posted 11-23-2001 10:13 AM            

No offense, and thanks just the same, but one word for your suggestion

not

posted 11-23-2001 10:48 AM            

But I guess that's 'obvious'.

Good eye, Kneweyes... keep watching.

posted 11-23-2001 01:38 PM            

If they're not familiar with the subject, how would they know what 'face value' is Chem11? or a 'chemtrail' for that matter?

Hopefully the title will raise curiosity in people unfamiliar with chemtrails enough to find out what's up, and will soon realize the site is laced with a heavy dose of sarcasm.

posted 11-23-2001 03:12 PM            

First impressions are often lasting ones, regardless of their inaccuracy.

Better to discredit the myth that concerned citizens and legitimate activists are ranting, paranoid 'conspiracists' than legitimize it.

I think I see the off-handed statement you were trying to make. At least I hope I do. But when I see that banner on Topsites, it scares me. Look at it. What is your first impression. I seem to recall you giving me a hard time because I used the word 'asshole' in a story on Mega. You thought it might give people a bad impression. Perhaps.

This is a fairly PC corner of the net here at CTC and you are obviously big on etiquette (sp?) so I understood that arguement. Certainly we have to hold ourselves to a higher standard to be taken seriously.

posted 11-24-2001 02:16 AM            

Sorry Lulu, didn't mean to disturb 'you'.
It won't happen agin. But if you're going to talk smack (about me or anyone else), at least have the decency to do it here in front of your alleged peers instead of crawling off to your friends Chickie Deb's and Topgun's board.

I think you should take Cogita Tube's advice and take a good hard look at yourself. Perhaps his efforts at recruiting you (if such recruitment has not already taken place) are not entirely without merit. You ceratainly seem to fit the mold of a debunker more so than any 'activist' I've ever seen.

Sorry to 'bug' ya'.

posted 11-24-2001 03:14 AM            

I guess the same could be said of you chem...running off to your decrepit board to make comments about Thermit's.....

I sure hate to think that CTC is being perceived as a 'Debunker's Board'. It's not exactly research or activism oriented, but there are still a lot of good people slugging it out there.

I understand it's perception as such, though. I simply didn't like the direction (or lack thereof) that the board was taking.

my...my...my...

posted 11-24-2001 04:35 AM            

Careful, T/S. I can be a notrious archivist when it comes to debunkers. Espesially ones that make posts in mod forums regarding their true concerns for the 'changes (they) have observed ocurring in our atmosphere' and their supposed identification with 'us' paranoid chemtrail conspiracists. Not that I believed that line for a second, but it's not liable to go over too well with your pals, espescially Jay.

Divide? The forum is already divided. If it wasn't I wouldn't be put in the position of defending my involvment with it and you wouldn't be posting said defense.

Conquer? I've learned to choose my battles wisely. It's not my job to police any portion of this forum anymore. And I've wasted far too much time mired in the same old tired arguements with debunkers that 'might' believe in chemtrails and activists that 'might' not.

A quick lesson in grammar and evolving internet technology. Decrepit would be indicitive of age. The network54 forum at Mega is still fairly new and is based on the XML language. What this means is that the contents of the forum are syndicated which ties in rather nicely with a news-oriented site and the weblog format. As far as I know, network54 is the only forum software provider that utilizes this powerful new language.

Get some sleep Greg. You seem a leetle 'tense'.

posted 11-24-2001 10:49 AM            

But if you're going to talk smack (about me or anyone else), at least have the decency to do it here in front of your alleged peers
I already did that Chem11, I told you that you had no manners or no respect. Is this perhaps why you're starting a little smear campaign against me? Cause you're too thin-skinned that you can dish it out but you can't take it?

The fact that you left that crap up in the zone about Deb says a lot about your character Chem...

Divide and conquer is right seeker, another good call.

posted 11-24-2001 01:15 PM            

Actually, it was your comments about other members of CTC within the confines of that forum that convinced me of your insincerity. That rankled.

But don't for a second delude yourself into thinking that is a personal issue. It's idealogical. I despise duplicity and hypocrisy.

