Twice the skin cancer and half the vitamin D of regular sunlight; what's not to like? The average cancer patient generates $350,000.00 in revenue before they die prematurely; buy stock while you still can.

MSDS info a couple potential sulfates used:

Aluminum Sulfate, Hydrated:

Routes of Entry: Inhalation. Ingestion. Toxicity to Animals: Acute oral toxicity (LD50): >9000 mg/kg [Rat]. Chronic Effects on Humans: DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY: Classified Reproductive system/toxin/female, Reproductive system/toxin/male [SUSPECTED]. May cause damage to the following organs: the reproductive system, mucous membranes, skin, eyes, Urinary System. Other Toxic Effects on Humans: Hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of inhalation (lung irritant). Slightly hazardous in case of ingestion. Special Remarks on Toxicity to Animals: Not available. Special Remarks on Chronic Effects on Humans: May affect genetic material (mutagenic). May cause adverse reproductive effects based on animal test data Special Remarks on other Toxic Effects on Humans: Acute Potential Health Effects: Skin: Causes skin irritation, particularly if moisture is present. Symptoms include redness, itching, and pain Eyes: Causes eye irritation. Symptoms include redness and pain. Inhalation: Causes mouth and respiratory tract irritation. Symptoms may include coughing, shortness of breath. It may cause airway constrictin in rare instances. Symptoms are usually transient. Ingestion: May cause irritation to the gastrointestinal tract. Symptoms may include cramping, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea. Ingestion also produces a feeling of dryness and puckering of the mucous membranes of the mouth and throat. It may affect behavior/central nervous system and cause ataxia and seizures. High blood concentrations of aluminum may cause aluminum-induced encephalopathy with confusion, lethargy, respiratory depression, cognitive impairment, dysarthria, asterixis, seizure, coma. It may also affect the liver. Individuals with renal failure may more readily accumulate toxic levels of aluminum which can result in encephalopathy and seizures. Chronic Potential Health Effects: Skin: Repeated or prolonged skin contact may cause irritation, especially if moisture is present. Ingestion: Repeated or prolonged ingestion may affect metabolism, urinary system, blood (changes in serum composition - e.g. TP, bilirubin, cholesterol), skeletal system, and brain (degenerative changes). High blood concentrations of aluminum may cause aluminum to be deposited in the bones. Accumulation of aluminum in the bone appears to reduce the positive effects of vitamin D adn may prevent calcium deposition into the bones. The prevention of calcium deposition leads to the return of the calcium to the blood. This may cause bone/skeletal abnormalties, osteomalacia, painful joints. The elevated serum calcium levels in turn inhibit the release of parathyroid hormone by the parathyroid glands.

Barium Sulfate:

The substance is toxic to lungs, mucous membranes. Repeated or prolonged exposure to the substance can produce target organs damage.

Strontium Sulfate:

Slightly hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of ingestion, of inhalation.

Special Remarks on other Toxic Effects on Humans: Acute Potential Health Effects: Skin: May cause skin irritation. Eyes: Dust may cause eye irritation. Inhalation: Dust may cause respiratory tract irritation. Ingestion: May cause gastrointestinal tract irritation. The toxicological properties of this substance have not been fully investigated

well that clears it up why children in industrial areas are chronically ill, does it?

All probably true and all very scary. Now explain how this relates to chemtrails (if you believe they are related, that is).

In Madison, WI, I've documented via photography and video the spraying of some substance that, as a scientist, I can only conclude must be basically a micronized powder of a solid compound. I say micronized because it appears to take an a extremely long time to settle out of the upper layers of the atmosphere where it is initially deposited by jets. And solid because it doesn't seem to diffuse at a rate that a vapor would, it just kind of slowly builds into a large amorphous cloud, presumably largely water vapor with the sprayed substance acting as a nucleus for the condensation. It always happens to obscure the sun. It has become obvious that this is a global warming experiment.

