks AFB. Married, no kids. One of the nicest guys I know.
Another flew tankers for the 22nd ARW at McConnell AFB. Married, two kids. Loves to go fishing. Flies with our unit at present.
Yet another flies KC-10s at Travis. She's single, but still a great person, if not a bit aloof sometimes. She's the only person I know of who oversped the flaps, landing gear, and the landing lights on the T-37 in pilot training, in a single day.
Another guy, single, flies from Fairchild AFB in Washington. Very nice person.
Another pilot in our unit was also a former KC-135 driver, I just don't remember where he flew them from. But he's married with kids too.
My uncle is a KC-135 pilot in Ohio. He's also married, and has an adopted daughter.
I could go on, but you can guess what the trend is. Most of these people have everything to lose by flying aircraft spraying stuff on the population below. They would get their families sick, and even themselves. And considering that they spend their deployments overseas, they really don't have much time to spray their own families and neighbors.
Again, talk to the folks at flightinfo.com. If their are people who have seen chemtrailing, or something suspicious, they'd tell you. |
| |
|
|
Dan Rockwell
Joined: 10 Dec 2001
Posts: 1988
Location: Stamford, CT, USA |
|
Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:09 am
|
|
|
quote:
Most of these people have everything to lose by flying aircraft spraying stuff on the population below. They would get their families sick, and even themselves. And considering that they spend their deployments overseas, they really don't have much time to spray their own families and neighbors.
That's probably true Pacer, but Krissa did bring up a few valid points. The government has been released all kinds of stuff for years for various purposes without looking at the long term effects. Both Krissa and I have posted various articles concerning all kinds of new viruses emerging and stuff like that. There are also definite problems with the atmosphere, etc. that could prompt the government to take immediate action to prevent a catastrophy further along down the road no matter what the short term consequences of their operations might be.
Hell, we had a few birds die here about 2 or 3 years ago and a couple of people died from West Nile. They were performing ground level spraying operations for months and wondering why fish and lobsters were dying off in Long Island Sound.
Was the spraying necessasary? Maybe it was, but West Nile has hasn't even come close to being an epidemic. Could it have become a major epidemic if they didn't spray? Maybe.
Right now we've got more people being infected by diseases from ticks that from mosquitos.
Were the people who were doing the spraying aware of the possible long and short term health effects of the chemicals they were using? I'd say they were, but they either had a choice of their family members possibly coming down with a chemical related illness or a disease that is ultimately fatal. |
| |
|
|
Chem11
Joined: 21 Apr 2001
Posts: 1386
|
|
Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:38 am
|
|
|
Pacer sez:
quote:
They all either laugh and dismiss it, or make remarks that you guys don't have a clue. Even with my friends outside the military, who fly for civilian operations (both part 135 commercial and part 121 air carrier ops)
Right. Maybe you're just talking to the wrong kind of people, Pacer. Here's a submission.. from a pilot...
The idea that there isn't a pilot in the world who is curious about these ponderous aircraft emissions is laughable. The point is nonsensenscal, anyway. I doubt if the vast majority of people who hold driver's licenses are experts on auto emissions or their effect on the enviroment.
But I forgot. These are aircraft pilots. They're are endowed with a greater sense of accountability and almost always know what the hell they are talking about..
Just like Pacer.
quote:
I'm sick of hearing the old cop-out..." I know a pilot who saw chemtrails, but won't admit to it because he'd lose his job" or some other nonsense like that.
Okay... but:
quote:
On a side note, I know several tanker pilots. Here is a synopsis, with names withheld for privacy
Pacer seems to think that active-duty military personnel are going to violate their security oaths, but simply referencing someone that ostensibly doesn't give a rat's ass requires the utmost in secrecy?
Pacer.. I am curious about one thing. During basic training or whatever they call it in the AF... were you subjected to intnetional sleep deprivation during the course of the program?
Not an uncommon practice in the military, just curious...
