locked Chemtrails: Why?

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
martien007
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 565
Registration: 25/03/08, 00:28
Location: planet Mars

locked Chemtrails: Why?




by martien007 » 06/05/08, 09:25

Observations since March: another subject that goes awry like the problem of cereals and world hunger.

I see that some people cannot bear the contradiction, the spirits are heating up, it's not good for the planet : Evil:

Too bad, the subject was interesting; these observations of the sky deserve an explanation.

It would take a real independent and neutral moderator in this forum, because there are more and more subjects that degenerate.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79112
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 06/05/08, 11:11

1) It's funny this mania to put 100% of the responsibility on the back of the moderators. As I was the only one on the subject at the end, I feel particularly targeted ... Obviously as always (in France in particular) must find the culprits ... : Evil: : Evil:

If you want to know everything, the real person responsible for this closure is momo68 because the public insults sorry I do not tolerate ... It was the drop of water ... as they say.

2) Sorry but you confuse the notion of moderator of a forum and moderator / moderator of a televised debate. I don't have to be a vegetable on my own forum! On the contrary, the paranoid discussions of some other modos on others forums would have censored them long ago ...

3) Here is a private message from Cuicui, who is in the "chemtrails" camp, I remind you:

For chemtrails, I regret momo68's unnecessarily hurtful tone, which hurts the "chemtrailer" camp, while the lockdown proves it right (see these "anti-chemtrailers", as they are intolerant and sectarian ...).
I do not want to inflame the discussion, but I find that this subject had the advantage of encouraging people to look at the sky and to make their hypotheses, even if it means verifying or invalidating them afterwards, without necessarily seeing the evidence of a great plot.


To which I replied:

Well visitors can still, it is not because it is closed that it is no longer readable. I think that EVERYTHING had been said anyway. If there is anything new about discoveries or observations, nothing prevents opening a new subject ...


4) Finally: the relationship in chemtrails and econology is still distant ...
Last edited by Christophe the 06 / 05 / 08, 11: 59, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
nonoLeRobot
Master Kyot'Home
Master Kyot'Home
posts: 790
Registration: 19/01/05, 23:55
Location: Beaune 21 / Paris
x 13




by nonoLeRobot » 06/05/08, 11:46

Totally agree with Chris!
0 x
User avatar
gegyx
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6930
Registration: 21/01/05, 11:59
x 2870




by gegyx » 06/05/08, 14:03

Hello everyone.
I am neither for nor against Chems. I have observed the opinions, the sources and the sky for some time… : Cheesy:

Nothing deserves to be insulted on the forum, like pro or anti.
Any new comments are welcome.

As Chris says, if there's something new, there's nothing stopping you from creating a new topic.

By cons there is still a relationship with ecology:
- Modification of the sky, due to the numerous passages of jets rejecting water vapor.
- Accentuation of this modification, for pro-chems.

So, at a minimum, certainly a modification of local climates.

In addition, I appreciate the testimony of people who remember other different ancient seasons. It's always good to hear, even if there is a bit of melancholy or errors in judgment. It is always more meaningful in impressions and emotions than statistics, considered according to the conclusions we want to reach.

If the sky is veiled, the air of nothing, by 15%, that goes against a development of solar energy.
At the level of the ethics of the rulers, we cannot keep the discourse that we must encourage solar, if at the same time we dry up the useful solar source ...
I agree that 85% of the sun is always better than burning the equivalent in fossil energy.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79112
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 06/05/08, 14:06

gegyx wrote:Hello everyone.
I am neither for nor against Chems. I have observed the opinions, the sources and the sky for some time… : Cheesy:


Uh, it's not to relaunch the "controversy" but it was you who gave the last link on CONspiration.CaCa : Mrgreen:

ps: I insult anyone ... even if I sometimes use words (some leave me no choice) words that can be hurtful ...
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15989
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5187




by Remundo » 06/05/08, 15:07

gegyx wrote:Nothing deserves to be insulted on the forum, like pro or anti.
Any new comments are welcome.


I can only agree with this very wise remark. I'm holding her back, Gegyx. : Cheesy:

From my point of view, Christophe has never been insulting on the subject Chemtrails, he may have been a little virulent in his answers, but without attack people, However in response to more than incisive arrests affecting directly himself.

I will add that it is "his" forum and that he has the right to lock a subject without having to justify himself "particularly", even if that may seem unfair, even for admissible reasons ...

Just like forumers can open new threads and continue viewing the old one forum which is not offline.

This is my feeling, and having participated very little (but having followed it) on the subject Chemtrails, I immediately slip away ...
0 x
Image
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79112
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 06/05/08, 15:16

Remundo wrote:From my point of view, Christophe has never been insulting on the subject Chemtrails, he may have been a little virulent in his answers, but without attack people, However in response to more than incisive arrests affecting directly himself.


Image
0 x
bamboo
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1534
Registration: 19/03/07, 14:46
Location: Breizh




by bamboo » 06/05/08, 17:50

+ 1 for Christophe.
It is true that you were alone on the end ... But as you said, everything had been said. It went round and round. In my case, it is for this reason that I expressed myself more.
0 x
Solar Production + VE + VAE = short cycle electricity
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2




by Woodcutter » 08/05/08, 01:00

Amusing...
I spent a few hours catching up on this subject and I must say that being away from it all served me well, I could never have stayed calm ...
0 x
"I am a big brute, but I rarely mistaken ..."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79112
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 08/05/08, 08:47

Ah glad to read you Woodcutter! Yep you abandoned me loosely ... : Mrgreen: : Mrgreen:

You're back (even moderately?) Then? 8)
0 x

Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Macro and 217 guests