Well, Dr.know [sic] you don't appear to "know" much. There is extensive evidence regarding the "seeding" of our atmosphere that goes back to the '40s and '50s. There have been a number of studies on the contents of the Chemtrails. To disregard [this] is to show just how much your [sic] don't "know." —Leah
Oooh, evidence! And studies! Well, that certainly changes things. How could one possibly argue with studies and evidence?
Now, I understand that, as a crazy person, you're probably too busy shouting at ducks to worry too much about how the great questions of science get decided. Perhaps you assume that in intellectual debates, one side shows up with evidence, while the other just stands there picking its butt. Not so! These days, everybody's got evidence.
Big Oil has evidence global warming is a hoax. The tobacco lobby has studies on how cigarettes don't cause cancer. Hell, there's a guy on the Internet who can prove Belgium never existed. So the fact that you can find material to support your prejudices doesn't sway me.
Look, sometimes people get sick and we can't explain why. And inevitably, we then use that ignorance as an excuse to blame whomever happens to be pissing us off at the time. In 1750, it was witches with their black magic. In 1950 it was the Commies with their fluoridated water. Now it's the feds with their chemtrails. Is anybody seeing a pattern here?
Maybe someday we'll discover the whole phenomenon has been one of those culturally determined syndromes, like the Algonquian wendigo, or the unfortunately named Asian "penis panics."
Whatever. I still maintain a chemtrail conspiracy would require the federal government to display precisely those qualities it most conspicuously lacks. Subtlety, discretion, competence? I'm sorry, you must be thinking of the KGB.