I don't doubt that you may have been the subject of a geo-engineering experiment. Many governments including the USA and UK have lost their moral compass and treat their subjects as a commodity to be exploited or a problem to be eradicated. Their willingness to lie to us and cheat us has been amply demonstrated in the last year by Julian Assange and Edward Snowden. Frankly, I wouldn't trust either government further than I could throw a fit. My issue is not with geo-engineering but with allegedly chemtrails. Simply that. I am trying to break this bait and switch attitude which chemtrail believers share. They like to use the words geo-engineering and chemtrails interchangeably, but while there's plenty of proof for geo-engineering that doesn't make it evidence for chemtrails. Polluted ground samples suggest that something is going on, but it's a leap beyond logic to say that these contaminants are coming from chemtrails. I will only accept evidence of chemical pollution coming from chemtrails when the sample is taken directly from the plume coming out the back of the aircraft. The reason it hasn't happened before now is that there are no secret chemicals coming out of the back of commercial airliners. The white lines you see across the sky, no matter how many there are of them or how long they last, have nothing to do with geo-engineering and are simply the result of burning hydrocarbon fuel in a cold damp atmosphere. They can be recreated on demand in laboratory conditions, and they can be predicted with complete accuracy just by looking at a weather report. In short, they are a red herring.

Thanks for your input, I will keep my mind open and look into some of what you have indicated here.

And thank you. That was beginning to think there was nobody around here who could string a sentence together without resorting to cheap shots and personal insults. If you want to explore 'my' side of the chemtrail/contrail argument here are some websites to peruse. Make of them what you will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Y97OK6qEIz0

http://contrailscience.com/aerodynamic-and-rainbow-contrails

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/atmosphere/q0111.shtm

http://depletedcranium.com/the-realities-of-contrails

And what real airborne geoengineering actually involves:

http://englishrussia.com/2013/05/13/moving-clouds-away

It's like these people have no regards for gravity or after effects. Not to derail op's post but I stumbled across this and quite frankly I am mind fucked. This guy has done the research himself, wrote out and documented with images attributing morgellons disease to chemtrails. Patients describe it as an irritation beneath the skin, lesions etc as a result from microscopic fibers, he's also saying

"The alkalizing of water and any water based air breathing organism allows for increased storage and even the creation of dc current, especially when mixed with other components / chemicals. I proved this in myself with only a pretty good digital volt meter. I measure my voltage constantly by just wetting my fingers and squeezing the probes." " I've observed in my jars that were electrolyzed that the growth of what I've learned are called "synthetic model organisms" (or artificial life forms) is greatly enhanced and increased. The fibers they call Morgellons increase in about 6 mo. to almost visible with the naked eye or magnifying glass."

He also states the fibers/synthetic organisms are growing by assembling vaporized plastic or silicone

"One plausible explanation of how the flat ribbon like fibers seem to grow even on glass is that these synthetic model organisms can assemble plastic components from the air, water or wherever present and use dc current as part of their assembly technique, or they are feeding off the silicone in the glass or both. It's been proven that plants extract most of their mineral content from the air not from the soil as once was believed. Nano-tech is designed to mimic the things that man has discovered about how nature works, assembles itself etc. http://www.morgellonsexposed.com/Chemtrails&Morgellons.htm

That article is hysterical claptrap. I defy you or anybody else to get a voltage reading just by holding the probes of a multi meter. What you will get is a RESISTANCE reading when you switch the multimeter to the Ohms scale, at which point you have created a primitive lie detector. Then the writer goes on to claim she can see the actual DNA strand in a 'Morgellon' fibre using an ordinary microscope. It requires an electron scanning microscope to see DNA. And let me assure you that plants do not get most of their mineral content from the air. Plants are not even able to metabolise nitrogen out of the air, and need it supplied in soluble form to the roots.

There's nothing chemtrail related about it at all. This article is about geo-engineering and doesn't mention chemtrails once, understandably because they don't exist except in the minds of paranoid conspiracy theorists.

