On its face, you're casually suggesting vapor trails from aircraft as the cause of Europe's CO2 shortage. Rather than elaborate on your chain of thought, you go right towards predicting distopia.

I'm guessing your image isn't a vapor trail reference, but a reference to "chem trails". Chem trails are controversial and widely regarded as a conspiracy theory.

The main criticisms I'd have for your contribution are these: Your comment is erratic, has spurious relation to the article, makes vague references to controversial conspiracies and provides no evidence.

In my opinion, this is an inappropriate forum for it simply because it's a better without it. Someone smarter than me could probably point out specific HN rules though.

I didn't elaborate on my train of thought because it's a three-point train of thought. No offense.

"conspiracy theory" is widely understood to be a derisive term the CIA had to invent after they shot Kennedy.

Here's a contrail next to a chemtrail on video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kcTvqiMNl8

My comment is not erratic. Saying my comment is erratic is like saying you're afraid of loud noises.

My comment does not have "spurious" relation to the article. My comment has a holistic big-picture relation to the article.

There's absolutely no scientific basis at all for chemtrails.

If these were real the cost would be staggering in terms of equipment, supplies, and of course, unbelievable amounts of hush money paid out every single day to keep a lid on the conspiracy.

Just as there's things too big to fail, there's conspiracies too grandiose to be real. They'd collapse under their own weight.

Do you honestly think in an age where terabytes of data can be stolen by insiders and outsiders alike that something as massive as chemtrails can be kept under wraps?

Here's some empirical evidence of chemtrails, in case this is the first of its kind that you've ever received I also suggest paying attention to the sky in your local neighbourhood at around 6am and 6pm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFL4ogRm3yc

Saying "conspiracies too grandiose to be real" may be akin to saying "organization too grandiose to be real" when only talking about one program within a multi billion dollar black budget.

That said there are indeed grandiose conspiracies that do make chemtrails look simple by comparison: https://i.imgur.com/SbCArRO.jpg

That "empirical evidence" is a load of garbage. Contrails occur differently at different altitudes due to temperature gradients. Anyone who's been up in a small plane or who's climbed a mountain knows this. Planes are also "stacked" at different altitudes (flight level) to simplify controller operations, anyone who's casually observed local airport activity knows this.

You really need to read up because this YouTube junk is poisoning your ability to think rationally.

Now multi-billion? No. For chemtrails to be real it's a multi-trillion dollar undertaking. Nothing in aviation is cheap. Everything is unbelievably expensive.

In order to produce "chemtrails" that have the same volume as contrails you would need to have an equivalent amount of whatever loaded into tanks as there is fuel. Do you have any idea how much fuel is loaded into a passenger plane? It's tons. A 787 contains around 33,000 gallons of fuel, or about 162 tonnes.

Now you're telling me they have to sneak on another ~160 tons of chemtrail stuff somehow without anyone noticing?

And why? For what? Who benefits?

"Contrails occur differently at different altitudes due to temperature gradients."

Thanks. I'll look into this.

"Multi billion?"

That's the budget.

"For chemtrails to be real it's a multi-trillion dollar undertaking."

That's a figure you've pulled out of your behind.

"A 787 contains around 33,000 gallons of fuel, or about 162 tonnes."

Naphtha-kerosene's already a blend.

"And why? For what? Who benefits?"

Are you going to verify the phenomena for yourself?

Hi LukeB42 :-)

A number of people here are trying to help you.

Many of us have real life experience (me from sw engineering, large distributed systems, parts of security), others from aviation etc.

I agree with the rest here:

I'd say there's no way such an operation could be hidden.

While I could be wrong, - it seems I was wrong about the depths of the capabilities of NSA etc, I'm more often right than wrong it seems.

If there is a conspiracy going on then I'd say it is to keep people busy with this instead of the huge global issues we should see: the west meddling in the middle east, millions of refugees, huge health problems (both because of obesity and because of lack if food).

> That's a figure you've pulled out of your behind.

Oh, and your "multi-billion" budget is real? You know what that gets you in terms of aviation? A handful of planes for less than a year. What part of fucking expensive don't you understand? Running a commercial jet is so expensive you'd be hard pressed to flush stacks of $100 bills down the toilet as fast as a typical jet consumes an equivalent amount in fuel. These planes cost in excess of $25,000 USD per hour to keep in the air.

Airlines are notoriously cheap and always push for maximum efficiency. They installed winglets to save 5% in fuel costs. They install seats an inch closer to fit another row of seats in.

Now you're telling me they're willingly lugging around millions of tons of this chemtrail stuff just because?

You've pulled this entire nonsense out of your ass. Chemtrails have zero plausibility due to how massive an undertaking it would be to make that happen.

The closest "conspiracy" to this was the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam. That was exposed within years of the first spraying. It was thoroughly documented. It was too big an undertaking to hide.

Now you want me to believe that this is a worldwide phenomenon and nobody, absolutely nobody, has ever found any hard evidence?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Come back when you have some.

Stop doing lines of YouTube videos and visit the real world once in a while.