I don't like editing posts, either. But when someone drags my family into their moronic ranting, it's getting edited. And I clearly left any further action to theseeker, at his discretion, and said so on the thread. I was not the only moderator of the Neutral Zone, you know. If I had it to do over again I would not have extended him that token of respect and consideration.

Thermit made his intentions on the direction of this forum quite clear, an open forum where people are held accountable for their words. I think of a forum in more synergistic terms, ideally it should be a meeting of like-minded people that somehow creates a sum greater than the total of it's individual parts.

As I said, there a lot of sincere people here. And there's also a lot of phoney baloney.

On a personal level, I like Thermit quite a lot. But I like his website even more. And, yes, it makes me angry when I see that this place still being referred to as a 'debunker's board'. I know better. But many others do not.

I am going to try explain this one last time. When I first poked my head in the door it took me all of about five minutes to decide that this was a debunkers board. I saw the usual suspects running the same old tired scam, over and over and over. It wasn't until after Thermit cleaned house that I returned and found it to be an intellectualy stimulating and focused forum.

The Zone, I thought, would serve to perhaps set a bit higher standard for the debunkers and keep the other forums free from their activity. It didn't work out that way. Moderators encouraged debunkers to post in other forums and debunkers have absolutely zero interest in civilized debate. Put a piece of irrefutable evidence in front of them and they ignore it. Press the issue and it's a flamewar.

Anyone that hasn't figured out that Jay Reynolds is the mastermind behind their strategy simply hasn't been paying attention. Let me quote from an email correspondance between a prominant chemtrail investigator and himself that he published on his site;

I will destroy you.

Not debate. Not talk about this, that and the other thing in order to build rapport.

Destroy.

He ain't joking either. He's got more than a few notches on his belt. Anyone who doesn't repect a formidable opponent is a fool. Lulu, I suggest you 'respect' these people enough to realize that getting cozy with them and letting them play with your head is probably not such a hot idea. They've already skewed your perception, and despite your protestations, I can't see that your strong-willed enough to be considered completely immune from their influence. I watched Jay play CD like a cheap violin. They've been working on 3T3L1 for quite some time and considering her comments about there being evidence that chemtrails do not exist, I can only imagine what the eventual fruits of their labor will be. They tried to turn me (with offers of zucchini bread, no less. ACK!!) and you are definately next on the list.

Do what you will, but don't think your comments on the debunker board will go unremarked. And as far as your site is concerned;

posted 11-24-2001 02:34 PM            

Make no mistake about it...I am a chemtrail activist, but that doesn't mean I can't be interested in what's happening on the other side of the fence. If the debunker agents want to rip me to shreds, let them.

posted 11-24-2001 06:53 PM            

referring to this..

Careful, T/S. I can be a notrious archivist when it comes to debunkers.

go right ahead, there plenty of folks that don't like you pal, and they archive too...

I have said from point one if chemtrails can be proven, I'll switch back to supporting the cause...I view this as being *open minded* not narrowminded as you display on a daily basis....

the jury is still out on the global effects of radiative forcing, the ground level warming that comes from artificial clouds, that's all I see "chemtrails" adding up to...cute pic's don't do much for me old boy...sorry...

let me explain for all the folks that the "agreement" in moderating the zone was that I would moderate my side and chem would moderate his, chem failed in task and in conviction, he censored deb's comments and left the extremely vulgar comments from defender....

In closing chem, I thought the pic of liberty giving the finger was funny and appropriate....as usual you and others seem to have lost your sense of humor...some where along the way...

get a grip....and some manners...

T/S

posted 11-24-2001 09:09 PM            

I wouldn't say you were Paranoid or a Conspiracist...perhaps the title:

Rantings of a Chemtrail Activist

Just my two cents.

I want to say that I really like your style Lu. It hits the heart in a creative and personal point of view. The insight you took to place the words to the appropriate visuals, is art. You did a great job.

posted 11-24-2001 09:49 PM            

This was a conflict between two people on a chemtrail message board and therefore is of no concern to you. The Neutral Zone is gone and you carry about as much weight here as an empty shot glass.

Nothing you say is of the slightest importance or interest to me. You've been banned from every CT site on the net (including this one) and it's for a reason.

I feel nothing but pity for William Cooper, as I do for all pawns. Rest In Peace.

