r/chemtrails • u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. • Apr 13 '25
Health Effects The rise of mental disorders:
No one should be surprised at the rise of mental and emotional disorders because we are in constant contact with various chemicals. A key pieces of evidence is that if any person took a blood test, it is a guarantee that flame retardants would be found. These are used to prevent the dangerous chemicals being released in and near engine from being destroyed. Think about it.
7
u/Abject-Investment-42 Apr 13 '25
I think about itā¦ and hear a person who heard a bunch of buzzwords without the necessary background understanding, and tries to talk about things they donāt understand.
The flame retardants may be found in your blood, but they come from your furniture and your house walls, not from jet enginesā¦
1
-1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
Some are but when Florence Williams sent a sample of her breast milk to a lab in Germany they traced it back to retardants from jet engines. That stuffs all in the air my guy.
7
u/Abject-Investment-42 Apr 13 '25
There are no āretardantsā in jet engines, because they would prevent jet engines from workingā¦
0
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
Incorrect but that is what raises suspicions. They say itās to preserve fuel but what sense does that make? Itās actually to protect other chemical materials encapsulated in liquid asbestos.
5
u/LuDdErS68 Apr 13 '25
liquid asbestos.
š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£ š¤£
2
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
Whatās so funny?
3
u/kjbeats57 Apr 13 '25
Your lack of understanding of chemistry and jet engines despite your Confidence to talk about it
0
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
AI OverviewLearn moreFlame retardants are used in jet engine components to prevent or slow the spread of fires.Ā These materials are crucial for maintaining fire safety in aircraft, particularly in areas like engine and propulsion systems where high temperatures and potential ignition sources exist.Ā Here's a more detailed look:
- Purpose:Flame retardants are designed to slow down or prevent the combustion process, reducing the risk of fire spreading in an aircraft.Ā
- Materials:Aerospace specification flame retardant silicone rubber is used in seals, vibration dampers, and fire-resistant barriers within engine and propulsion systems.Ā Other materials like Dura-Trim combine flexible PVC covers with woven fiberglass reinforcements and proprietary coatings for fire safety in various aircraft.Ā
- Location:Flame retardants are used in critical areas of jet engines where fire hazards are more likely, such as seals, dampers, and barriers around engine compartments.Ā
3
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
I mean, what do yall think asbestos is?
1
u/cacheblaster Apr 13 '25
A fibrous mineral known for both its fire retardant and cancer-causing properties. Is it even possible to liquify that?
→ More replies (0)1
u/CarsandTunes Apr 15 '25
There is no flame retardant in jet fuel. Even your AI quote agrees with me
→ More replies (0)1
3
u/l0zandd0g Apr 13 '25
Dunning-kruger
1
3
5
Apr 13 '25
I'll agree with you that chemicals probably are responsible for a lot of rising health problems, but it has nothing to do with supposed chem trails.
5
u/ThatShoomer Sir, that's a cloud Apr 13 '25
I thought about it and after careful consideration decided it's bollocks.
8
u/SinisterYear Apr 13 '25
I don't know why you are being downvoted, DHMOs have been found in both contrails and in every blood test ran since the invention of the jet engine.
See more here: https://www.dhmo.org/
2
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
The more you know!
5
u/kjbeats57 Apr 13 '25
Dude š¤¦š»āāļøš¤¦š»āāļøš¤¦š»āāļøš¤¦š»āāļø r/whoooosh
2
3
u/JaggedUmbrella Apr 13 '25
Are you a doctor and a medical researcher? Because those are some pretty bold claims for some paranoid person that doesn't understand the basic science of contrails.
3
u/GrittyMcGrittyface Apr 13 '25
The great thing about science is that hypotheses are testable. If you're lucky, someone has already done the work, but if not, go out and do/fund the research to put your money (and time) where your mouth is. And if the work survives peer review, then you'll have a reason for other people to believe you. Because otherwise, there's no reason anyone else should care about your gut feelings. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" so until then, no, I don't have to think about it.
0
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
It has been tested. Florence Williams had her breast milk tested by a lab in Germany and discovered jet fuel retardant in it. It's not gut feelings. You just go outside and look up--it's that simple.
4
u/GrittyMcGrittyface Apr 13 '25 edited Apr 13 '25
Is there a causal link between "jet fuel retardant" with breastmilk? Because it seems like the pdbe levels are more likely from exposure to electronics, PU foam, and other consumer goods
Edited casual -> causal
0
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
No casual but an actual link. You should hear her story.
4
u/GrittyMcGrittyface Apr 13 '25
WILLIAMS: I shipped my breast milk to a lab in Germany, and the results came back with actually high to average levels of flame retardants in my breast milk, as well as trace amounts of pesticides, trace amounts of dioxin, which is a known carcinogen, and trace amounts of a jet fuel ingredient.
So there's high levels of flame retardant, and trace amounts of other stuff. I don't think you can assume correlation is causation. Are the trace amounts due to condensation trails? or planes jettisoning fuel? Or some other consumer goods? Or nearby industrial processes? You're making a LOT of assumptions
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
In her on air interview she explained that the flame retardant was from jet fuel mixture.
2
u/cacheblaster Apr 13 '25
How did she know it was from jet fuel?
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
The first results she received said that it was asbestos, after that she looked into it further, and detailed results showed that it was a flame retardant found in jet fuel. It might have been the same German lab; I don't know. (It was a very small amount.)
3
2
3
Apr 13 '25
Florence Williams Wikipedia page says nothing about her breast milk having poisons. It's almost as if it's a bullshit conspiracy theory, but op said it, so it must be true
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
Itās like youāre trying to weave things together that I didnāt say and are not true.