Getting uncivil and perpetuating a flamewar are bad things to do here even if you didn't start it. Please stop.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Sorry about that, you're right.

"Oh, and your "multi-billion" budget is real?"

Yup.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23903310

"Now you're telling me they're willingly lugging around millions of tons of this chemtrail stuff just because?"

No dude, I'm telling you they're doing it for money.

"You've pulled this entire nonsense out of your ass. Chemtrails have zero plausibility due to how massive an undertaking it would be to make that happen."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Stormfury#Project_Cirr...

"Now you want me to believe that this is a worldwide phenomenon and nobody, absolutely nobody, has ever found any hard evidence?"

I'm here talking with you about it. I even have footage of this stuff on video. Sent you some like 20 minutes ago.

Did the chemtrail program start in your lifetime or is it something you've been forced to inherit?

You've taken this thread into a badly off-topic flamewar. We ban accounts that do that, so please stop now and please don't do it again.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

No offense taken. To be honest, HN is often very receptive to controversial ideas, but there's certain unwritten shibboleths. You break one by effectively saying "I think chem-trails are to blame" without more foundation. That sentence in isolation is like a hand-grenade. It's pretty much exclusively divisive.

Maybe try acknowledging people's skepticism, list a few reasons why you personally believe in it, and bring it around to something a little more focused on the article (your picture was too big, it's hard to follow). I bet something like that wouldn't get dismantled like this was.

I agree now that the basis for chemtrails could have done with being established in my initial post.

For some reason I assumed other HN users had had similar experiences I've had with seeing them right next to contrails in real life.

Wasn't intending to produce entertainment to consume. Just wanted to provoke serious, thoughtful discussion of the likelihood that these phenomena are related.

I value perspectives like yours specifically because they are different than mine. I hope you stick around. My only other suggested shibboleth is to try and avoid barbs in your posts.

"I didn't elaborate on my train of thought because it's a three-point train of thought. No offense." is a subtle jab at my intelligence. I am not offended, especially since people are dog-piling you, and that sucks to be on the receiving end. However, subtle insults like that'll get you in trouble here.

Thanks.

"[quoted text] is a subtle jab at my intelligence." -- No it's not. It just means the initial post was very simple and wasn't intended for readers who're in denial when experiencing reality.

Jeez man. I'd like to remind you that I live on the same planet you do. I'm slave to the same physics and I go through similar struggles.

If I am skeptical of something you believe, that does not mean I am in denial. I hope you can figure out how to navigate this place, because if you want to have a polite discussion about chem trails, lizard people, flat earth theory, who shot JFK, drop bears, the gold standard or whatever else, a polite version of you could really spark great discussion here.

I hope beyond hope to experience THAT reality. I believe in you.

It's insane to this forum, is what. Whether it is actually insane is irrelevant, it just won't have any traction here and cause needless noise.

I was speaking to a different entity. The mod I was speaking to probably wouldn't use an ad hominem as their basis for an unrealistic forecast.

I didn't read your other comments, so it's not an ad hominem. I'm just saying that I'm confident enough that this particular comment of yours or others like it will just be 'noise' here, and possibly an exercise in frustration for you.

But you're right that you didn't ask me. I just felt like responding, considering this is a public forum where both you and I have the ability to just say stuff.

Anyways, by all means keep at it, if that's what you feel like doing!

I feel confident enough that I don't think it will, and I wouldn't describe myself as generally very confident in matters of group psychology.

Anyways, I checked out your other comments and I regret getting into an argument about this. You seem much smarter than me in many ways, and I welcome your contributions, and while I personally feel that 'the collective' here will consider some of it noise and very downvotable (possibly even hellbannable), I hope that doesn't happen and that you stick around. Again, my apologies for what I suppose could be considered participating in or enforcing groupthink.

EDIT: let me add that I'm certifiably weird and perhaps that's made me sensitive to these kinds of things. sometimes it's best to 'soften' the edges so that engagement is possible in the first place, and sometimes that increases the chances that I can actually discuss my 'weird' beliefs without being dismissed. I've not figured out the right balance, and I'm not even 100% sure that finding a balance is the right thing. but it's what prompted this.

I appreciate you challenging my initial post in this thread. Thanks for the reality check.

Finding a balance is constant and inescapable anyway, is it not?

Pff, don't get me started :).

My approach has been, for about the past decade or two, to spend a lot of time, energy, and possibly happiness, on figuring out how to blend in and be inoffensive. I'm not entirely sure it was worth it, but at least I feel it's allowed me to be my 'authentic' self without being dismissed in many situations, so that's something. And there are even times when I feel validated, which I think is quite valuable. We're social creatures ultimately, most of us anyways.

Considering my uncertainty about this approach, though, I shouldn't be lecturing others!

Best thing I did was read the book of Proverbs (KJV), FWIW.

I've read the NIV version multiple times (as well as the equivalent in my language). thanks for the reminder to check it out again :).

I've enjoyed that as well, I used to read it when I eas younger. Now I've just read the ESV2 version of the last few chapters in parallell with my native language during the last few days. :-)

Speaking of unrealistic forecasts...

What's up with it?