What in the world are they spraying? (Spoiler: Nothing)

[Redlambs]

https://coto2.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/1968-macdonald-how-to-wreck-the-planet.pdf

"Professor MacDonald is associate director of the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at the University of California, Los Angeles. His researches have embraced a remarkable diversity of natural phenomena and his professional interests are further extended by his participation in national science policy-making. He is a member of President Johnson’s Science Advisory Committee.

Among future means of obtaining national objectives by force, one possibility hinges on man’s ability to control and manipulate the environment of his planet. When achieved, this power over his environment will provide man with a new force capable of doing great and indiscriminate damage. Our present primitive understanding of deliberate environmental change makes it difficult to imagine a world in which geophysical warfare is practised. Such a world might be one in which nuclear weapons were effectively banned and the weapons of mass destruction were those of environmental catastrophe. Alternatively, I can envisage a world of nuclear stability resulting from parity in such weapons, rendered unstable by the development by one nation of an advanced technology capable of modifying the Earth’s environment. Or geophysical weapons may be part of each nation’s armoury. As I will argue, these weapons are peculiarly suited for covert or secret wars.

Substantial progress within the environmental sciences is slowly overcoming the gap between fact and fiction regarding manipulations of the Earth’s physical environment. As these manipulations become possible, history shows that attempts may be made to use them in support of national ambitions."

Why don't you all actually read the information presented to you?

@JustAFan considering we know that governments have indeed experimented with weather modification in the past and most likely continue to do so today, perhaps we can look beyond the lack of scientific rigour in these experiments.
@Dwazza I wont shy away from providing evidence, if you wont shy away from reading it.
@Redlambs not being interesting to you cannot invalidate the theory. Can I get this straight though, you are actually claiming categorically that there is no such thing as weather modification by any government or any corporation, ever??

I did read it, and I do understand what he's suggesting may happen.

I also never made any claim. For someone striving to appear as a level head, you miss an awful lot. In fact I'm open to the idea this could be something that happens down the line. I just can't help be amused by the way these ideas are presented, let's just say that.

 

[PitchFork]

So he's not saying that it's happening, nor even that it's currently possible, just that it will be? fecking headline news that. When somebody solves the Navier-Stokes equations I'll start to worry.

You don't feel the need to read all the information I linked? What you refer to is a theoretical summary of the same experiments documented in previous links.

I will be happy to keep looking. That was the result of a five minute Google search, I don't think it's such a bad start to be fair.

 

[JustAFan]

So he's not saying that it's happening, nor even that it's currently possible, just that it will be? fecking headline news that. When somebody solves the Navier-Stokes equations I'll start to worry.

Lots of things might be it all it proves right now is that none of us are wrong in laughing at the chemtrail conspiracies since nothing of the sort is happening as they claim.

 

[PitchFork]

I did read it, and I do understand what he's suggesting may happen.

I also never made any claim. For someone striving to appear as a level head, you miss an awful lot. In fact I'm open to the idea this could be something that happens down the line. I just can't help be amused by the way these ideas are presented, let's just say that.

True you didn't make any claims, the whole post was suggestive without actually saying anything. From what I read I supposed it would be the sort of claim that you might make.

My whole argument is that the idea that government could be spraying the atmosphere with something is quite plausible and shouldn't be written off as quackery simply because some people let their imagination run away with it.

 

[JustAFan]

Except that the conspiracy theories being presented about them are full of quackery so it's pointless to say ignore that part of them.

 

[PitchFork]

"The Royal Society has published the findings of a majorintroduction

geoengineering the climate.

The study, chaired by Professor John Shepherd FRS, was researched and written over a period of twelve months by twelve leading academics representing science, economics, law and social science.

Man-made climate change is happening and its impacts and costs will be large, serious and unevenly spread. The impacts may be reduced by adaptation and moderated by mitigation, especially by reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. However, global efforts to reduce emissions have not yet been sufficiently successful to provide confidence that the reductions needed to avoid dangerous climate change will be achieved. This has led to growing interest in geoengineering, defined here as the deliberate large-scale manipulation of the planetary environment to counteract anthropogenic climate change.