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Chem11 on 07-16-2002] |
| |
|
|
PacerLJ35
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 456
Location: Millbrook, AL, USA |
|
Wed Jul 17, 2002 5:48 am
|
|
|
Dan:
Here's the bottom line. I've looked at literally hundreds of photos, and the occasional video of "chemtrails". They look just like the persistant contrails left by the Delta, American, United jets and other traffic up there. I see them every day. And to be honest, it's only a bit irritating to get the condescending attitude that I should "look more closely" at the photos to see what is described by chemtrail believers as "the obvious".
Hey, while you guys were "discovering" these puffy contrails within the last few years, I've been seeing them all the time since I started flying. Same goes for my coworkers who have been doing this far longer than I have.
I reviewed Phantom911's video, and lo and behold it looked just like any regular contrail I've seen coming from a Continental 757 or some other aircraft.
I find it highly suspect that this whole theory is being thrown about by a bunch of people who spend very little time actually airborne watching these aircraft from close range. Instead, they spend the majority of their time 5-6 miles away on the ground gaping through the tiny lenses of a cheap set of binoculars and video cameras.
On the flip side, the pilots, who have consistently dissmissed the chemtrail theory, are being portrayed as "ignorant", "brainwashed", or that we lack "common sense" or "wisdom" to notice the obvious. We (the pilots) know our aircraft inside and out. We have more than just a basic cursory understanding of aircraft operations, yet often what we say is tossed aside as just another part of the "debunker" strategy. We spend hours each day climbing and descending through the atmosphere, watching other aircraft create contrails, and observing the traffic all over the United States, yet somehow we're viewed by the chemtrail crowd as a bunch of hacks not worthy of engaging in discussion.
This is my #1 complaint about the chemtrail theory. Legitimacy. It lacks this basic tenent. People on this board throw about numerous stories, many of which are not factually checked, and some are even outright lies. Any attempt to critically examine a source is met with a "circle the wagons" mentality. I've made a few errors in the past, and I have no problem owning up to them and correcting myself. But often when I point out obvious mistakes with chemtrail activist's information, I'm either personally attacked, accused of being a "disinfo agent", or they ignore me and refuse to engage in continued conversation.
To this day, I have yet to see any direct evidence of chemtrail activity. I've seen and read lots of OTHER government activity, such as nuclear tests in the 1950s, chemical tests in the 1960s, etc. But that doesn't provide any evidence that chemtrails are real. It's kinda like trying and convicting an ex-con for another murder just based on his prior convictions, not real evidence.
If I had the time and the ability to do so, I'd personally take each one of you on a several-day tour of an aircraft facility, air traffic control facilities, and spend time teaching you how our airspace system is managed. Then I'd go into detail how contrails form, and what variables can affect their formation, even from second to second.
But I don't have that kind of time. And my unit needs it's airplanes for missions instead of tours.
Again, ask your questions to the pilots on flightinfo.com. Instead of throwing out their professional knowledge, use it. One thing that many chemtrail believers fail to acknowledge is the possibility that they could be WRONG. I've admitted before that I don't know everything, and I could be wrong. But based on my experience, chemtrail operations, as portrayed on these websites, are not a reality. |
| |
|
|
PacerLJ35
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 456
Location: Millbrook, AL, USA |
|
Wed Jul 17, 2002 6:17 am
|
|
|
"Here's a submission.. from a pilot..."
Ah, my "buddy", ALCON777. I've tried to engage in dialogue with him, but to no avail. He wouldn't mention what he flies, nor any details about the photo. You know, I've got some pictures that I took from the cockpit, with hands and fingers in view pointing to the contrail. If I were to post them on the net, would someone steal it and then say they were a pilot? It's been done before.
I used to have a helicopter web site that had a little FAQ on "black helicopters". I was doing some searching one day and my photo of our Louisiana Army Guard UH-60s was posted on this guy's web site with the caption that they had "caught" these black helicopters on the ground. I sent him an email to take it down, but no reply. That was a few years ago, and I doubt his web site is still up.
