Living far away from the USA, I'm not familiar with this matter. However, you present zero evidence in your post. I'd appreciate it if you could cite some peer reviewed sources to back up your claims. Thanks!
There may well be high concentration of Aluminium and toxic wastes, but that is easily explained by pollution through industrial or natural means. What I'm requesting evidence for is that these comes from airplanes. Indeed, a quick search through academic papers reveal mostly evidence to the contrary.
People will take issue with any evidence that I present. What is needed here is not more proof they exists (that is well established) but more thought about how to deal it and those that are having a hard time finding honest evidence.
I don't know what the right material is for you. I can't pick that out. I know I consistently find great videos on the topic though. I suggest that you go looking for evidence "for" since you have already found the evidence "against" and I would like to remind that the only way to make a rational decision is to seek all the evidence then make an assessment.
Don't let anyone scare you away from your investigation with cheap name calling, etc. My advice is to either get a fair amount of evidence for and against or put it on the self of inclusive for now.
This links back to tax money. There is a lot of money available to produce evidence to the contrary as people tend to sell out for money. On the contrary, there are way more people willing to expose fraud and they can make a lot of noise. It just has not come in the form of multi-million dollar studies (why do they cost that much!). In the day and age of block-chains this will change.
Thanks. I've looked into the matter, on both sides, and it seems that there's far more evidence debuking "chemtrails" than there is for. I found this article and the subsequent collection peer-reviewed papers most compelling - http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/8/084011/meta;jsessionid=3E64663199CA75E8F69625258B8A9278.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org.
There are certainly a few YouTube videos which present the case for "chemtrails", but I found them to be a lot of noise without substantial evidence; unlike the vast majority of scientific research on the matter which lay out some basic facts.
I'm not interested in what the media says, but I believe in the peer-reviewed scientific consensus, which like blockchains is uncensored and free of propaganda (unlike the media). Currently, there's far more evidence against the existence of this phenomenon than for. I'm of course open to more evidence coming forth from the "for" camp in the future, and I'll look out for it.
What if the head of the FBI came out and talked about how great chemtrails are for dealing with global warming? Would you believe it then? Would you then wonder why you found so many convincing reports debunking that very same thing?
If there was a history of peer-reviewed scientific consensus being overturned in such a manner, I'd certainly entertain such a possibility. However, throughout post-industrialization history, since the scientific process has evolved, there hasn't been a single such occurrence. A simple application of Occam's razor and basic rationality would suggest such a scenario or "what if" with the FBI talking about how great chemtails are, is highly implausible.
Do make a post if that ever happens, and we can have a great discussion on the flaws of the scientific research on the matter.
Till that day, I'm going to consider only cold, hard evidence.
I'm sorry .. it is the CIA not the FBI..
Approx 50% of science is fraud and lies. Don't be deceived by scientific propaganda. I will write on this topic in due course.
Well, it will take time.. Like I said tax money is being used to create that mountain of reports. If nothing else, don't ignore the mountain of picture we see of chemtrail laden skies all over the place. I just looked out my front door and saw one then got a bit ticked off so I came back to this thread to talk to people like yourself so I can feel like I'm doing something about it.
You're going to have to battle scepticism probably for a long time. I suggest to don't expect yourself to make a good conclusion in just a few days. Things need to sink in, old ideas need to be re-thought. It is like building a house. Just make sure you always seek out that voice of logic and reason (that is what I did) and drop in on some topic like this when you feel like you're ready for a challenge. I promise, it will serve you very well.
I'm not rushing to any conclusion; however my conclusion will be based on peer-reviewed evidence I see presented.
I did come across the Brennan interview before, however, only extreme confirmation bias would make me see that as anything to do with the topic on hand. Here's a pretty good explanation of the CFR talk - https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-cia-director-admits-chemtrails-geoengineering-stratospheric-aerosol-injection.t7721/
Also, I did check out Dane Wigington's videos earlier. While he's a great speaker, his work is not peer-reviewed.
You might check out Dane Wigington. He is really scientific and sticks with the facts. I have probably learned most of what I know form Dane. He posts pictures he receives from all over the world in the "Geoengineering Watch Photo Gallery" fb group.
@liberosist cool. Thank you for keeping your mind open. This is the most important part for both parties in any discussion.
For my part I've observed the evidence for myself and I found them to be overwhelming coherent with covert geo-engineering operations rather than normal condensation trail.
Also the fact that the US army conducted top secret geo-engineering operation during 5 years in the Vietnam war is cause for concern that such program still exist for me. (US army source of the declassified paper can be found on wikipedia)
As this,
China creates 55 billion tons of artificial rain a year—and it plans to quintuple that (qz.com)
And this,
Weather on Demand: Making It Rain Is Now a Global Business
Welcome to the strange world of cloud seeding. (forbes.com)
And Project Stormfury
Project Stormfury was an attempt to weaken tropical cyclones by flying aircraft into them and seeding with silver iodide. The project was run by the United States Government from 1962 to 1983. (wikipedia)
There are multiple evidences, overwhelming evidences that some of the lines behind some airplanes are part of some covert geo-engineering program. I'll present those evidences here eventually.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Popeye http://qz.com/138141/china-creates-55-billion-tons-of-artificial-rain-a-year-and-it-plans-to-quintuple-that/ https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-cloud-seeding-india/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Stormfury
There's enough evidence for geo-engineering - that's not the issue. The question is whether aluminium and harmful, toxic particles are being seeded as accused by "chemtrails". There's no conspiracy around silver iodide seeding - there's enough evidence for that, and governments are hardly covert about it.
I get you. Thank you.
I hope to present my observations which I see as overwhelming evidences of highly classified geo-engineering operations. I don't have any first hand evidence for aluminium. Aluminium isn't part of my evidences.
I'm eager to see to what conclusions people will come up with and see if they, like a lot of us, come to the conclusion this scientists collection of peer-reviewed papers seems suspiciously off from what is being observed for whatever reasons, be it that they've been coherced to conclude what they concluded, incentivized to lie or simply made bad observation, thus bad science.
I'll eventually read the paper this week. I'll most probably comment on it when I'll publish my article on the subject. This would make a lot of sense.
It is for the most part world-wide ...