NOT Debunked - Admitting the reality of chemtrails is hardly debunking them!

"Chemtrails often occur at altitudes and in conditions where it would be impossible for a contrail to form." - Jim Marrs

The global cover-up of chemtrails has been going on in order to give scientists time to legitimize their ongoing crimes against the environment. Now it is official and scientists have molded the program in their image you can now say that the trails in the sky are for the betterment of the weather and the climate. The lunacy is not even questionable and the actions of the elite seem to indicate that they want a mass cull of the population in order to create a post-human world. On tonight's show, Clyde Lewis talks about THE END TRAILS - BABY IT’S REALLY COLD OUTSIDE
  

The global cover-up of chemtrails has been going on in order to give scientists time to legitimize their ongoing crimes against the environment. - The Planetary Deep State Is Engineering The Collapse Of All Life On Earth

NOT Debunked - Admitting the reality of chemtrails is hardly debunking them! Acting as if a program already outed by so-called conspiracy theorists is only a new idea yet to be implemented is a WEAK debunk.

They're not real! They're not real! You're crazy!

I mean, they are real, but they're good and we haven't used them yet. 

CIA director John O. Brennan at the Council admits geoengineering in the form of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) is taking place, ie "chemtrails".

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kdDkYfaNMQ

Another example is the array of technologies—often referred to collectively as geoengineering—that potentially could help reverse the warming effects of global climate change.
[...]
An SAI program could limit global temperature increases, reducing some risks associated with higher temperatures and providing the world economy additional time to transition from fossil fuels.
[...]
As promising as it may be, moving forward on SAI would raise a number of challengesfor our government and for the international community. On the technical side, greenhouse gas emission reductions would still have to accompany SAI to address other climate change effects, such as ocean acidification, because SAI alone would not remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.

On the geopolitical side, the technology’s potential to alter weather patterns and benefit certain regions at the expense of others could trigger sharp opposition by some nations. Others might seize on SAI’s benefits and back away from their commitment to carbon dioxide reductions. And, as with other breakthrough technologies, global norms and standards are lacking to guide the deployment and implementation of SAI.

mrfintoil said: ↑

• The very term stratospheric aerosol injection indicates that the aerosols should be put into the stratosphere, otherwise the aerosols will cause heating instead of cooling. Common "chemtrail" lore believes that conventional airplanes are doing the "spraying", but conventional airplanes cannot fly in the stratosphere. This strongly suggests that the trails seen behind such airplanes cannot be the product of stratospheric aerosol injection

This is from PhysLink:

"The World record for both speed and height by an air-breathing aircraft (not a rocket) was 85,135 feet. It was set in an SR-71 Blackbird in 1976. The speed record is also held by an SR-71, at 2,193 mph. This is not as high or as fast as the airplane can fly, however, it's absolute speed and altitude limits are classified. Most US military aircraft can exceed 50,000 feet, if they really really try. Again, the limits are classified."

Content from external source

and

"A typical commercial jet (most standard flights) cruises at around 28-35,000ft (up to 6.6 miles of altitude). The main exception is Concorde which was designed to fly at a higher altitude (and hence lower wind resistance) at around 45,000ft. Although many jets could fly at higher altitudes, they are usually certified to an altitude giving a wide safety margin. For example the new generation Boeing 737 is certified to 41,000ft (7.8 miles).

Many military jet aircraft are able to fly considerably higher. Often, the plane itself is not pressurised and instead the pilot wears a pressure suit that provides him with a pressurised environment. Originally, very high altitude military planes were used for surveillance � the current versions of the famous U2 spy plane, originally designed in the 1950s can cruise at up to 90,000ft (17 miles). The Stealth Bomber cruises at up to 50,000ft (8.3 miles) and many other combat planes can now also attain significant altitudes."

Content from external source

http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae610.cfm

Another question I have is, with the relatively consistent history of our government not being extremely honest with the citizens, how can we know for sure that a project isn't already implemented in some way, perhaps still in an experimental or trial phase, just because the head of the CIA used words like "would" and "could". If they started doing this today, how long would it be before we saw any results from it? Would it be immediate? If not, then are words like "would" or "could" really signs that he is referring to a program that has not yet been implemented, or could it be that we have yet to see the results he is saying the program "could" produce?

Also, isn't it a pretty well known thing that the general population never knows the full capability and technology of the government? That the government are years or decades ahead of the technology that is publicly available? If that is the case, and the above quoted article mentions that the government has been able to fly planes well above the 60-70k feet that Spectrar Ghost mentioned in this quote:

Spectrar Ghost said: ↑

Most SRM proposals assume injection at 60/70kft, however. This is far beyond the reach of commercial aircraft, as well as all heavy lift military aircraft (the C-17 tops out around 45kft, while the An-124 reaches 40kft. The C-5 can't even reach 36kft).

How could I convince someone that the government does not have planes that fly that high when the article I linked states that "Originally, very high altitude military planes were used for surveillance � the current versions of the famous U2 spy plane, originally designed in the 1950s can cruise at up to 90,000ft (17 miles). The Stealth Bomber cruises at up to 50,000ft (8.3 miles) and many other combat planes can now also attain significant altitudes.". If the government had planes that could cruise at 90k feet in the 1950's, how could I possibly convince someone that 60-70k is too high for them today?

Just to be clear, I am not a chemtrail person, but I am having an ongoing debate with some very intelligent friends and they keep making good points that I can't quite argue against. Came here hoping to find solid, unquestionable proof, but the proof provided in this article seems pretty shaky, and some of the claims used to debunk seem pretty inaccurate, according to PhysLink.

I'm not convinced. As an example, there was a gap of 10-12 years in between the time the first stealth aircraft were flown to when they were publicly acknowledged. And during that time the possibility of their existence was denied. Then when it couldn't be denied any longer, they went public. In the case of SIA's or "chemtrails" they're not just going to come out & say that they've been doing this for a number of years. Instead it will come out slowly, confirming that what we've considered conspiracy theories are in reality, facts.

Related:

Debunking Potholer54 and Global Warming/Climate Change Propaganda:

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2018/02/debunking-potholer54-and-global.html

Climate Viewer: GIS on Steroids:

http://welcometohealth.blogspot.com/2015/12/climate-viewer-gis-on-steroids.html

So Does Chemtrail Evidence Impress You? - Here's How to Protect Yourself:

http://welcometohealth.blogspot.com/2016/01/so-does-chemtrail-evidence-impress-you.html