However, despite this interest, there has been a lack of accessible, high quality information on the proposed geoengineering techniques which remain unproven and potentially dangerous. This study provides a detailed assessment of the various methods and considers the potential efficiency and unintended consequences they may pose. It divides geoengineering methods into two basic categories:

1. Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) techniques, which remove CO2 from the atmosphere. As they address the root cause of climate change, rising CO2 concentrations, they have relatively low uncertainties and risks. However, these techniques work slowly to reduce global temperatures.
2. Solar Radiation Management (SRM) techniques, which reflect a small percentage of the sun's light and heat back into space."

https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/publications/2009/geoengineering-climate/

This is actually providing some weight to the conspiracy that Chemtrails are related to some sort of planetary mission to avoid the cataclysm of climate change.

I actually didn't believe them but here it is from the Royal Society.

Let's see what else I can find...

http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/372/2031#introduction

A whole wealth of information discussing different geoengineering methods.

 

[Wibble]

My whole argument is that the idea that government could be spraying the atmosphere with something is quite plausible and shouldn't be written off as quackery simply because some people let their imagination run away with it.

It should be written off because it is baseless bollocks. Lots of things that don't exist are vaguely plausible. The nutbags who love conspiracy theory bollocks don't require plausible anyway. Some half coherently written fantasy on a blog is all the evidence they require.

 

[PitchFork]

Except that the conspiracy theories being presented about them are full of quackery so it's pointless to say ignore that part of them.

I am providing you with quackery-free information that demonstrates government weather modification programs that were in operation designed to manipulate the outcome of war, to affect economies, and for humanitarian projects, all from the 1960's. Things have moved on a lot since then too.

It should be written off because it is baseless bollocks. Lots of things that don't exist are vaguely plausible. The nutbags who love conspiracy theory bollocks don't require plausible anyway. Some half coherently written fantasy on a blog is all the evidence they require.

Is this a serious post?

How can something be "vaguely possible?"
How can something that doesn't exist be possible?

My argument is baseless bollocks because... you couldn't be bothered to read the links. And then you will later on, with somebody else, complain about the lack of links, the lack of evidence. And then evidence will be shown to you, and you will ignore it, and resort to abusive remarks, and call that person a nutbag, and criticise the information without reading it; and then the circle starts all over again. I know you.

 

[Silva]

Isn't the point of the conspiracy secretive (read: evil) chemicals being sprayed into the atmosphere rather than known experiments? We already of such experiments - what we doubt is the secretive (read: evil) ones happening on a global scale, for, erm, reasons?

 

[Wibble]

Nobody is using secret chemical spraying to do anything, much less nefarious something or other. To think otherwise is very silly indeed. Just because there have been discussions about geoengineering doesn't mean that vapor trails are anything other than what we know them to be.

Odd that you think I was criticising The Royal Society. The conspiracy theory bollocks is the suggestion that the government is using similar technology to do something nefarious. The heart of many conspiracy theories is taking something real or even highly plausible (or even vaguely plausible) and adding on invented rubbish to make it sexy or exciting (or whatever people get out this silliness). I can't work out why the amazing universe we live in requires added invented drama.

And of course something can be vaguely plausible. Although to be fair it will be rare. Usually such a phrase is used to avoid having to say that someone is making stuff up as they go along. And lots of things are possible but don't exist. A six legged mammal species is possible but doesn't exist, for example. An electric car powered by solar panels on the roof that can travel 24 hours a day at the same speed as a petrol fueled car, even in temperate climates like the UK's, is another. A cure for alzheimers etc etc

 

[PitchFork]

Isn't the point of the conspiracy secretive (read: evil) chemicals being sprayed into the atmosphere rather than known experiments? We already of such experiments - what we doubt is the secretive (read: evil) ones happening on a global scale, for, erm, reasons?

