• SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Dude on my Facebook posted a Pic of some repurposed 747 with a bunch of tubes in the cabin with a caption about the chemtrail stuff taking up space. Like, motherfucker, if it takes that much space, how is every passenger jet doing it??

    • Michael@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea-Spray

      From the page:

      Between 1949 and 1969, open-air tests of biological agents were conducted 239 times.

      239 open-air tests of biological agents in a 20 year period. Remind me again why people have no reason to be paranoid? This wasn’t that long ago.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentation_in_the_United_States

      These aren’t conspiracy theories.

      Is there something real behind these people’s paranoia and suspicion? Do our government, military, and our corporations inspire trust?

      • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Is there something real behind these people’s paranoia and suspicion? Do our government, military, and our corporations inspire trust?

        No, the US government, as with every government, does not deserve trust. They are not your friend. They will lie to you, directly or by omission.

        However, all governments are bad at coverups. Chem trails would need to have entire leagues and fields paid off and prohibited from investigating it. Not just in America, but world wide. If America was doing Chem trails, there’s nothing really prohibiting China or Russia from calling it out. They have zero reasons to agree to deals to limit their scientists, as it would be a major shake up in geopolitics. America in that instance could not be trusted with any claims of its scientific achievements.

        I don’t really buy into a moon landing hoax or a JFK cover up. By now, everything and everyone involved would have had to been paid off, including families, scientists, historians, and more.

        You don’t need to be mad at a vague shadow government, you can be mad at the actual government for what they are actually doing. Be mad at Tuskegee and Gulf of Tonkin, not 9/11 with wire bombs and plane holograms.

        • Michael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          I’m not making an argument for chemtrails. It’s pointless to speculate about, there is no evidence or smoking gun.

          I’m just suggesting that we be kind and empathetic towards individuals that do believe these sorts of things. Is it out of character for the US government? Nah, not really.

          Many of these people probably were living in or around 1969. In their lived reality, the US government was doing shit like this. Have things really gotten better?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Understanding is cemented in one’s original source of information about the world. Shaping a pre-existing understand requires not just accuracy but volume, because you’re not competing against faulty logic. You’re competing against accumulated memories.

      If someone is deep into the conspiracy theory rabbit hole, what is shaping their opinion is the consistent repetition of orthodoxy over time. Similarly, if someone is highly educated in a particular scientific field, their opinion is shaped by the persistent need to reaffirm fundamental truths in order to succeed and progress. We are not computers. We are not creatures of pure logic. We are the accumulation of our prior experiences and exposures.

      You should not be surprised if an individual - when confronted with a narrow band of contrary information - does not immediately jettison all their prior information. Because ask yourself - would you? I mean, if a single guy showed up with a stack of papers insisting he’s proved without a shadow of a doubt that chemtrails are real and the entire professional weather reporting community is lying to you, is there anything they could show you that you wouldn’t greet with skepticism proportional to your exposure to professional weather science?

      Because, if the answer is “No”, then why would you expect someone immersed in hundreds of hours of conspiracy theory podcasts and think pieces and social media conversations to behave any differently?