That's why I put "chemtrails" in quotes. Language is a tool, but it has woeful limitations. Chemtrails is a term that I think ultimately obscures what an intelligent observer can see is really happening by the charged emotional content of a "buzzword." However, I referenced this term in the title here because I think it could attract viewership of the link itself, though ultimately I just want to discuss what is really happening, whatever term is most relevant.

Not really related to the topic at hand, but, may I ask what your interest in the subject is? You seem to be an intelligent and well read person in the field of science and obviously have some good critical thinking skills.

I'm not attacking you or calling you a shill, it's more genuine interest.

I see you often argue against chemtrails, here and in other threads. I'm not decrying this, I think it's great for the sake of discussion to have a strong, yet reasonable opposing voice.

For myself, I am a trained pilot (not professional), I took meteorology. When I see these planes fly across at very high altitude and leave a trail that persists for an hour or more and eventually spreads out into cloud it makes me wonder. If it doesn't for you that's ok.

I guess I would like to know why would you not consider the possibility? We know that other forms of weather manipulation are being used around the globe. Why couldn't this be one of the techniques? If it's a matter of consent of the public, I would think it's pretty obvious that the majority of the public would object to spraying the skies, so it's done in secret, for our supposed benefit.

Anyways, just know I appreciate your input, if not simply for the sake of discussion.

Thank you very much for your comments. I triy to put forward a reasoned argument and back it up with facts, but sometimes I am up against people whose opinion is intractable and whose only response is to make ad hominem attacks. So far this week I think I have had three of them banned for insulting or racist comments. That's cool by me. If I act as a lightning rod to attract the loonies then it's all the more fun. And that's where my interest in the subject lies. I enjoy debating, and I enjoy winding up the opposition to the point where they break the rules and lose the argument.

Why chemtrails? My Facebook friends tend to be hippy new-age types and occasionally one of them will post some bullshit about chemtrails, and I feel obliged to explain the facts and put them straight. And that is fun too. It forces me to structure my thoughts, do my research, and hone my presentation until I can slap any dumbass conspiracy theorist back into the tinfoil lined bunker they emerged from. And I do consider the possibility that I may be wrong. I was an investigative journalist when I was younger and I am constantly checking and rechecking what I believe to be true by watching or reading anything which challenges it. And I'm willing to change my mind if that challenge is upheld. Another part of me is slightly sad that people devote so much energy fighting something which does not exist. It's the pathos of Don Quixote tilting at windmills, I guess. They are passionate people, and that energy would be so far better used fighting the real issues like government corruption and global warming.

I have actually come up with my own conspiracy theory about chemtrails. I don't believe it for one moment, but it's just as valid as anybody else's conspiracy theory about chemtrails, so here it is: What if chemtrail theory' is part of a disinformation campaign to take the focus off geo-engineering by trivialising it. Some chemtrail believers insist on using the words 'chemtrail' and 'geo-engineering' interchangeably, as if they are the same thing. Are they the real government shills? They conflate the very real issue of geo-engineering with the bullshit surrounding chemtrails and their alleged doomsday uses. As a result, geo-engineering gets rubbished as just another woowoo fantasy for the tinfoil hat brigade. Some aspects of geo-engineering are very troubling - who knows what the long-term effects of filling the upper atmosphere with chemicals could be? What better way of diverting the public attention than by pointing to an annoying but harmless contrails coming off commercial airliners and saying "that's geo-engineering", while the real dirty work is done by specially modified military aircraft at night.

It's nice to write for once for somebody who wants to hear what I have to say, rather than someone who puts their fingers in their ears and calls me a shill. Thanks.

P.S.I don't actually type this shit out – I just gabble into a microphone and it appears magically on my screen. Cool huh?

Voice to text, very cool, I gotta get me one of those.

As to your chemtrail theory that it is a distraction from other issues/real geo-engineering, I have considered this possibility too. When considering controversial information, I always ask myself, why is this information in the public domain? Snowden is the perfect example of this.