All these programs were secret. Cloud seeding itself was not a known experiment. Today, it isn't an experiment it's an accepted technology. Like I have shown already, there are most definitely secretive programs that use weather modification on a global scale. There have been since the 1960's and probably even 20 years earlier. One of the reasons we are discussing chemtrails is because of disclosed information that had been found and published. If you want evidence for current programs you will have to write to the US Gov. and ask them for some empirical data because clearly literature isn't enough.

 

[Wibble]

The only reason chemtrails (actually vapour contrails) are being discussed is because conspiracy theorists keep making rubbish up about them. Bring up something serious and it will be discussed seriously.

 

[PitchFork]

Nobody is using secret chemical spraying to do anything, much less nefarious something or other. To think otherwise is very silly indeed. Just because there have been discussions about geoengineering doesn't mean that vapor trails are anything other than what we know them to be.

Odd that you think I was criticising The Royal Society. The conspiracy theory bollocks is the suggestion that the government is using similar technology to do something nefarious. The heart of many conspiracy theories is taking something real or even highly plausible (or even vaguely plausible) and adding on invented rubbish to make it sexy or exciting (or whatever people get out this silliness). I can't work out why the amazing universe we live in requires added invented drama.

And of course something can be vaguely plausible. Although to be fair it will be rare. Usually such a phrase is used to avoid having to say that someone is making stuff up as they go along. And lots of things are possible but don't exist. A six legged mammal species is possible but doesn't exist, for example. An electric car powered by solar panels on the roof that can travel 24 hours a day at the same speed as a petrol fueled car, even in temperate climates like the UK's, is another. A cure for alzheimers etc etc

I would say that if it were possible then it exists. But purely to be argumentative. Have to concede here really.

The Royal Society discuss the technology at hand. "How to Wreck The Environment" discusses how to use this technology for economic or military gain. I linked another official paper discussing the use of this technology in the Vietnam war (Operation Popeye, iirc). Add to this the wealth of evidence showing a growing belief that the worlds population is too large and needs to be reduced; this is not a wild conspiracy, it is a very real and nefarious agenda.

 

[PitchFork]

The only reason chemtrails (actually vapour contrails) are being discussed is because conspiracy theorists keep making rubbish up about them. Bring up something serious and it will be discussed seriously.

I thought I did that already. I brought up the use of weather modification for war, for humanitarian aid and for economic sabotage / advantage. All from serious and credible sources.

 

[JustAFan]

Isn't the point of the conspiracy secretive (read: evil) chemicals being sprayed into the atmosphere rather than known experiments? We already of such experiments - what we doubt is the secretive (read: evil) ones happening on a global scale, for, erm, reasons?

It's been explained over and over to pitchfork that this thread is about the wacky conspiracy theories, for some reason he either can't or won't understand that.

 

[TwoSheds]

I would say that if it were possible then it exists. But purely to be argumentative. Have to concede here really.

The Royal Society discuss the technology at hand. "How to Wreck The Environment" discusses how to use this technology for economic or military gain. I linked another official paper discussing the use of this technology in the Vietnam war (Operation Popeye, iirc). Add to this the wealth of evidence showing a growing belief that the worlds population is too large and needs to be reduced; this is not a wild conspiracy, it is a very real and nefarious agenda.

That's not on a global scale you gimp, that's on a local one. Global means the whole world. Good luck doing that without anyone noticing. You really understand feck all bout science eh?

 

[DFreshKing]

It's been explained over and over to pitchfork that this thread is about the wacky conspiracy theories, for some reason he either can't or won't understand that.

If you read the OP it is about chemtrails, with the proviso that conspiracies get in the way of the discussion so you are flat out wrong with what the intention of the thread was.

It is a given that these activities exist, patents, nobel prizes, and lots of scientific evidence point to their use the issue is how large is the use and what results if any have occurred.

The fact that this endeavour can be weaponised pretty much leads to the conclusion that big military countries will research it, in their worldview it would be risk of allowing others to get there first and have an advantage.