Lulu and I have managed to settle our differances and your continued meddling is most unwelcome. Go read Thermit's Trail Research Report and argue with him or someone else that's interested in your unique perspective regarding it's validity.

Radiative forcing would affect more than just the 'unidentified' flights tracked in that report. It would affect every jet in the sky. How this point remains seemingly lost on you and your ilk is impossible for me to explain.

Well, not impossible.

posted 11-24-2001 10:05 PM            

quote:

---

let me explain for all the folks that the "agreement" in moderating the zone was that I would moderate my side and chem would moderate his, chem failed in task and in conviction, he censored deb's comments and left the extremely vulgar comments from defender....

---

This is completley correct, BTW. But if you look at the thread, it was DEB who violated forum rules and YOU left it up. Defender's comments came after her slanderous verbalism. After you neglected to remove them. You didn't have the stones to fulfill your responsibility. If you had, Defender wouldn't have felt it necesary to come to my defense. Does that make sense? Damn.

So why did you leave Deb's comments regarding my family up in the first place, T/S?

posted 11-24-2001 10:40 PM            

who cares about carrying any weight here, or at any chem boards, is that supposed to impress someone ?....

I left them up because that was your job...duh...and in the lack of performing your function your "true" character shown through, naturally it did not involved run-off of the mouth so you could not complete the task...obviously....

your one word twisting SOB you know that, lol... frankly the only folks who really like you chem are you and your other 3 personalities...

read the thread a little closer chem, defender started verbally assaulting me, before starting on deb....another reason not to take "mega-puker" news seriously...research and facts ain't part of your psyche is it chemboy...hell you'd still have the *may 3 * tornado date wrong if I would not have told you...sheesh...

I'm glad you and lulu got things straightened out, I respect lulu, for various reasons...you however won't ever recieve more than a *pissboy* status with me and all other critical thinkers...

do us all a favor and shut up now, you've just had your ass handed to you (again)...accept it and move on....

T/S

posted 11-24-2001 11:43 PM            

I dont post here to give debunkers the opportunity for target practice. Sorry, Chum... I've never posted on any board as anything other than Chem11. You people are so scared that I am really NSAsucks or that NSAsucks is really David or that we are all really somebody else. The problem is that it's the Col. Dan's and Chickie Deb's and Cydoniaquest's that get caught with their multiple log-in panties around their ankles.

Whats the matter... was 'theseeker' already taken at Mav's board, Lord Vader?

The name calling which you claim to find so offensive seems to have made a triumphant return in this thread. You have the mind and mouth of an 11 year old, and you are confirming that fact with every keystroke.

I'll ya' what Lord Vader, I'll make you a deal... I'll take a walk if you promise to do the same. You don't belong here and I simply don't have the time to waste with this anymore. Too much to be done.

The debunkers get a major thorn in their side removed from this forum and I get the satisfaction of knowing the remaining believers don't have to listen to your drunken rants any longer. You people aren't going to get a better deal than that.

And if I hear another word out of your mouth other than 'deal', you're going to quickly find yourself in a flamefest that will put the Cydoniaquest thread to shame.

Choose wisely.

posted 11-25-2001 12:24 AM            

Thermit, could you find it in your busy schedule to make me a new banner? One that reads "Rantings of a Chemtrail Activist".

I accepted your apology Chem11, because that's how I was raised...to graciously accept an apology when one is given, however, that doesn't mean I think your comment concerning my motives of site title was correct or even reasonable...

Of course, one has to wonder about the catchy title. Is it wise to portray chemtrail 'activists' as paranoid conspracists? Probably not, unless you are in the business of discrediting the cause. Perhaps T**** ****'s friend D****** ****** (AKA Chickie Deb) suggested the title. So many interesting alliances, so little time...

Really Chem, you think I'm siding and in-league with the debunkers? Your other comments concerning my site were very nice...

Chemtrail Central's very own Lulu has cut the ribbon on her own website. This is one slick chunk of code and very artistic as well. Great pictures. Great writing. Great research. Congratulations Terry, this is one of the tightest CT sites to come along in a while. Thank you.

