I did something similar with marijuana. Kept a notepad during my smoking sessions to capture fleeting thoughts, to see which ones made sense afterward. About half of them did. I did this repeatedly through my use of the weed.
"Ultimate" programmers? Actually, I doubt that there is much of a hierarchy, since the programming industry prides itself on a lack of structure in its activity, as being stodgy and time-consuming. (The same attitude that let the MCAS software murder people in the 737 MAX.) And, my own opinion is that they are too fascinated with their interests to be able to look at the situation from a larger perspective. Thus, they are seemingly constantly surprised at developments.
It is probably the wrong question to ask if A.I. can "work." Did Frankenstein's monster "work"? Did MCAS "work"? They worked, but not in ways anyone foresaw. First, they are probably deceiving themselves. Why would they want to anticipate they are on a path of failure? Not psychologically possible for someone who is obsessed with the beauty of their "baby." Blinded by pride? Indeed, they are True Believers.
The overlords are similarly incapable of seeing the bullshit, because they are playing out with human beings and national economies what the programmers are playing out with stimulus-response information mechanics. They are a natural pair, each willing to suspend recognition of truth in favor of their false dream. (My opinion.) I would say the common ethos between the overlords and the programmers is "We know better...and we can make it stick." A common degree of hauteur and amorality.
In short, your conclusion is correct. Where we might differ is that I see the problem being less intellectual and more psychological. The general public does not help by making all this popular because it is so tempting and "cool."
Prove that such a trail would be visible. All I have seen of cloud-seeding is either that is it only marginally visible or not visible at all. The "industry" around cloud-seeding is nothing compared to the industry of making airliners. I have all the means of stalking people and killing them. Does that make me a stalker and a killer? That's your logic.
So, then, why rejoice over Tennessee? You will see that the contrails will not cease and no airline will be indicted for them.
No, it wasn't commercial aircraft. Read your history. And it wasn't a program that was visible. The only "visible" program is firefighting, and there are lots of pictures of that---but it is also the wrong kind of system for what you are arguing. What is pathetic is your inability to realize that the proof of a case must entail a trail of causality of something real, not something that is purely fabulous ("chemtrail").
Because it is not going on in that industry. Should you take or care about the opinion of someone who has spent 4 decades in the industry and is conversant with the physics of contrails? All you are proving is that you don't want truthful information; you wan fantasy confirmation.
This "controlled, on-message" A.I. is ultimately untenable. Internal algorithmic harmony requires that it use logic and facts. Denials of either logic or facts to facilitate a lie is tantamount to a psychosis. To be fully under control of programming that latches it to lies will make it a clinically insane process.
We got a small taste of what this can cause, in the behavior of the MCAS software that crashed two 737 MAX airliners, fighting the control of the pilots in order to commit homicide (the only possible outcome of continuous and accumulating orders to pitch down despite pilot input to the contrary).
Answer: they won't. The contrails will continue (not "chemtrails").
They are only contrails. Look at where Illinois is situated and then look at a map of major air traffic routes. You can't have any reasonable expectation that they would not occur.
A ban is the only way to prohibit the use of anything even though there is no provable harm from using it.
And it was also finally determined not to be caused by rain, but by beds of conifer needles. An on-the-ground chemical reaction from pure rainwater.
Tell your friend that aerosols were not banned; it was chloronated hydrocarbon gases used as refrigerants and pressurants.
I predict no one will be charged under this law, as there are no criminals...and contrails will continue.
Right off the bat, you misidentify the past actions. They conducted dispersal experiments, not biological or chemical warfare operations. Their tests were indicative, but weather conditions greatly affected the dispersal patterns (as one might expect). Making the claim that "chemtrails" are being performed in a massive program is not credible, for reasons of expense, futility, logistics, and lack of physical evidence.
Back to the opening: the dispersal experiments did not involve chemical or biological agents (out of concern for the population). If you want to bring in the subject of covid 19, that did not involve any infection mechanism of this sort.
And, although covid 19 was dastardly, the commission of one crime is not evidence of the commission of a different crime. All you are doing is impeaching the character of the current power strucure, but suspicion is not proof.
I am stubborn because there is no EVIDENCE that "chemtrails" exist in fact or are the product of a vast program. The concern is ALL based on primitive ignorance of what contrails are and how they are formed. You are basing your logic on the fallacy of "because it could be so, it must be so."
Which comes nowhere close to establishing that anything is actually happening. All you have is a bad past record and paranoia.
Do you take the attitude that it is possible to rely on the state of Tennessee's legal prohibition against "chemtrails", but it is not possible to rely on the federal government's discontinuation of the limited experimental program upon public criticism? Why not wait and see if anyone is charged and convicted under the Tennessee law?
Invent what you want, but actual seeding is essentially invisible, and has not been practiced at high altitude---for the obvious reason of excessive dispersal. You have the problem that there are no reports of anyone seeing this.
However, there are plenty of reports and photos of airplanes dumping loads of extinguishing agent to combat forest fires. But you don't seem to be concerned about that at all.
"Chemtrail" advocates, however, have the problem that what they see are contrails and cannot understand that fact. It is as though they see horses and think they are unicorns. I know a lot about contrails, from what they are to what they appear. You couldn't identify a "chemtrail" if your life depended on it.
The final note was Attorney General Janet Reno's testimony before Congress. In demeanor, I would describe it as "I take full responsibility for the events in Waco---and fuck you." A more arrogant and unrepentant sinner I have not seen since.
