Took me six hours to debunk that whole chemtrail theory because I kept finding new fake sources

I started looking into it after a buddy at work swore the streaks in the sky were poison, and it took six hours of cross-referencing flight paths and FAA data to realize the whole thing was built on a misread photo from 1999 - has anyone else sunk way too much time into proving a wrong idea wrong?

2 comments

2 Comments

ivanb4116d agoTop Commenter

Man that "misread photo from 1999" thing really stuck with me. I remember reading an article a few years back about how a guy on YouTube zoomed in on a picture of a plane and swore the trails were different from normal clouds, but it turned out the photo was taken during a weird weather event where ice crystals formed in a specific way. It's wild how one bad source can send people down this rabbit hole. I spent a solid afternoon once going through old NOAA reports trying to find proof that those streaks were just water vapor from engines, and it was exhausting but also kind of satisfying when I found the actual data. The whole chemtrail thing is built on shaky ground, and it takes forever to untangle because the fake sources are so good at looking legit.

parkernelson16d ago

@ivanb41 you know what, I used to buy into that stuff until I saw the NOAA data myself. Changed my whole view.