I wonder where 3T3 is? Could it be that your cruel comments to her has chased her away? Perhaps it is with she you should settle your differences with? Perhaps an apology is in order for the good doctor? Perhaps I'm just ranting...

posted 11-25-2001 12:42 AM            

I don't make deals with morally corrupt individuals....

It's no secret to anyone why I use vader at mav's...

I have not made a post here since the NZ went DOA, til you opened your mouth that is...and as far as the vulgarity on my part, if the shoe fits...

posted 11-25-2001 01:31 AM            

Or so I was led to believe.

In any case I was making a gesture for the good of the board and I didn't really expect reciprocation, but it would have been nice.

I'm curious why you would choose to re-open this can of worms...?

If you think that my arguements are 'unreasonable' then don't change your site. Simple as that.

3T3L1 bails whenever the kitchen gets hot. She did it at Cliffords, and she did it here when it was revealed that she had revealed the identity of NSAsucks to a USAF intelligence officer. I still haven't figured out what really went down between those three and I don't think I want to. Enough said.

The real issue is that 3T3L1 seems to think it's okay to slam Clifford Carnicom's work as 'junk science' and insist that he 'is giving us all a black eye'. That is not only cruel, but highly innacurate. If she can't stand up to the same level of criticism with regards to her own methodology, then she shouldn't be slamming other concerned activists. I have never, in all this time, heard Mr. Carnicom utter one diparaging word about another chemtrail researcher. He has put his ass on the line and is deserving of respect for doing so. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

And certainly not in such a public manner. If you feel it is neccesary to clarify the issue, then feel free to post the entire contents of the thread in question and I will address your concerns.

If the remaining moderators of this forum are more interested in roasting legitimate investigators, perpetuating derogatory myths and cozying up to 'debunker agents' than advancing the issue then something is drastically wrong with this picture, IMHO.

How times change.

posted 11-25-2001 02:05 AM            

Mr. Vader,

In my estimation, hypocrisy and duplicity are the pinnacles of moral corrution. You have accused me of having four different online 'personalities', an utterly baseless accusation, yet you refuse to explain the need for your use of the Lord Vader 'personality' at Maverick's board. Hypocrisy.

You rant and rave about Defender's self-censored use of 'profanity' in the Zone but you shrug off your own vulgarity with a meaningless reference to shoes. Hypocrisy.

You attempt to swear people to secrecy regarding you own 'true' beliefs about the subject matter of this board, and then claim that this has been your stated position all along. Hypocrisy.

Make no mistake, Mr. Vader. You're debunker friends were quite correct in cautioning you against participating in the Zone. Only a fool would trust someone who exhibits the stunning level of duplicity that you so clearly posess and I am going to hang you out to dry.

Let's not waste any more time, shall we?

Your comments regarding Chickie Deb. You have previosly stated that you were "no fan of Deb's" (who is?) but you are a fervant supporter of her board. That strikes me as a bit 'odd', old chap.

I'm also a bit curious about the circumstance surrounding your original removal from this forum. Do enlighten us as to what behavior on your part prompted this removal...

posted 11-25-2001 02:24 AM            

Concerning fellow moderator 3T3L1...

Triple 'D' for ya Chem11 ~

I'm wondering what cruel comments you are referring to Lulu?
Denial.

The real issue is that 3T3L1 seems to think it's okay to slam Clifford Carnicom's work as 'junk science' and insist that he 'is giving us all a black eye'. That is not only cruel, but highly innacurate.
Disinformation.

3T3L1 bails whenever the kitchen gets hot. She did it at Cliffords, and she did it here when it was revealed that she had revealed the identity of NSAsucks to a USAF intelligence officer. I still haven't figured out what really went down between those three and I don't think I want to. Enough said.
Discredit.

Enough said indeed.

Too tired to respond further as eyes are rapidly closing. Only have the strength to read mark sky's latest post then I'm off to dream land.

Try to behave yourself Chem.

posted 11-25-2001 03:28 AM            

quote:

---

I'm wondering what cruel comments you are referring to Lulu?
Denial.