In my mind, it is possible that it is indeed happening. However the way I justify this belief is that, the majority of contrails are just that, contrails. That said, from personal observation, I have been able to determine that in certain weather conditions, they do appear to either 'trail just in front of low pressure fronts or early in the morning on days when the sky is clear, which eventually turns into a (thin) blanket of overcast.

The justification for this belief is indirect. It is partially based off other's observations, some legitimate, some not, (separating wheat from chaff) but also from the patents for HAARP. Herein lies my conundrum. IF chemtrails are real, are they actually being used for weather modification, if they are, are these trails different from ones being used by the military to enhance communications or extend HAARP's range. (I know there are other stations similar to HAARP around the world, but I hold it up because it is likely the best known. In the HAARP patents, as I'm sure you've heard before, it calls on well for lack of a better term chemtrails spraying Barium and Aluminum to extend range or better interact with the atmosphere.

I guess what I'm saying is, it's likely that much of what is photographed and talked about may be simply contrails, it's hard to tell if not observed over time, which is really the only indicator a layman can have as to the composition and behavior of a contrail.

In certain circumstances I am wary however. I have personally observed an aircraft emitting a trail cross over from a low pressure front to a high pressure front with varying humidity, and yet the 'trail remained distinctly the same in thickness and plume, where by comparison there was another aircraft flying along (admittedly at lower altitude) but as it crossed the barrier between the fronts the trail thinned and faded rapidly. I remember that day vividly, I think it was the day that in mind I started to take contrails/chemtrails more seriously, because at the start, I was very skeptical, like you.

We are almost entirely in agreement. As for your unusual contrails, check out this page which answers many questions about apparent discrepancies in the 'natural contrail' theory. For instance, why you may have contrails coming of aircraft flying in one direction, but not others on a different heading.

For sure I always enjoy interesting atmospheric effects. I find them fascinating. I tend to think of the air in a similar way to a fluid, or perhaps the ocean. Very dense at great depth, and at a 'lesser' atmospheric of pressure higher up due to the weight of all the liquid pressing downwards. Some of the effects you can do simply by manipulating air are fascinating.. It gets really interesting when you start getting into vortexes and then apply sacred geometry such as the golden spiral, or perhaps compare it to one pole of an electromagnet with the tip of the vortex being formed at the center of the pole.. Of course we can scale this up and apply it to anything from Tornados to the movement of galaxies.

I tend to keep my eyes to the sky a lot. You'd be surprised what you see. I've seen what I would describe as UFOs on three separate occasions now, one of which was this past weekend, although this one was different from the first two

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I try to keep an open mind about what I see with my own eyes, and what I read or watch.

It's easy to fall into the trap of confirmation bias – only ever reading or watching information which confirms what you already believe. I avoid that by watching or reading anything on the subject, regardless of its perspective. Sometimes, however, I feel justified in excluding an entire source such as geoengineeringwatch.com because I know what they present will be hysterical unscientific rubbish. So I say, read everything and accept nothing until you have built up a picture of both sides of the argument.

[deleted]

Why you need to call me at twat to make your point? What makes you think I didn't understand what was meant by 'shade'? This article is about geo-engineering. This is done using modified aircraft like these or with rockets or artillery. It is not done using secret tanks and spraying equipment on commercial airliners, therefore the contrails coming off commercial airliners are not plumes of chemicals - they are simply artificial clouds of ice.

See the problem is, i live next to an airport. I watch planes go in and out all day long, funny thing is NONE of them leave these "artificial clouds of ice" that just happen hang around and slowly spread out turning blue skies grey EXCEPT for the ones flying back and forth making a grid all over the sky, no where near the in bound-out bound flight paths mind you. Im the WRONG person to try this bullshit on, take it elsewhere.

If I travel outside London to the west to Reading I reach the point where the contrails end. This is the point where aircraft coming from America to Heathrow descend below the altitude needed to create contrails. The only contrails you will see over London are at high altitude and are created by aircraft in transit.