Do you really think powers like the USA, Russia, China, Uk would allow that possibility?

I'd be amazed if it is not being tested as a future weapon tinfoil hat or not.

 

[rcoobc]

If you read the OP it is about chemtrails, with the proviso that conspiracies get in the way of the discussion so you are flat out wrong with what the intention of the thread was.

It is a given that these activities exist, patents, nobel prizes, and lots of scientific evidence point to their use the issue is how large is the use and what results if any have occurred.

The fact that this endeavour can be weaponised pretty much leads to the conclusion that big military countries will research it, in their worldview it would be risk of allowing others to get there first and have an advantage.

Do you really think powers like the USA, Russia, China, Uk would allow that possibility?

I'd be amazed if it is not being tested as a future weapon tinfoil hat or not.

Sorry, what has been weaponized?

 

[DFreshKing]

Sorry, what has been weaponized?

I don't know but there is lots of information on how weather modification can be.

There was a few links above with good sources.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

If you read the OP it is about chemtrails, with the proviso that conspiracies get in the way of the discussion so you are flat out wrong with what the intention of the thread was.

It is a given that these activities exist, patents, nobel prizes, and lots of scientific evidence point to their use the issue is how large is the use and what results if any have occurred.

The fact that this endeavour can be weaponised pretty much leads to the conclusion that big military countries will research it, in their worldview it would be risk of allowing others to get there first and have an advantage.

Do you really think powers like the USA, Russia, China, Uk would allow that possibility?

I'd be amazed if it is not being tested as a future weapon tinfoil hat or not.

This thread is five years old. It was bumped with an article shared by @Jippy full of absolutely ludicrous bullshit like this:

Explaining the theory, he says that there's no way the line-like clouds that are left by aircraft are responsible for the long lasting patterns in the skies. He told Express.co.uk: "They’re long trails of cirrus clouds that stretch across the horizon and then spread out across the sky. "After about a half hour or so, they begin to appear foggy and disappear into the air. "It cannot be jet exhaust either since normal jet fuel contrail dissipates within seconds after the aircraft has passed."

He added: "One of the other components found in chemtrails are barium salts. "The chemical reaction of barium salts in the sky is said to cause water moisture to be retained in real clouds – which could be contributing to the recent spike in widespread global flooding. "Research shows that barium salts have the capability to receive and conduct radio waves. "What’s interesting about barium salts is that chemtrails are sprayed in straight lines across the sky – usually in multiple directions. "Sometimes it even looks like they’re playing tic-tac-toe in the sky! This tic-tac-toe pattern creates a grid. The barium salt radio wave grid then becomes a giant antenna, which can be used to send and receive data.

This is - obviously - on a whole other level to legitimate, controlled and carefully regulated scientific experiments that attempt to manipulate the weather.

What's really annoying about people spreading bullshit theories like this is when it contradicts real - and important - science, such as global warming.

"These chemtrails can also cause extreme and prolonged periods of drought. "Never before have we witnessed such an extreme amount of weather fluctuation across the globe."

 

[rcoobc]

I don't know but there is lots of information on how weather modification can be.

There was a few links above with good sources.

The weather isn't some powerful nuclear weapon like force. China can just about make it rain on their crops semi-regularly. I am Death, waterier of plants. Look on my plants growing so nicely, and prepare.

What are we saying here, that Russia are looking into causing giant hurricanes to wipe out the United States (if necessary)? No one has that degree of control over the weather, we can't even predict it, let alone control it.

Or maybe the US are looking at causing a drought in the middle east wiping out entirely countries as necessary? How much harm would that do, creating millions of refugees who then 'destabilize' to Europe.

Or maybe Russia are the ones looking to cause a drought in the US? Rain is quite rationalised, it seems rather likely the US would notice if Russia were doing such things.

Of course people have looked into controlling the weather. But right now it's not happening.