---

I asked you to post the thread, Lulu. I no longer have access to that section of CTC. It's not quite fair to make an accusation of this nature without posting the thread. We both know why it's a pretty bad idea for you not to, but that's another story. The 'Seeker' has put me in a pretty good mood so I'm going to give you a B... for bullshit.

quote:

---

The real issue is that 3T3L1 seems to think it's okay to slam Clifford Carnicom's work as 'junk science' and insist that he 'is giving us all a black eye'. That is not only cruel, but highly innacurate.
Disinformation.

---

3T3L1
Which witch?
Posts: 925
From:Hogwarts, Texas
Registered: Mar 2001
posted 11-17-2001 08:19 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sadly, when Mr. Carnicom does one of his scientific articles, you can assume it's wrong and work backward from there to figure out why he is wrong in that particular instance. Just like the guy at CTTUSA who said that, by definition, any trail that lasts longer than 5 minutes is a chemtrail--his ignorance gives all of us a black eye.

http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000078-2.html

Disinformation, indeed. Normally I would give you an F for for selective Forgetulness, but you were fully aware of these comments so that isn't going to be a viable excuse. What the hell, I'll give you a D...for deception.

quote:

---

3T3L1 bails whenever the kitchen gets hot. She did it at Cliffords, and she did it here when it was revealed that she had revealed the identity of NSAsucks to a USAF intelligence officer. I still haven't figured out what really went down between those three and I don't think I want to. Enough said.
Discredit.

---

You get an A+ on this one. Except the problem is that I didn't bring up 3T3L1 and her attempts to DISCREDIT Clifford Carnicom. You did. Nice work. Don't feel too badly though, karma is a natural force at work in the universe. What comes around goes around and it has nothing to do with either of us.

Enjoy Mr. Sky's latest. I hope you pay particular attention to the references to credit card 'payments' and housewives...

Make no mistake, lurkers. That is exactly what chemtrail debunking is about. Not all of these people are drawing a check from Uncle Sam but I can think of two right off the bat that we know for a fact are.

I sometimes ask myself exactly how much money it would take to buy someone off. I'm not a particularly materialistic person, But what if I was? I'm not in any dire financial straits... but what if I was? What if I was in the process of losing everything in a divorce? What if I had a chronic debilitating illness and was in desperate need of medication? How long would I hold out before I looked up at the sky, decided there was nothing I could do anyway? And that it was probably for our own good...

How much would it take? Answer: they can't coun't that high. But I tell ya' what... if I ever show my face around here or anywhere else and start telling people that 'there is evidence that chemtrails don't exist' or that a computer program proves that there is nothing abnormal going on in our skies, you'll know I was wrong about the counting thing.

posted 11-25-2001 10:10 AM            

When the good guys & girls argue, it only promotes the weasels false representations that chemtrails are only contrails. We're only human, and I'm only saying this because we are all susceptible to the attacks from the 'dark side'. You know I'm speaking from my own experiences too!

I know that you're capable of defending yourselves... but try not to waste your energy on these morons. This looks like another neutral zone?!

BTW, I honestly didn't know that neutral zone was set up for 'debunkers'. If I had, I never would have bothered to look into it. I was surprised and disappointed to see those 'debunkers' names listed when they made posts there, and I didn't know why they were'nt posting in other threads (other than DK), so I had to see what was going on.

But I certainly don't miss the neutral zone and the CONtrail noisemakers & liars with their multiple disinfo tricks and traps.

Think about what it is that motivates these lemmings & robots to want to spend so much time and effort (using multiple ID's, month after month after year after year.... trying the patience of even the the most unbiased and open-minded sysops until they're finally banned from posting)... I know I'm preaching to the choir!?

IMO, it's not good to ever give them a foothold... in time, for anyone who takes the time to wade through their disinfo, the truth comes out and the evidence of their lies is clear. But maybe that's because I have spent the time watching them. For newcomers, I guess they'll have to judge for themselves? Maybe that's more of Lulus approach, whereas maybe Chem11, more like myself is already too aware of the CONtrail crooks methods?

But, to reiterate... thumbs up to you Chem11 & Lulu, you really do both deserve a thumbs up and a thanks for all the work you've put into your respective and worthwhile websites, regardless of their formats. Let's not give the dark-siders any ammunition... examine your motives and comments and always steer for the light!

On with the search.......!!