Recent public chemtrails debate show that we should not explain chemtrails with geoengineering, SRM, cloud seeding, nor aluminium theory. Against a denier, we should be using science.
I tried hard to find the original audio for this debate but I can only found a script for that debate that is posted at metabunk.
It is clear that in that debate, the chemtrails believer side is the one being defensive. I already predict this to happen. Geoengineering, SRM, cloud seeding and aluminium is a weak argument against chemtrails denier. This had been explained by previous article such as:
Chemtrails are not the same as geoengineering; the public has been hoodwinked!
Cloud Seeding VS. Chemtrails 101
Aluminium is not a potent Chemtrails Particle
More sulphate in the skies means more chemtrails
The use of science had been proven to be able to make chemtrails denier to be on defensive position:
Mick West, Owner of Contrailscience, lies once again. Please be aware!
It is sad that Dane Wigington and John Massaria do not address false claim made by Mick West:
Mick: Because, [laughs, pause], because it’s falling, basically. You’re looking at a very small thing. A jet plane’s contrail is very very large, if you imagine it heats up that thing, and it wasn’t just a simple cup of water, it was huge train load of water, and threw that up in the air, you would get cloud that would kind of hang around for a lot longer. There are also other reasons as well, the particles that form from….
This had already been explained again and again in other article in TheTruthDenied. It is sad that both chemtrails representative do not use science to deny this claim.
Science document deny this claim:
“Some of that water vapor comes from the air around the plane; and, some is added by the exhaust of the aircraft.”
Also another false claim:
Mick: … the air is full of particulate matter. Everywhere, even in the clouds or not in the clouds, there’s particulate matter everywhere, there’s no shortage of particulate matter. The stuff that comes out of the black of the plane helps the contrails to form a little bit, but if it was perfectly clean, if it was just spraying water out of the back of the plane, you’d still get a contrail, because there’s particulates in the atmosphere.
Contrails persistance definitely related by the number of particulate released by jet exhaust.
a collection of papers presented at the 14th International Conference on Nucleation and Atmospheric Aerosols, Helsinki, 26 – 30 August 1996.
“A series of experiments has been performed observing contrails formation of twin-angine jet aircraft (ATTAS-VFW 614 and Airbus A310-300) run with different sulfur containing fuels on the two engines at the same time. The fuel sulfur mass content was varied from 2 to 5500 ppm. The results suggest that contrails particles form mainly from soot particles. The higher the sulfur content the more the soot particles get activated as condensation neclei.”
Contrail and Cirrus Cloud Avoidance
“Cirrus clouds can evolve from spreading persistent contrails known as primary cirrus or contrail cirrus (2). Secondary cirrus occur due to locally increased soot and aerosol concentration, which might lead to the formation of cirrus clouds that would not form in the absence of air traffic (3; 4; 5).”
Keep in mind that the effect of double sun, halo around the sun or moon, white out, cirrus clouds cover the whole sky can be attributed to ice crystal, ice crystal that will easily form if there are nano particle floating in the sky. More nano particle in the sky will resulted to more dimming, more white out, more light refraction, etc. Floating nano particle is serious problem now, intentional of not this problem must be solved immediately.
A clear sky would not let contrails to form shadow, a phenomena that some people notice nowaday. Contrails shadow indicate something is covering the sky. Sulfur nano particle layer may have blue color. So it can easily fool people into believing that the sky is clear, when there is blue layer of transparent clouds.
There are dozens (can be more) of people who testify health problem because of chemtrails. I am certain that chemtrails produce real health problem because I have personally witness it myself and trying desperately to protect my family from the harm caused by chemtrails.
Even scientist consider contrails a problem. Contrails is not harmless, that is only exist in chemtrails denier circle. Some example of science concern for contrails:
Global warming: blaming the basic thing being living, ignoring the more visible one
Global Warming: What can we teach our children?
Why is it bad for sulfur dioxide to linger in the atmosphere?
Global weirding, violent weather & chemtrails
Stratospheric Phenomenon : What caused the winter blast?
I believe that it is better if we just call chemtrails as chemtrails and use solely fact. Against a chemtrails denier, it is best to avoid explaining chemtrails with geoengineering, cloud seeding, SRM, or aluminium. Make the other people acknowledge contrails as serious problem instead of trying to explain too many term. Sky should be blue. White sky is a bad sign. We should convince people that a white smoke coming from plane is sign of pollution. Debunker do their best to make contrails appear harmless. Make people realize this disinformation.