Barry_Woodward: You're jumping to conclusions. Where have I said I'm not willing to learn about the "material"?
I
am listening. What leads you to believe I'm not?
OK. That's fair.
I don't have an internet connection that will let me watch three hours of video, so I won't be able to comment on what's in your videos from the OP. But you've said
"1. Scientists actually admit they're either in the planning stages to spray or are already conducting trials for the purposes of preventing global warming. 2. There are serious scientists who have conducted soil and water testing and found increased amounts aluminium and barium in heavily trailed areas." as a reason not to disregard whatever's in the videos. Good. Richard Feynman, a far smarter man than anyone on any of these forums, made it clear that you should never take something for granted when you can learn it for yourself. Especially things you want to be true. So, good, let's consider these two data points.
I don't know what you're talking about for the first. Not at all. Who are these scientists? What are they planning to spray? How (what is the mechanism) will this prevent global warming? You don't have to answer these questions in the forum. You don't have to answer them at all. But there's so little specificity in your post that I encourage you to at least answer them to *yourself* so you can decide if you want to dismiss the videos as rubbish.
For the second - contrails (bear with me for the moment, I'm going to refer to contrails because unless you have *compelling* evidence to the contrary, there exists no system I know of to distinguish vapor trails from hypothesized chemical trails) are going to follow where airplanes go. Higher rates of aluminum, a material critical to the construction of airplanes, and barium, which is alloyed into steel and aluminum to reduce impurities, as well as being an active component of pesticides (which would be heavily used in areas of population, over which airplanes tend to go, creating contrails) are to be expected in the flight path of aircraft. Have you adjusted for externalities such as that when considering what's found where? Again, this is something you need to answer for yourself, not for us. If you've got good answers for both, and you still think the ideas behind chemtrails aren't madness, I'd like to hear them.
After all, Richard Feynman is my hero, so I'm always game to upset my assumptions.