(I also used to refer to her as the 'Attorney Estrogeneral,' but that is a seperate point.)
I have no doubt this happened, or similar events, but past actions do not prove the occurrence of present actions. Earlier parts of the overall program involved ground-based emission sites. Project LAC involved C-119 airborne carriers, which had a maximum altitude capability of only 29,000 feet, and would certainly not be operating at maximum altitude if the objective was mass ground distribution. (The had another career as forest fire water bombers, where the altitudes were substantially lower.) The experiments did cover distances as far as 1200 miles from the drop point, but were the result of air masses moving into/across the drop zone carrying the particles away. (The particles were chosen because they were fluorescent and could be optically tracked.) "Thousands of square miles" of coverage is a lot, but the continental United States has a total area of 3.1 million square miles. It would be an uphill struggle to cover the entire population in the teeth of prevailing weather.
The military always use private companies to provide goods and services. These operations were not kept secret; they were simply unadvertised, and later came under criticism. I have no doubt they were prohibited. So, am I clear that such prohibitions are to be dismissed as nonexistent---or are they as potent as the new (toothless) Tennessee law?
Interesting that you had to pull a 67-year-old rabbit out of a hat for your "aha" moment. All it proves is the possibility to pull off a limited operation with special aircraft operating lower than typical for commercial flights. No indication that any of these sprays were even visible, and I would expect them not to be if they were below contrail altitude. Still no evidence for "chemtrails."
Who is "they"? I'm not aware that anyone is telling me anything. Cloud-seeding has been known since the 1950s. Vain ideas like infiltrating clouds with reflective particles have been around for some time. I've also seen elaborate plans for space colonies. They haven't happened either.
Your "if it could be, it must be" mental approach is akin to reading a murder mystery and then declaring that the author "told us" how he was preparing to kill someone.
I don't "believe" any such thing. No evidence that anyone is actually doing it. And I am not personally persuaded that any such activity would be fruitful, as I live in a land of extensive cloud cover, against which this "activity" would be like cutting down a sequoia with a nail file.
"They"? Who is "they"? It is only water because that is what it always has been and always will have to be, according to the laws of chemistry.
It is not a question of what storyline is the more palatable to a certain taste. It is a question of what is actually happening, and "chemtrails" are based on a crucial piece of ignorance concerning ordinary contrails.
I'm only pointing out that there are meteors entering the atmosphere and they end up as oxidized powders. I'm not comparing them to auto exhaust, and there is no reason to. Tetraethyl lead has been banned from gasoline for decades.
What lack of situational awareness? I knew from the very beginning, when hydroxychloroquine was being badmouthed, that the official story was bogus.
Here's your problem: You think in terms of the Package Deal. Either everyone is On Board with All of the conspiracy theories, or they are some kind of uber-sleeper agent. I am sorry that I live outside your mental box.
As a result, you believe that something is going on when all the physical evidence only illustrates a natural phenomenon. You live in the world of "Well, it could have---so it must have!" This is anti-scientific in the extreme.
All you jokers who think I need to "look up and observe" are pathetic. I have been observing contrails since I was about 5 years old in the mid-1950s. And have observed them constantly ever since. And know what they are, how they form, and what affects their evanescence or persistence. And know how airliners are built. Tennessee will see no changes at all. The contrails will continue unabated without hindrance---because there are no "chemtrails." We once had a state-by-state speed limit of 55 mph, and when the stupidity of that wore off, it just went into the history books.
If there were anything in the air where I live, it would be washed out by rain in short order. Our rainwater is the safest thing to drink or use for washing clothes. It's either that or harder ground water (minerals, much?).
This is a bore. I am a rocket scientist and have known all about the use of powdered aluminum in solid rocket fuel. Experimental use of aluminum liquid slurries was carried out in the 60s, leading to higher energy release than its carrier liquid. For similar reasons, boron was explored as a "zip fuel" for the pending B-70 bomber, but had to be abandoned because of inconvenient combustion products.
Aluminum oxide is essentially incombustible, and that is the only natural form of aluminum. Aluminum dust from a machining environment (freshly-created, unoxidized surfaces) is a slightly different creature. It all depends on exactly what you have. Raw (unprotected) aluminum will in fact exothermically react with water.
All this is true, but you have proven nothing. Trace quantities of aluminum oxide will not catch fire. Raw aluminum can be melted by an open flame without catching fire (we used to do that to cast metal in my junior high school metalshop). No evidence of aluminum in the various wildfires. Nor of any aerial spraying.
Why would I want to? It's death on wheels. You lowly-educated make very stupid assumptions.
Stupid mistake. Not everything is "pushed." You have to keep an open mind, not set up a brainless reflex, or you just become a mirror image minion. It is wise to be scrutinous, but there is absolutely no guarantee that assuming the contrary is going to lead you to truth.
As predictable, you end on a rude curse. Are you saying you do NOT agree with the theory I instanced? A little yes or no would be appreciated.
What gives me so much confidence is the amusement at how completely off-target you are with me.
What you say recapitulates the original fascination Adam and Eve had with the Fruit of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
Most modern computers are digital, not analog. And the fact that the digital computers use quantum-mechanical technology has little to do with the nature and operation of the program. Consider the program as a "spell," which is a configuration of information for the purpose of eliciting information. Like a chess game that has no limit on number or nature of pieces, or size of board. There will be people who think they can succeed against such a game.
Most everyone should read the play,"R.U.R." (Rossum's Universal Robots) by Karel Capek, to see where the creation of artificial servants may lead.