 

[JustAFan]

If you read the OP it is about chemtrails, with the proviso that conspiracies get in the way of the discussion so you are flat out wrong with what the intention of the thread was.

It is a given that these activities exist, patents, nobel prizes, and lots of scientific evidence point to their use the issue is how large is the use and what results if any have occurred.

The fact that this endeavour can be weaponised pretty much leads to the conclusion that big military countries will research it, in their worldview it would be risk of allowing others to get there first and have an advantage.

Do you really think powers like the USA, Russia, China, Uk would allow that possibility?

I'd be amazed if it is not being tested as a future weapon tinfoil hat or not.

The video in theOP is about the fecking conspiracy theory
Not really right from the start this thread was about the conspiracy theories, read the posts. The whole chemtrail theory is about the wacky idea that there is a huge global effort to spray everyone and everything to achieve something (weather control, population control, etc etc etc). The claims that it is already happening ( the op claims it is) not that it is something being researched for some future use maybe.

 

[JustAFan]

Anyone have any links to scientific studies where scientists have taken samples directly from the contrails (easy to do actually) and proven that they contain something other than jet fuel pollutants? Where are the Snowfen or Manning type whistle blowers out of the millions who would be involved in this?

 

[JustAFan]

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


Also, operation Popeye was just cloud seeding to make it rain more. No fancy barium salts to conduct radio waves, no mind control drugs, just making moisture laden clouds rain. Ooooooooh

 

[rcoobc]

Id love cloud seeding in the UK. Wouldn't it be great if we could get rid of clouds during the week so the weekends were dry

 

[JustAFan]

Id love cloud seeding in the UK. Wouldn't it be great if we could get rid of clouds during the week so the weekends were dry

Make it rain every Tuesday night in Stoke

 

[Redlambs]

True you didn't make any claims, the whole post was suggestive without actually saying anything. From what I read I supposed it would be the sort of claim that you might make.

So basically, you made up an argument for me.

My whole argument is that the idea that government could be spraying the atmosphere with something is quite plausible and shouldn't be written off as quackery simply because some people let their imagination run away with it.

You have already let your side of the argument slip, you did the moment you referenced psychology and reinforced it with the "aha" to someone far more knowledgeable than you.

 

[PitchFork]

It's been explained over and over to pitchfork that this thread is about the wacky conspiracy theories, for some reason he either can't or won't understand that.

I had thought this thread was more about the sensible theory and less about the individuals who exaggerate the theory and make it "wacky." Looking at the title and the first page I can be forgiven for making that assumption. Perhaps somewhere along the line the discussion became inundated with the usual incongruity and accompanying abuse. Maybe you are in a better position to point out when this descent took place?

The video in theOP is about the fecking conspiracy theory
Not really right from the start this thread was about the conspiracy theories, read the posts. The whole chemtrail theory is about the wacky idea that there is a huge global effort to spray everyone and everything to achieve something (weather control, population control, etc etc etc). The claims that it is already happening ( the op claims it is) not that it is something being researched for some future use maybe.

You are twisting the claims here; there are people who look at the sky and see a contrail and think they are being poisoned. I hope these aren't the people with whom you choose to engage in this sort of discussion, it won't get you anywhere. There are also claims that chemtrails are part of a global warming / climate change experiment, though equally unbelievable, it is a more plausible considering the information I provided from the Royal Society.

You see, clearly the theory isn't so wacky; we can prove that weather modification for weather control is real technology that is already happening. Read the information I provided, read all of it, not just the short section I copied. It isn't something that could be possible in the future. It's something that has been around for more than 50 years.

 

[PitchFork]

So basically, you made up an argument for me.






You have already let your side of the argument slip, you did the moment you referenced psychology and reinforced it with the "aha" to someone far more knowledgeable than you.

I suppose so.

It has already been declared that pogue is an expert on this topic and has a vast wealth of knowledge. One would think that this thread would be a reasonable place to share that knowledge; I am yet to see it.

