Contrails? Like the condensation that happens when water vapor adheres to CO2 particles from plane exhaust?! Cloud seeding puts out similar airborne particles that help clouds form so we can get rain/snowfall. How can the government be incompetent and also pull off a conspiracy that every airline, plane engineer, manufacturer, and pilot would have to know about but keep it a secret? 🤨
Not sure what you’re referring to - the database I put together is drawing on official government sources like NOAAs weather modification projects database. Depending on what they’re doing government can be both incompetent and fairly competent. For instance, they’re quite competent at violence, since that’s how they hold onto power and they practice it a lot.
I think the implications of what you shared was hinting at some malicious intent. I understand where that bias comes from since I would somewhat describe myself as the libertarian. But I’m pretty sure all this data is referring to experiments in cloud seeding. As I have mentioned, clouds are formed by water vapor condensing on small airborne particles. There are government funded projects where they fly up and put out, or more commonly, shoot up these airborne particles to encourage cloud formation in hopes of rain/snowfall.
The government is good at violence but it seems more rational that the government would just approach people with guns than engage in a slow poisoning of all people ever since planes took the sky.
Yes, a lot of the documented projects are weather modification, but there's a lot beyond that, too. Research Project 112 and what's been declassified about what the military did there, or Operation Seaspray. It's all on the chemtrailmonitor.com site.
For what it's worth, I don't think the government is trying to slowly poison everyone with chemtrails. I've not really seen evidence of that.
Specific illegal military experiments have done this, literally on purpose, but these have been relatively limited in scope.
I think most of the poisoning that is happening is through the food supply (glyphosate, phytoestrogens, biosolids), over-prescription of medication (big Pharma), etc.
How much of that is deliberate is up for debate. I think a good portion of it is. When you look at who owns the food companies and the pharmaceutical companies, and the relationship between bad food > health problems > medication; then it's not really a surprise.
The key point with putting all of this data together is less about trying to deduce what the government's purpose for the various programs is (I'm sure there are many different ones).
To me what matters is whether consent has been obtained, and in every one of these cases, it has not. Nobody is asking the people on the ground, "Hey, are you okay with us spraying chemicals over your head to alter the weather?"
When the military sprayed bacteria in the NYC subways and airports, nobody asked if the people exposed were okay with it. They didn't even bother informing the local government.
This is psychopaths committing crimes and unethically experimenting on human beings. Nobody should be okay with this.
I think consent is important for sure, at risk of using an ideological fallacy I am wondering where the line is between holding companies accountable for CO2 emissions/pollution (which alters the climate, weather, and hurts people’s health) that the people did not consent to and the government cloud seeding in hopes of rain/snowfall for farming and municipal water? In both cases there is no consent but regulating companies on their emissions is not a libertarian position.
Yes government has done and most definitely still does shady things. Transparency is extremely important and neither government nor businesses should do things at the expense of us. We the people should have better tools or set in stone rights to sue and legally hold these large entities responsible for their violations on our lives, liberties, and property. But the science behind contrails and cloud seeding is pretty clear, though.
Contrails? Like the condensation that happens when water vapor adheres to CO2 particles from plane exhaust?! Cloud seeding puts out similar airborne particles that help clouds form so we can get rain/snowfall. How can the government be incompetent and also pull off a conspiracy that every airline, plane engineer, manufacturer, and pilot would have to know about but keep it a secret? 🤨
Not sure what you’re referring to - the database I put together is drawing on official government sources like NOAAs weather modification projects database. Depending on what they’re doing government can be both incompetent and fairly competent. For instance, they’re quite competent at violence, since that’s how they hold onto power and they practice it a lot.
I think the implications of what you shared was hinting at some malicious intent. I understand where that bias comes from since I would somewhat describe myself as the libertarian. But I’m pretty sure all this data is referring to experiments in cloud seeding. As I have mentioned, clouds are formed by water vapor condensing on small airborne particles. There are government funded projects where they fly up and put out, or more commonly, shoot up these airborne particles to encourage cloud formation in hopes of rain/snowfall.
The government is good at violence but it seems more rational that the government would just approach people with guns than engage in a slow poisoning of all people ever since planes took the sky.
Yes, a lot of the documented projects are weather modification, but there's a lot beyond that, too. Research Project 112 and what's been declassified about what the military did there, or Operation Seaspray. It's all on the chemtrailmonitor.com site.
For what it's worth, I don't think the government is trying to slowly poison everyone with chemtrails. I've not really seen evidence of that.
Specific illegal military experiments have done this, literally on purpose, but these have been relatively limited in scope.
I think most of the poisoning that is happening is through the food supply (glyphosate, phytoestrogens, biosolids), over-prescription of medication (big Pharma), etc.
How much of that is deliberate is up for debate. I think a good portion of it is. When you look at who owns the food companies and the pharmaceutical companies, and the relationship between bad food > health problems > medication; then it's not really a surprise.
The key point with putting all of this data together is less about trying to deduce what the government's purpose for the various programs is (I'm sure there are many different ones).
To me what matters is whether consent has been obtained, and in every one of these cases, it has not. Nobody is asking the people on the ground, "Hey, are you okay with us spraying chemicals over your head to alter the weather?"
When the military sprayed bacteria in the NYC subways and airports, nobody asked if the people exposed were okay with it. They didn't even bother informing the local government.
This is psychopaths committing crimes and unethically experimenting on human beings. Nobody should be okay with this.
I think consent is important for sure, at risk of using an ideological fallacy I am wondering where the line is between holding companies accountable for CO2 emissions/pollution (which alters the climate, weather, and hurts people’s health) that the people did not consent to and the government cloud seeding in hopes of rain/snowfall for farming and municipal water? In both cases there is no consent but regulating companies on their emissions is not a libertarian position.
Yes government has done and most definitely still does shady things. Transparency is extremely important and neither government nor businesses should do things at the expense of us. We the people should have better tools or set in stone rights to sue and legally hold these large entities responsible for their violations on our lives, liberties, and property. But the science behind contrails and cloud seeding is pretty clear, though.