Got to say I'm pretty unconvinced.
What would you say if you were told that airplanes were regularly spraying toxic aerosols in the skies above every major region of the world? That is exactly what a group of protestors were claiming outside of the annual American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) meeting that was held in San Diego from February 18-22. However, inside the convention center was a different story. The scientists gathered to discuss the “plausibility” of implementing various Geo-engineering campaigns throughout the world, all under the guise that the Earth has a man-made global warming problem that can be solved in-part by spraying aerosol aluminum and other particles into the sky to block the sun. When these scientists were asked about the possibility of existing aerosol programs; they stated that no aerosol spraying programs have been implemented to date. A little confused? Why would protestors gather outside of a meeting making claims that world-wide aerosol programs were under way if scientist were only now discussing the possibility of implementing these programs? Could it be that one of these groups is being deceived?
Why indeed? Probably because 'protestors' don't always have all the right facts, especially where green issues are involved. I am pretty familiar with the AAAS and also with the geo-engineering projects undergoing research as a tool against climate change. I was recently involved in a participatory activity from the UK research councils about the main geo-engineering methods being considered of which cloud seeding is certainly one.
Could it be that scientific data and studies are being used to implement pre-mature full-scale SAG programs with-out the knowledge of the top scientists who are involved with the research?
I think probably not. In general governments and defence agencies are more inclined to ignore scientific research than prematurely implement it. All the research into methods such as this are publically available in the scientific literature, pros and cons and effects. Besides which, governments are on the whole entirely apathetic about climate change so why would they be trying to implement one of the considered tools before science has reached any kind of consensus? Maybe this is something that is happening and is sinister, but it's not geo-engineering.
Now, here is a real doctor
and then:
I can certainly verify the detrimental health affects from chemtrails in my practice.
I have to ask, what kind of "real" doctor does not know the difference between affect and effect?
And how can he verify that the things he is observing are down to chemtrails? Has been up there and analysed the vapour?
Another of the articles also talks about these vapour trails mysteriously lasting more than 20 minutes. Well living on the flight path to Manchester airport I see many vapour trails that last more than 20 minutes! Our sky is permanently scarred by trails at many different altitudes.
So my considered opinion is that whilst I DO think defence agencies get up to certain mischief (history proves this), I don't think geo-engineering and cloud seeding will have anything to do with it. (Cloud seeding has been understood and practised for a long time anyway.) Planes are highly polluting. What's to say that if there are THAT many going over as some of those pictures show it isn't just respiratory effects from normal trails? Kids get asthma from living by busy roads after all.
