And grotesque ones, too.
Or so you think. Plenty of reasons for the slope.
The mortality curve has a slope. It is usual for people to die before they reach the end of the slope. I'm responding to the astonishment registered that people could reach such long lives at all. It is, in fact, "usual" for a small fraction to reach such long lives, though one can rarely predict if it will happen. (I entertain a small hope for myself, from my mother's lineage. By the time that my father and his father were my present age, they were dead.)
I don't see any traceback to NASA for this document (i.e. a URL to a NASA address).
Can't understand it?
My maternal grandfather passed away at the age of 99 and that was many decades ago. My mother will be turning 99 this month. There is nothing innately unusual about such long life, although most of us don't reach it.
This is a pseudo-documentary (propaganda) by onlooker/bystanders. Nothing in the narration even asserts it is "from" Niger (British-accented voice using "our" notwithstanding). The narration is completely disconnected from the imagery, and the imagery is innocuous. The faults in pronunciation are typical of the verbal gaffes produced by A.I.-created voices. Despite the request to "support my channel" and "provide comments below," there is no identification of the video's author(s) or date of production or original site and date of publication. It is a real possibility that the whole video is an A.I. artifact, stitching together a target narrative and open-source video imagery. Since the truth value of any of it is open to question, it cannot be said to provide "information." I would suggest giving this a wide berth. It may all be true---or it may be a complete nothing. One would have to resort to other sources of information to find out, anyway.
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.
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.)
My kid brother refers to them as "Home Despot." Ever since they went to compulsory self-scanning, I stopped buying things from them. Other hardware stores still have cashiers.