I have no problem telling people my name, who I fly for, and what I fly. All the other pilots that are "debunkers" are the same way. ALCON777 wouldn't even provide a tidbit of info to validate his background.
"The idea that there isn't a pilot in the world who is curious about these ponderous aircraft emissions is laughable."
Exactly. Which is why I was wondering why EVERYONE I've mentioned it to (pretty much my entire unit, and most of my friends whom I correspond with via email) dismiss the theory. Additionally, not a single postive result was had at flightinfo.com, ufly.com or tsalounge.com. Not a single one. And there are hundreds of pilots that belong to those communities, although ufly.com is now defunct.
Chem11, you underestimate my aviation ties. I don't simply know a few handful of pilots. I work with 20 of them. There is a C-130 reserve unit here with dozens more, and I have a good friend flying with them. I've got about another 3 dozen or so friends scattered through the Air Force flying everything from tankers to fighters. My dad is a pilot. My uncle is a tanker pilot. My best friend is an airline pilot, along with the people I know through him. I've mentioned the chemtrail theory to nearly every one of them. They all have dismissed it.
"I doubt if the vast majority of people who hold driver's licenses are experts on auto emissions or their effect on the enviroment"
That's a very poor analogy, Chem. Most people who drive can't even find the radiator on their car. Many can't even change a tire on their own. The standards to get a driver's license is nothing like the standards to be a professional commercial pilot. Although the general public seems to have this preconceived notion that being a pilot is sorta like being a driver, it's not.
Pilots can sit down and draw the fuel system, hydraulic system, electrical system and engine systems on a piece of paper from memory. They can explain to you how the system works in detail, and they even know things like how much pressure the hydraulic pump produces, or at what temperature the oil cooler in the engine operates. They can explain to you exactly how their engine operates, the air flow in the engine, as well as the fuel flow.
They may not be experts in chemical engineering, but they have a pretty good idea of what comes out the other end. And to be honest, most drivers don't give a crap how their car works or what pollution it produces. But most pilots have a much better understanding of their machine than you give them credit.
"But I forgot. These are aircraft pilots. They're are endowed with a greater sense of accountability and almost always know what the hell they are talking about.."
Exactly. Regarding their aircraft, they SHOULD always know what they are talking about. Successful analysis of a malfunction while in flight depends on the flight crew correctly understanding what the problem is and how their actions impact the system involved. Having a thorough understand of the airplane, its associated systems, and the things that affect the aircraft (such as weather, etc) is paramount for a safe flight.
"Pacer seems to think that active-duty military personnel are going to violate their security oaths, but simply referencing someone that ostensibly doesn't give a rat's ass requires the utmost in secrecy?"
First, there isn't a "security oath", per se. Security is important. Keeping secrets vital to national security is important and enforced by the laws. But higher than that is the moral responsibility that military personnel are required to uphold. Keeping a secret that could result in actions contrary to the spirit of the Constitution would mean violating the ultimate oath...protecting and defending the Constitution.
This whole myth that military personnel are sworn to blindly obey all orders above all is one of the greatest urban legends thrown about. This stems from an intellectual holier-than-thou mentality that folks in the military are stooges who couldn't hack it in the real world, or can't think for themselves.
Military personnel are REQUIRED to use moral judgements to determine if orders are legal or immoral.
That being said, I withheld names for privacy. I didn't email any of them for permission, so I doubt they'd appreciate me plastering their names on the internet for people like Chem11 to view. Withholding their names has nothing to do with secrecy or security. If you can't see that simple distinction, then I'm not quite sure where to go from here. I throw my arms up in frustration. It's like dealing with the 6-year old who keeps asking "why is the sky blue?". |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Sep 02, 2010 5:20 pm
|
|
|
|
|
Register
Login