 

[JustAFan]

No I am not twisting claims, you are just ignoring what claims are actually being made by the chemtrail conspiracy bunch, right from the very video in the opening post and then the inclusion on the first page of the nutty Ted Gunderson, he of satanic child molestation cults and such.

Though it needs to be pointed out so far you have twice admitted to basically making up arguments just for the sake of arguing. So I am not really sure what your point of any of this is except that you enjoying Wumming, which is pretty sad.

 

[PitchFork]

No I am not twisting claims, you are just ignoring what claims are actually being made by the chemtrail conspiracy bunch, right from the very video in the opening post and then the inclusion on the first page of the nutty Ted Gunderson, he of satanic child molestation cults and such.

Though it needs to be pointed out so far you have twice admitted to basically making up arguments just for the sake of arguing. So I am not really sure what your point of any of this is except that you enjoying Wumming, which is pretty sad.

I wont let this turn into a tit-for-tat.

"To spray everyone and everything to achieve something (weather control..." this is your twist. The accusation that chemtrails are related to weather modification have nothing to do with people being sprayed in an intentional depopulation program. I agree, it is wack. But that isn't the crux of this theory whether you want it to be or not!

I think the element of people being sprayed comes in when they ask the questions what exactly is being sprayed, and what is the effect on human health? I haven't seen any credible proponents of this theory assume that weather control is a devious agenda to control minds or depopulate. I am fairly certain Alex Jones and his ilk are responsible for that distraction.

In a discussion do we not form arguments in order to discuss? Do I have to believe the argument I am making? Can I not join a discussion purely for discussions sake? How can you equate someones interest in discussing something with wumming? Are you clutching at straws now?

 

[Redlambs]

.

I suppose so.

It has already been declared that pogue is an expert on this topic and has a vast wealth of knowledge. One would think that this thread would be a reasonable place to share that knowledge; I am yet to see it.

Well maybe you should stick to questioning him rather than making up people's opinions for them? And on that front, why are you so ready to dismiss his side yet want everyone to read the links you so readily post?

After all, isn't that what the problem is here? People making up claims and being laughed at?

 

[PitchFork]

"From enhancing friendly operations or disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural weather patterns to complete dominance of global communications and counterspace control, weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary

Technology advancements in five major areas are necessary for an integrated weather-modification capability: (1) advanced nonlinear modelling techniques, (2) computational capability, (3) information gathering and transmission, (4) a global sensor array, and (5) weather intervention techniques. Some intervention tools exist today and others may be developed and refined in the future.

Modification of the ionosphere to enhance or disrupt communications has recently become the subject of active research. According to Lewis M. Duncan, and Robert L. Showen, the Former Soviet Union (FSU) conducted theoretical and experimental research in this area at a level considerably greater than comparable programs in the West.25 There is a strong motivation for this research, because induced ionospheric modifications may influence, or even disrupt, the operation of radio systems relying on propagation through the modified region. The controlled generation or accelerated dissipation of ionospheric disturbances may be used to produce new propagation paths, otherwise unavailable, appropriate for selected RF missions.26 A number of methods have been explored or proposed to modify the ionosphere, including injection of chemical vapors [sic] and heating or charging via electromagnetic radiation or particle beams (such as ions, neutral particles, x-rays, MeV particles, and energetic electrons).27 It is important to note that many techniques to modify the upper atmosphere have been successfully demonstrated experimentally. Groundbased modification techniques employed by the FSU include vertical HF heating, oblique HF heating, microwave heating, and magnetospheric modification.

modification of the ionosphere is an area rich with potential applications and there are also likely spin-off applications that have yet to be envisioned.

Nanotechnology also offers possibilities for creating simulated weather. A cloud, or several clouds, of microscopic computer particles, all communicating with each other and with a larger control system could provide tremendous capability. Interconnected, atmospherically buoyant, and having navigation capability in three dimensions, such clouds could be designed to have a wide-range of properties. They might exclusively block optical sensors or could adjust to become impermeable to other surveillance methods. They could also provide an atmospheric electrical potential difference, which otherwise might not exist, to achieve precisely aimed and timed lightning strikes. Even if power levels achieved were insufficient to be an effective strike weapon, the potential for psychological operations in many situations could be fantastic.

