This is a cross-post from this blog
. The comments are moderated, so it might not have been published yet.
It can be very frustrating to read our views being ridiculed. But for the most part, these people are not being sadistic. We can't blame them for thinking "chemtrails" is a crazy hoax.
One of the main reasons I started to devote my blogging to other subjects was my faith in the idea that if I could gain credibility in those other areas as a serious thinker, that would prompt folks to check out my chemtrails schtuff. I have a feeling that has paid off dividends.
My other blog is doing kinda good.
Just to show ye that I'm not ashamed of being a "chemmie" here are a few diaries I wrote there. For those shy about posting on this forum, feel free to leave comments at DFQ2. They can be made without the need to register. You may also want to check out the other topics. This year, I got into researching and writing about the satanic panic. I don't regret that. It's hard to put into words, but I think we can take knowledge and insights from what appear to be completely separate topics and find universal themes which influence both. So I am curious why it is that we believe what we do. I wonder why some ideas take hold, while others never get off the ground. Sometimes what is held as common knowledge is false. Often times it is what it is. It takes time and effort to get to the bottom of social reality is what I'm trying to say.Former Marine Corps Weatherman Admits Fake Clouds Are Being ProducedUS Military Apparently Creating Cirrus Aviaticus
Hi S.M. Elliott and others,
Sorry I am late to this thread.
I do like your work. We have a lot in common in regards to noticing internet fakery and other forms of hogwash.
Yet, I do disagree with you on this topic. I agree with the last anonymous comment. He or she wasn't being offensive. What a lot of us are saying is precisely that chemtrails look totally different from contrails.
Most of what is posted about "chemtrails" on the internet is clearly rubbish. I have no difficulty understanding why anyone thinks it's a ludicrous idea based on that.
But if you look into the specifics of cloud science, you will see that the idea of chemtrails is anything but outrageous. On a number of occasions I have checked the radiosonde readings in my area for days where aircraft emissions have led to synthetic white-outs. In short, the necessary level of relative humidity was non-existent.
I believe "chemtrails" are mostly about blocking out harmful uv-b rays. They have nothing to do with mind control and depopulation, little to do with environmental modification, and are separate from the idea of geoengineering. The latter is something you may want to investigate. Many are trying to get that on the table for serious consideration. Geoengineering for our purposes here would be about creating cirrus aviaticus in the stratosphere using aluminum and other particulates in order to repel solar heat back into space. "Chentrails" are basically too low to get that job done. Thus I go with the uv-b ray schtick.
My basic point is that "chemtrails" cannot be compared to L. Ron Hubbard or anything else obviously batsh*t crazy.
You have done splendid work exposing Alex Jones. That could be another analogy. There is centralised power in this world. That is fact. However, Alex turns that into some Mickey Mouse conspiracy schtick. The same thing happened with the idea of chemtrails in regards to its portrayal on the internet. For those interested in a rational argument for the existence of chemtrails, they are encouraged to check out <a this forum
. Thanks for your time and consideration.