posted on Feb, 12 2015 @ 01:02 PM
a reply to: Petros312
Correct. Nobody here is saying that planes do not produce pollution, NOR are people saying that the cloud cover caused by persistent contrails is not
a potential problem. Heck, there have been studies done for several decades now about the potential effects of increased cloud cover caused by
persistent contrails and the proliferation of air travel.
However, the common "conspiracy theory " about chemtrails is this:
Contrails and chemtrails are different.
Contrails last only a short time and cannot spread out. Chemtrails are different because they are not made the same way a contrail is made.
CONtrails may be the mostly water-ice byproduct of high altitude flight, but CHEMtrails are made secretly and nefariously, and are special chemicals
sprayed into the air from special tanks, and are sprayed for the strict purpose of putting those chemicals into the air.
Also, Chemtrails are a new phenomenon. The puffy white trails from planes never used to be long, persist, and spread out prior to the 1990s. Before
that, all trails were short and short-lived.
Again, I don't disagree that contrails can affect weather, and possibly affect the climate. I also don't doubt that someone could intentionally make
persistent chemtrails with the idea of creating a cloud cover.
However, first show me the evidence that the planes in the sky ARE intentionally trying to create a cloud cover (rather than just an airline flying
from here to there, creating a persistent contrail as the do so, but incidentally rather than with special intent).
Secondly, what does that have to do with the idea that Chemtrails are different than contrails? I agree that additional contrail cloud cover created
from proliferation of air travel is an issue that should be discussed, as should the greenhouse gasses produced by planes, cars, and factories, by why
are we confusing the issue by talking about "chemtrails"?
edit on 2/12/2015 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)