Are Chem-Trails a Con (-Trail)?

The sky is falling

I have recently been switched on to the debate relating to the world-wide phenomenon of Chem-Trails by a friend who has a particular and quite intense fascination with them.  Or should I say ‘insecurity’ about them.

CLICK on the image(s) at right and below to ZOOM in —->>

UPDATE 30-Aug-2011:   Also, I strongly urge readers to check out the website http://www.bluenomore.com/ and see a fuller range of Chemtrail images

At any rate, I promised I would do a little research on the topic. I must admit, there are certainly some aspects of the debate which require our closer inspection and scrutiny…

—>Next up … What changed my skepticism?.

Is it smoke and mirrors?

Note: all images were taken in the City of Adelaide, South Australia, on Monday 25-Jul-2011 at around 3-4pm.

… My first thoughts on the subject are that “some people are just being a bit paranoid”. They are just mistaking normal whispy cirrus or alto-cirrus clouds, (i.e. simple wind-swept water ice-crystals at very high altitudes) as something more sinister.

With ‘lines’ in the sky, the simplest science explaining the formation of trails caused by the disturbance of jetliners is that they are “Condensation Trails” (or ‘Con-Trails’).

Generally, Con-Trails are considered quite safe or benign to the environment. Sure, they are dirty microscopic smoke or dust particulates including burnt or unburnt aviation fuel and gases emanating from passenger airliners. But generally not the cause of any (known) sinister health or toxicological effect to humans.

The skeptical argument made by you and me and every other sensible suburbanite, is that a jetliner travelling at 750+ km/h, at an altitude of 30 – 40,000 feet, would surely – occasionally – create an interesting atmospheric anomaly or two.  Naturally, this would be so especially if you view a con-trail in just the right unique conditions. The atmospheric condition variables in this equation, as you would expect, include stratified levels of heat, moisture, wind speed, and lighting around the condensate when viewed from particular angles.

First I saw this:

… Which is apparently a military jet (commentary by the pilot) as it follows an airliner.

Then this slightly longer video really got me thinking:

(… PLEASE NOTE: I kindly ask you to IGNORE the cheesy / desparate plea to God in the last 10 seconds of this video. I can’t be responsible for the conclusions that SOME people draw when presented with certain evidence. At any rate; it does not express MY journalistic opinion. For now, dear reader, just focus on the images and draw your own conclusion.)

There was certainly a lot more on stuff on Youtube when I typed in the search term “Chemtrails”. And this sparked me to look more closely at some of the ramifications IF these claims of illegal aerosol spraying were substantiated.

Finally, all doubts were erased with this:

It’s a two-part documentary called “What in the world are they spraying“, (97 mins) and “Why in the World are They Spraying“.  (72 mins).

Understandably, the path leading from denial of chem-trails to solid conviction of their existence is a process. It takes time. A person needs time to tear down years of faith in governments, trust in corporate institutions and media brain-washing. So, by all means, take your time until you’ve absorbed all relevant data.

However this article cannot wait for you right now. I still have issues to summarize below concerning global health, safety, legality and motivation for chem-trails being sprayed. When you finish reading my article below to the end to get the overall picture, then come back and watch the above videos slowly to flesh out your understanding. They shall unavoidably lead you to certainty and enlightenment.

(Note: don’t shirk your duty in doing this research, otherwise – like atheism – you have no proof God doesn’t exist so you have no right to boldly assert chem-trails don’t exist. At minimum, you may only be agnostic about chem-trails. But think about it:  As you continue to get more and more proof of (god or) chemtrails, then concluding they exist becomes harder to deny.)

The safety of their chemical composition

Some of the aerosols include Barium salts, and various compounds of chlorine and aluminium.

Check out the MSDS (Materials Safety Data Sheets) website if you want to know how poisonous the chemicals are. Serious detrimental effects are shown for Lungs, skin, kidneys, muscles, eyes, and blood.

The diseases these compounds can cause (in humans) ranges from the respiratory illness, cardiac disturbance, blood abnormalities, skin & eye irritation, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, gastro-intestinal disorders (vomiting & diarrhea), muscle paralysis.

Whilst it is not exactly clear what is a “safe dose” of these materials is (i.e. how many parts-per-million is considered a safe threshold level), worse still, it is also not known exactly how much is being dumped, and what are the long term effects.

At this point, a number of critical questions arise, including —

1.  What is the legality of such spraying.

2.  Why do it? What are the reasons for Spraying; and

3.  Why hasn’t there been more prominent debate about this issue in world media.

1.  Legality

If your neighbour issues a noxious substance from his premises, including noise, vibrations, or wild animals, smoke or even toxic chemicals, you can sue them under what’s known as the “Tort of Nuisance”.