What's your evidence that commercial airliners or jets aren't equipped to spray geo-engineering particles too, it seems highly practical to cover a large distance. Also, contrails don't explain why I see large plumes of smokey cloud and iridescent reflections low in the atmosphere left by aircraft on a hot summers day in Australia.

If commercial jetliners are being loaded up with toxic chemicals to spray behind them as they fly then it involves a conspiracy of hundreds of thousands of people who own, fly, refuel, maintain, and design aeroplanes. With all those people and all this time do you think that not one person would stand up and blow the whistle? How how many tons of chemicals do you think it would take to create a 20 mile long trail across the sky? Where is it stored on the aircraft? How is it dispersed? Who pays for it? There are aircraft graveyards in Arizona with hundreds of scrapped commercial airliners. If they were fitted with secret spraying equipment it would be easy to spot, or there would be similar inexplicable spaces in them from where the equipment was removed. No evidence like that exists. It's difficult if not impossible to prove a negative, but the burden of proof lies with the people making the extraordinary claims. I don't have to prove they're not chemtrails (although I can demonstrate that they are a natural phenomenon), chemtrail believers have to prove they are. The simple truth is that there are too many commercial airliners in the sky. The last two decades have seen an explosion in cheap air travel. Companies like Boeing and BAe want to put as many as they can in the air with no regard to what that does the ecology. 30 years ago you might see one or two contrails which dissipated to nothing. Now, that same sky may contain a dozen or more contrails and they dissipate to form a white haze which covers the entire sky. It's bad because it cuts out sunlight, but it's not poisonous.

I think you'll find an explanation for the perpetual haze over Australia here

"(although I can demonstrate that they are a natural phenomenon)"

you can or you can't?

"If commercial jetliners are being loaded up with toxic chemicals to spray behind them as they fly then it involves a conspiracy of hundreds of thousands of people who own, fly, refuel, maintain, and design aeroplanes. With all those people and all this time do you think that not one person would stand up and blow the whistle?"

This is what a conspiracy is and there are plenty accounts of pilots standing up to this sort of thing.

"30 years ago you might see one or two contrails which dissipated to nothing. Now, that same sky may contain a dozen or more contrails and they dissipate to form a white haze which covers the entire sky. It's bad because it cuts out sunlight, but it's not poisonous."

That's naive to believe more contrails = white haze, water vapor just does not spread out like that, I'm also talking about when these trails are left low enough in the atmosphere that there would be no condensation trail behind the air craft at all. Your assumption that it is not poisonous is ridiculous too, you were just mentioning in an earlier comment that you wanted samples as proof that they are actually poisonous chemicals, You are biased to believe that chemtrails need to be proved yet you assume there is no poisons without doing your own investigation. There are plenty of documented samples of poisonous chemicals, they take their samples directly from the rain http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te_FOsKL_5Q

Also, there are no recent wild fires where I live

That's naive to believe more contrails = white haze, water vapor just does not spread out like that

It is not water vapour. Water vapour is invisible. What you are looking at is ice, which is why it lasts so long.

when these trails are left low enough in the atmosphere

It is very hard, sometimes impossible, to gauge altitude unless you have a reference point such as being able to see the body of the aircraft. Having said that, if you have genuinely observed aircraft at low to medium altitudes leaving trails behind them then I offer no explanation. I'm not here to try to explain every phenomena in the sky as a natural event. All I am saying is that the high altitude trails stretching from horizon to horizon, often forming criss-cross patterns, can be adequately explained by science and meteorology.

There are plenty of documented samples of poisonous chemicals

There may well be. That doesn't mean they necessarily came from chemtrails. Geo-engineering is taking place all over the world these days. Who knows what shit they are pumping into the atmosphere. Airborne pollution does not prove chemtrails, it just proves somebody is polluting the air.

there are plenty accounts of pilots standing up to this sort of thing

Really? Can you back up that claim with any evidence.

You are biased to believe that chemtrails need to be proved

Of course I am. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. My claim is that contrails are natural and I can offer all the scientific evidence I need to prove that this is true. If you believe they are something else then show me the evidence.