Skeptical Humanities

On Thursday, after a morning setting up a website for my students to work on, I hopped into a taxi and sped off to the local CBS affiliate, WGCL. A few days ago, in my conspiracy theory post, I mentioned that I would kill to see the emails that they got following the chemtrail story they ran back on the 2nd of this month. Luckily, it did not come to killing. And I don’t think that I would kill to see them anymore. I might beat someone up to see them, but doing them in? Nah.

The emails that the station receives, I am told, are publicly available. Some of the emails that come in from viewers get forwarded to the station for archiving, and they are printed and grouped by month. The administrator who maintains the archive, if I understood her correctly, said that I was the first person ever to come in and ask to see the letters to the station since she had been there. So, wow.

Now, I was interested in the chemtrail responses specifically, but I was surprised by people the number of people just sort of writing in to say how pretty the anchors are or ask them out on dates, which made it one of the creepier folders that I have ever gone through. The chemtrail letters were were mixed in among responses to other stories.

Some of the replies went on for a couple of pages, but most of them were short thank yous for running the story at all. A fairly typical excerpt from the letters, most of which were addressed to the reporter, Jeff Chirico, would include Brent’s comments:

“If you have the opportunity, ask [Georgia Tech’s own] Dr. Jim St. John why the plane in the photo I provided kept turning around and spraying more chemicals in over a particular area. […] I assure you if you continue to report on this, you will be ordered to stop and if you dont your job will be taken from you. It has happened to dozens of other reporters who have taken the risk of uncovering government lies. […] Would you be willing to consider doing a report on the negative effects of fluoridated tap water? If so, I can provide government documents labeling fluoride as poison and would be more than happy to find respectable and qualified individuals to offer their opinion. Thanks again, I know that it can ruin careers if you even hint at the government lying about something.”

From a practical standpoint, many of these assertions are absurd, and they seem to me to be more of a retrofitting of an overarching narrative that can explain to Brent why nobody takes chemtrails seriously. For instance, the claim that exposing government lies will ruin the career of an investigative reporter must have provided a snicker in the newsroom. (Woodward and Bernstein’s careers certainly didn’t suffer from exposing a humdinger of a government whopper!) I would say that Brent is looking at the news, seeing that nobody is reporting on chemtrails, asking why, and coming up with an answer that accommodates his worldview. I would challenge Brent to find one reporter who was fired because they got too close to the truth. (This is not to say that there might not be people out there who have been fired for, among other things, talking about chemtrails, but a growing obsession with chemtrails may be a sign of something other than getting too close to the truth.)

Albert wrote in, but his message seemed confused.

“You did good by running the report… but are you REALLY following truth or are you a collared dog on a leash? […] The meteorologist [there were two] you had on was total disinfo. Contrails are like a propeller wash in a boat…they dissipate. PERIOD!!!”

He also tried to present undeniable proof, as he saw it, that the government was secretly spraying us, and he found that information on the web at http://downloads.climatescience.gov/sap/sap2-3/sap2-3-final-report-all.pdf. (Does anyone else sense something slightly amiss here?)

The report he linked doesn’t mention airplanes, doesn’t mention intentional spraying, doesn’t mention aluminum, and doesn’t in any way suggest that there is a vast government program to spray. It is an examination of the impact “anthropogenic aerosols,” and these seem to include the smoke from fires and different forms of pollution. The report’s introduction is accurate:

This report critically reviews current knowledge about global distributions and properties of atmospheric aerosols, as they relate to aerosol impacts on climate. It assesses possible next steps aimed at substantially reducing uncertainties in aerosol radiative forcing estimates. Current measurement techniques and modeling approaches are summarized, providing context. As a part of the Synthesis and Assessment Product in the Climate Change Science Program, this assessment builds upon recent related assessments, including the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC AR4, 2007) and other Climate Change Science Program reports. The objectives of this report are (1) to promote a consensus about the knowledge base for climate change decision support, and (2) to provide a synthesis and integration of the current knowledge of the climate-relevant impacts of anthropogenic aerosols for policy makers, policy analysts, and general public, both within and outside the U.S government and worldwide.

Nary a word about spraying out of airplanes. PERIOD!!!

Matt wrote in to say:

“You guys have just diminished your credibility regarding the contrail/chemtrail issue. I suppose you didn’t read the Reuters article regarding the UN admitting they are doing chemtrail experiments for ‘global warming.’ You in your bias in only bringing in a “Dr.” for the opposing side of the issue in your story just makes this laughable. People are smarter and that’s why they’re turning off from this kind of propaganda and going onto real news from the Internet. Thanks for not bringing all the facts into the story. I recommend doing some research before diminishing your credibility on another issue.”

Clearly, some people are impossible to please. Matthew runs a film production house in Missoula, Montana, which he advertises in his signature line. A quick visit shows a number of projects related to all sorts of conspiracies, from the Illuminati to the Federal Reserve to…yes, the moon landing conspiracy. Yeah.

John’s letter to Chirico gives a short list of sources he encourages the reporter to read, including “Owning the Weather by 2025.” This was fascinating, but it also says in the opening lines that the technologies discussed are beyond current capacity and, on page 14, preliminary theoretical foundations have been discontinued by the government. Big fail for the idea that we are currently spraying! Also, it restricts the concept to its military applications (the actual title is “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025”), and the report mentions neither aluminum nor geoengineering. At the end, of his email, John adds,

“The problem with denial is it is built into people’s self-awareness, getting peopel to change their self-awareness is like changing a Zebra’s stripes. So those who deny the truth, right before their very eyes, must be ignored as they add no intelligent discussion, only blind ignorance and that includes your weatherman.”

A wonderful example of how one can justify to themselves not even listening to the other side. Folks like John have moved away from debate and negotiation to deliberately excluding anything that could upset their preexisting beliefs.

Snowleopard, from France, says:

“A handful of men controlled the world and its resources, they now want to control our health and fertility, they are desperate to bring down human fertility, that is why there has been a revolution in Tunisia and Egypt, the tyrant did not want to spray their people and their families with these [toxins] it is incredible that [dictators] have come to the limit, but [the] usa (cia, Illuminati, bilderberg) they do so without mercy. God save american people, it’s a good people but so blind, so blind (9/11).”

This was a truly novel interpretation of the revolutions in the Middle East, that the uprisings are apparently being orchestrated by America because the dictators are too nice. I don’t even know what to say to that. I have no doubt that Gaddafi, however, would not hesitate for a moment to spray his people. I read a report today that he was firing antiaircraft guns into crowds.

Katrina writes in and asserts: “The chemtrail pictures from all states sure do speak volumes, don’t they?” To which the only rational reply is, “They sure indicate that planes are flying over every state! But that’s about it!”

She encourages Jeff to follow up on the story and push the story into the national spotlight. By way of leads, she offers:

• Bill Gates has dumped millions into geoengineering research.
• In December 2010, 190 nations vowed not to move forward with geoengineering research. The US was NOT one of them.
• Have our rain/snow tested for an increase in aluminum and sulfur
• The World Health Organization reports 4 million lives will be lost each year to geoengineering our climate through aerosol spraying. The pollution from this science could have devastating consequences on our health and environment.
• The US government published a document titled “Owning the Weather in 2025.”

The one that gets me is the suggestion that we test for increases of aluminum in our snow and water. Even if you find an increase, it does not tell you anything about where it is coming from. Sigh.

A new review of the week in conspiracy theory is coming out tomorrow. Thanks to Jeff Chirico and Cary Bond at WGCL for sharing the global response to their segment with me! Hopefully, I will see a real, live controlled demolition tomorrow morning. None of this silly 9/11 stuff!

RJB