Similarly, if public corporations or individuals contaminate or poison you or your family or friends with radiation, toxins, pesticides or biological agents, OR act in a way which is simply “Reckless or negligent” as to your health causing you harm or injury, you can also sue them. Big Time! Think: Class Action.

In Australia, even if some farmer carries out a discrete localized spraying or “crop-dusting” of a small area for farming purposes, there is a huge amount of compliance and paperwork to ensure that the dusting material does not escape from the area.

But, I find it VERY awkward to explain why full-sized, high altitude jets would have ANY purpose whatsoever in spraying ANY kind of aerosol into high altitudes. Over heavily populated cities. Clearly potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of people.

Such activities SHOULD have serious legal and liability repercussions upon any organisation who can be proved to be responsible for such spraying. After all, just look at the furore that people have raised in recent years over such issues as passive smoking, asbestos, the use of aspartame, mobile phone radiation, the EM (ElectroMagnetic) fields emanating from High-Tension Power lines causing cancer clusters, the use of fluoride in our drinking water, or even the increase in UV due to the destruction of the Ozone Layer by ChloroFluoroCarbons from refrigerants or domestic spray cans.

—>Next up …… Why are they doing it ?

2.  Why do it;  Reasons for spraying

Admittedly, I am NOT in that camp of folk who claim the more ‘far-out’ theories for why intentional spraying is occuring. The reader is entitled to draw their own conclusion and to hear all sides. I just present my research.

(a) That certain military or similar organisations are intentionally spraying the skies with contaminants or chemical aerosols; AND

(b) that the purpose for this aerosol spraying is one or more of —

1.   Climate Manipulation

2    Population Control

3.   Mind Control (as suggested by a ChemTrails documentary on the History Channel)

4.   Relating to Political or Military agendas linked to HAARP, including earthquakes and tsunamis

Ok… Let’s look a bit closer at these theories

1.   Climate Manipulation

—>Next up … Some of the more “out there” but still potentially plausible reasons for spraying.

2    Population Control

(as suggested by Alex Jones \and Lydia Mancini)  … <click on these links for some REAL eye-openers!>)

3.   Mind Control (as suggested by a ChemTrails documentary on the History Channel)

4.   Relating to Political or Military agendas linked to HAARP, including earthquakes and tsunamis

For example see this short 3 min excerpt from the History Channel

—>Next up …   The view from the agnostic side of the debate.

Debunkers

Note. There are, of course, debunkers out there who elicit contrary arguments to things like Chem-Trails and HAARP. For example, on Youtube, you will find AtheistAussie who makes a long (17 minute) semi-scientific explanation of the HAARP facility in the U.S. and its alleged capabilities. Click on http://youtu.be/5VAgR9KqiQM if you have the time.  I find that his explanation, though earnest and somewhat angry in its tone, suffers from only apparently relying on technical information issued on and by the HAARP website itself.

But for my purposes today, all I say is: “Isn’t it fun to speculate?”

3.  Why isn’t there more public debate?

Before considering the reasons, we must make the following assumptions about this chemical spraying —

(a)  that the chemicals are, in fact, being sprayed.

(b)  That such chemicals are EITHER completely benign, OR may be (to varying degrees) harmful as carcinogens, toxins, or chemical agents which affect the health or biology of humans plants or animals

IF THEY ARE BENIGN, then at minimum, it is necessary to make the spraying public, open proper public debate, and then undertake verifiable scientific studies that can demonstrate the short and long term effects of such massive spraying at high altitudes is not harmful to humans or to the ecosphere.

IF THE CHEMICALS ARE DANGEROUS, we must sift through the many alleged reasons / theories for this activity.

Question: Why hasn’t there been a more meaningful discussion of these issues by our politicians or in our media. Can we be sure that there are no health or weather effects from these chemicals – even if they ARE generally inoccuous when it exists in small parts per million? OR are we so heavily depended and invested, now, in the aviation industry that people will not quarter a debate on whether it would be better to use bullet trains, instead of airliners to get people from one part of the planet, to another?

Ultimately, My view is that (at this stage) it is the SECRECY surrounding the spraying itself AND the automatic ridicule of proponents of this topic (Yes, even by supposedly objective people like YOU! Dear reader) that may be the deepest failure of perception here. These automatic ingrained prejudices – which are really at heart based on each citizen’s deeply vested fear of their own peer-ridicule – which ultimately seems to inhibit real progress in understanding this topic.

Only when this apathy is eroded, or overcome completely can there be a meaningful debate by responsible authorities who we elect to govern us all.