Maybe you need to clean your glasses?

No, I think my vision is just fine.

How can you dismiss weather modification when Congress has allotted money to it, Edward Teller proposed it over 20 years ago with a blueprint on how to do it and what chemicals should be used? Do you deny it's even happening?

I do not 'deny its happening'. I deny that there is reasonable evidence sufficient enough to convince anyone that it is happening. That difference is key. That a notable physicist wrote a paper 20 years ago with a believable plan for some project is not surprising. Most of the great thinkers of our age have written proposals for this that or the other. That doesn't make it true.

These chemicals have been found through tests conducted in areas sprayed by these planes. How can you dismiss the hundred thousand pictures on a hundred different websites, along with the reseach?

First, I am aware of no hard data of the type you indicate. I am aware of a hodgepodge of largely contradictory logically inconsistent claims, usually badly duct-taped together with some sort of 'theory' that includes space based lasers zapping away and enormous magnetic fields agitating particles of what amounts to 'unobtanium'- all via mechanisms that make no sense whatsoever. IE- are not mechanisms that well known conventional physics allows as even possible, much less possible to perform 'covertly'.

I am aware of asinine, stupid, moronic propositions that do not even pass the smell test. Even assuming that 'weather modification' was possible via spraying chemicals out the back of jets, here is what would be required for the quantities of material to be dispensed:

• EITHERThe dedication of nearly all military aircraft to continuous around-the-clock operations OR co-opting most if not all civilian aircraft OR A shadow Fleet of aircraft, vast in number, manufactured, purchased, distributed and operated all off the books.
• All the people in all walks of life (10s of thousands) necessary not only to manage such an operation, but to do so in a way that is kept 'secret' every day, by all of them.
• All of those people would have to be paid, off the books, and given reasonable cover stories.
• The procurement of metric tones of rare materials, which would have to be manufactured, distributed 'off the books' again by people who are themselves working 'off the books'.
• The above would have to be done by the same government that can not manage hurricaine disaster relief, successfully invade a third world country nor keep even teenage chinese internet savants out of our most secret and secure computer systems

Its asinine, stupid, childish fantasy to believe that this could be reasonably done without massive evidence of it being done existed. You seem to think that in a free society that a project nearly as large as the apollo space program could be hidden in plain sight. Furthermore, you would have to have hard documented evidence that it is being done, not just assertions and a few raving lunatics who say it is being done.

I grew up with blue skies. I know what natural contrails look like. I have been studying ths concept for 10 years now since it was introduced to me, and I finally saw them for the first time myslf in 2002. I know what they look like. To deny aerial spraying is going on, just like there is an actual ufo cover up is complete denial of the facts. It's your mindset and bias, and has nothing to do with the reality of both of these things hapening.

Now, this is precious to say the least. You know what 'natural' contrails look like? The ones mother nature intended all those millions of years ago when the jet engine evolved? And as jet engine technology has been revolutionized over the last 30 years and average speed of flight has altered and as climatic conditions have altered- you know what 'natural' contrails look like? This is preposterous. Not only is your claim absurd on the face, but its entirely subjective. I grew up under the same sky as you, stared up at the same contrails. Even if I were to say that 'contrails these days are different' (which I emphatically do not), there would be hundreds of reasonable causes for that, all of them far more reasonable than the hypothesis that some vast dark conspiracy is altering climate by 'OMG!!11CHeMtRAIlZ!!!11'.

This is stupid Lindy. I don;t have to respect it because you believe it. Nor do I owe you any respect for being silly, irresponsible and foolish enough to try to make other gullible people believe it. Snake oil kills people. Snake oil misleads people. This is snake oil.

Try to see it this way: Suppose I said that Jews were poisoning the water supply. Suppose I had a lot of silly nonsense dressed up as 'serious research' to back it. Suppose I cobbled together a bunch of foolish lonely people willing to lie to get attention. Suppose I dressed up my fantasy in 'sciency' sounding terms that smart educated literate people would see right through, but average folks on the street might be mislead by. They might be mislead by because it sounds like science, but its not. Suppose then I made enough people scared about this to start doing something about those jews poisoning the wells, despite the protestations of innocence by those jews?

Same shit, same snake oil, same pernicious crap rotting out the underpinnings of a rational literate society, different day. And I would say you are no better because you chose 'shadowy government conspracies' as the culprit than the jews. And it makes no difference that you devoutly believe your own drivel. I'm sure those in the middle age making the arguments about jews posioning wells devoutly believed their drivel.

You insist that you are a serious researcher yet you ultimately retreat to subjective non-empirical arguments such as these. You accuse those who question you of being small minded, of wearing blinders. Well, I call bullshit. On this, on you, on your attitude. I call bullshit on all those wishing to sell us back the demon haunted world we threw away with the enlightenment.