metabunk.org , snopes.com total crap

"The one possible exception is direct air capture, a relatively benign form of geoengineering," Mann continued. "With respect to other schemes, like stratospheric sulphate aerosol injection, the only legitimate reason to study them right now, in my view, is to get a better sense of just what dangers might result from implementing such schemes." from: https://www.gizmodo.com.au/…/the-white-house-wants-scienti…/


So it's almost been confirmed , the smokey exhaust clouds we see linger from passing jet's is from high-sulphur content jet fuel, and NOT "chem-trails" as is so often purported.

There is no doubt in my mind that testing this bogus geo-engineering method (saving money from not having to process sulphur out of jet-fuel) is what is responsible for the Chapecoense plane crash that killed the Brazilian soccer team - their flight was pushed to it's fuel limits (as many are by aviation professionals) but NOBODY told them the quality of their fuel was low and contained more sulphur than it normally would have.

I brought many academic references to metabunk.org to suggest this as an explanation for observed "chemtrails", even one that described why the public at large should be excluded from experimentation of these practices (reference: http://iopscience.iop.org/…/10.10…/1748-9326/8/1/014021/meta) , and was degraded by their head moderator. they un-indexed the whole discussion from their forum even after it had gone on for 100+ replies.

My point here is mainly that can't we rely on these skeptics websites like snopes.com or metabunk.org , no matter what academic information is available they are going to print whatever they believe in.