One major advantage of using simulated weather to achieve a desired effect is that unlike other approaches, it makes what are otherwise the results of deliberate actions appear to be the consequences of natural weather phenomena. In addition, it is potentially relatively inexpensive to do. According to J. Storrs Hall, a scientist at Rutgers University conducting research on nanotechnology, production costs of these nanoparticles could be about the same price per pound as potatoes.34 This of course discounts research and development costs, which will be primarily borne by the private sector and be considered a sunk cost by 2025 and probably earlier.

fog and cloud modification are currently important and will remain so for some time to come to conceal our assets from surveillance or improve landing visibility at airfields. However, as surveillance assets become less optically dependent and aircraft achieve a truly global all-weather landing capability, fog and cloud modification applications become less important.

researchers are also trying to influence the results of these models by adding small amounts of energy at just the right time and space. These programs are extremely limited at the moment and are not yet validated, but there is great potential to improve them in the next 30 years."

http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf

Excerpts from a USAF research paper discussing the potential of weather modification by 2025. Before I have to read a half dozen posts about how this is all research, yes it is. And it also needs to be tested. It has been tested for more than 50 years already. Therefore, someone looking in the sky and seeing an ominous looking contrail can be forgiven for worrying about the health of their community. Because without a doubt the US DoD put national security above public health.

 

[PitchFork]

.


Well maybe you should stick to questioning him rather than making up people's opinions for them? And on that front, why are you so ready to dismiss his side yet want everyone to read the links you so readily post?

After all, isn't that what the problem is here? People making up claims and being laughed at?

I have no idea what that first question is getting at. But I will try and answer the others:

I responded to demands for evidence, so I provided the links. It isn't so much that I want people to read the links, it's more off a frustration that when I provide the information that was demanded of me, the information is ignored and the usual "banter" ensues. I haven't dismissed his side; because he hasn't really provided a side for me to dismiss. All I read was that mass experiments are near-impossible due to regulations. I already explained why that is likely wrong.

I didn't know there was a problem here. This is a discussion about a theory is it not? People laughing at others has nothing to do with me.

 

[PitchFork]

https://coto2.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/case_orange-5-10-2010-belfort-chemtrails.pdf

This is a sensible read if anyone wants to take the time to learn something. I have no idea what the Belfort Group is and can't find anything about them online but this publication is a reasonable investigation into contrails, geoengineering, the aviation industry and the effects or risk to public health. Belfort Group may well be something set up by environmental activists; it also might not be. What it isn't is a "wacky" rambling.

 

[Jippy]

Can't believe this thread has been running five years. Nice to see a bullshit Express article can reignite it

 

[PitchFork]

Or you can ignore the Express article and read the more sensible information posted above. If the single biggest reason for being here is to laugh at people, then the Express is your cup of tea.

 

[Pexbo]

Can't believe this thread has been running five years. Nice to see a bullshit Express article can reignite it

That's like saying "I'd like to drink a glass of wet water"

 

[Jippy]

Or you can ignore the Express article and read the more sensible information posted above. If the single biggest reason for being here is to laugh at people, then the Express is your cup of tea.

The Express article variously blames chem-trails for droughts and floods, without considering the contradiction, and then espouses their use as secret antennae devices. Sounds a bit far-fetched, no?

That's like saying "I'd like to drink a glass of wet water"

Yes and I hope every customer you have asks for their steak extra well-done. The thought of anyone parting money to buy a copy of the Express is even worse than the Sunday Sport or Star.

 

[JustAFan]

So the answer to the question posed in the thread title is still nothing at the best anyone can come up with is that it is something that might happen. The question now becomes who understands the difference between the claims that it is happening now on a global scale and has been happening and saying well it could happen some day?

I know most do