Which means you are indifferent to logical points. Or to relevant expertise. The key logical point in this matter is the question of evidence and even of definition. No one can state if there is any visible difference between a "chemtrail" and a contrail (at least no one has in any exchange I have had with them). There is a widespread ignorance over what contrails are and how they appear. There is a failure to understand that speculation and proposal are not evidence of activity. There are hoax videos being touted purporting to show actual chemtrail installations (I have seen such a video, and it was a thoroughgoing misrepresentation of something completely different.) There is ignorance of the fact that 52,000 tons of meteoric matter settles to Earth every year, which is an obvious source of heavy metals in the atmospheric environment. There is studied indifference to the REAL "chemtrails" produced by space launches, highly visible, and with indisputable inorganic chemical components.

Clever twist of words, but trucks are not airliners, whose basic structure has to be modified to support any spraying operations. There is no analogy, Airlines are weight-conscious and would be non-competitive if they were trying to carry extra weight for the same passenger load and range requirements as their competitors. Nobody could afford to do it and remain competitive.

I don't give any respect to people who are ignorant, yet behave like they know what they are talking about. I suppose that is Not Nice of me to be that way, but at least I do not pelt people with name-calling, which seems to be how the intellectually unprepared often end up in dialogue with me. So, if you want to talk about technical details, I am your man and I am always ready to clarify or explain what is going on.

If you are willing to believe without evidence, you don't have logical standards that are worth boasting about.