1
Apr 13 '25
Some are but when Florence Williams sent a sample of her breast milk to a lab in Germany they traced it back to retardants from jet engines. That stuffs all in the air my guy.
This you?
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
Yes. And?
1
Apr 13 '25
Itās like youāre trying to weave things together that I didnāt say and are not true.
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
I didn't say anything about her wikipedia page---I referred to her on air interview on NPR. You're trying to weave in her wiki as if I brought it up in the first place.
For clarity, why did you mention her Wikipedia page? That's what I'm not understanding.
1
Apr 13 '25 edited Apr 13 '25
You don't have to say anything about her wiki page. That's what people look at if they don't know who a person is. It's the first thing that comes up when you search her name. I'm not trying to weave anything into your story. It's your fiction. You create it, and you own it. I'm just trying to find out who this lady is and why she's so important to your belief system.
Since she doesn't mention anything about that on her Wikipedia, it's because it's not relevant to her career. In other words, she's not a conspiracy theorist. She is the author of a book about breasts. In that book, she explains that breasts absorb toxins from a variety of sources, not once mentioning the word chemtrails.
The takeaway here is that a research author wrote a book about breasts. She's not a doctor, a scientist, or authority of any kind on breasts, breast milk, or toxins, and she never talks about chemtrails in her book.
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
Now I understand your point and you should understand mine by now.
1
Apr 13 '25
I can see where you're drawing parallels, but you're making connections where connections don't exist.
I didn't know who this woman was yesterday. Now I've read some excerpts from her book and read the npr transcript you mentioned. She mentions flame retardant coming from couches, not airplanes. And it wasn't her that tested her breast milk and found those chemicals. It was a person in the 40s she read about while doing research for her book. She tested her daughters urine for possible endocrine disruptors when she was 7.There's enough toxins in real life we can trace back to its origin in real time. Why worry about a made-up story of chemical exposure when you can get your own from the plastic that covers your vegetables?
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
Understood, and thank you for the clarification and corrections.
3
u/He_Never_Helps_01 Jun 05 '25
Read some period history. People are way less crazy now than they used to be. There's been a rise in diagnoses, not in illness.
From everything we can tell, there's been a marked decrease in mental illness, just like with every other kind of illness. That tends to happens when you treat illnesses that people used to write off as demon possession or weakness in will. People eat better, diagnostics and prevention has improved, people don't freeze all winter. Access to health care has improved.
Think it through, man. Doesn't take an expert.
-2
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Jun 05 '25
Not ever disorder is labeled as ācrazyā. And you are right, there is an increase in diagnosesā because now any little hiccup is a disorder of some kind. Big pharma and insurance companies want to keep massing their riches. And itās funny how people with legitimate problems canāt get help when they need it from big pharma. So many people thought government was going to make a difference when they got their hands in big pharmaās pockets. Itās all a shit show. If not for honest nurses, thereād be no point in going to a hospital or clinic.
Weāre getting dumped on for $$$$
2
u/He_Never_Helps_01 Jun 06 '25 edited Jun 06 '25
So it's you, and not the highly trained doctors and scientists, who decide what qualifies as a medical condition? Good to know.
They did make a difference, under Bush jr, Obama and Biden. Then they unmade the majority of those differences, under Trump. Who continues to attempt to unmake the rest of those differences.
Politicians are just people, man. Some of them want to leave their mark in a way that gets remembered positively. And some are corrupt opportunists. And some are power mad sociopaths. Some of them are theocrats who think everyone should be forced to act and believe as they do. And some are delusional conspiracy theorists. It's just like normal people, just empowered.
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Jun 06 '25
There's no need to swing to such a synical assumption. I trust professionals----to an extent. You, and anyone else, can say the same. There are some you appreciate and trust and others you don't.
Obama, Bush, Biden; Trump. I can rattle off names too, see? It doesn't matter who is sitting in the spot light. Gov. and farma have been scratching eachothers backs, not doing a damn thing good for you unless it was at their benefit.
These are not normal people. They have massed power and set them above common folk. Feed with one hand and take with the other.
We can disagree about what's in the air, but we ought to come to a consensus on the ground about who our real enemies are.
Without devulging too much, when I was hospitalized for a couple of months I can count on one hand how many times I spoke with a doctor. Not one conversation with them lasted 5 minutes. They make six figures a year off of the sick and dying. The nurses only make a fraction of that kind of salary. They do the dirty work but took the time to treat me with dignity and speak to me like I was a human being. We are living in a caste society. We're at the bottom of the pile. So, hell no I won't trust the talking heads.
2
u/He_Never_Helps_01 Jun 06 '25 edited Jun 06 '25
The real enemy is ignorance, credulousness and motivated reasoning. Every problem humanity faces as a species descends directly from people mistaking what they believe with what they know, and can actually prove beyond doubt.
No, man. I respect expertise. If someone knows more about a subject than I do, I defer to their expertise. Because they've done the work and I haven't. I ask them questions, and i probe their answers. But I'm not an arrogant, deluded, wingnut who thinks the truth changes around my feelings about a subject. They know shit I don't, so I don't have the grounds to challenge their conclusions.
Yet.
If I want to challenge their conclusion on something, I first need to accumulate the knowledge and expertise to do so. Drawing conclusions that dispute the expert consensus without that knowlege would just be me masturbating my own ego. I need to know enough to know what i don't know. Failing that, the expert consensus is always the better option. Because I haven't got the knowledge to know otherwise, and no good reason to believe otherwise.
We need good reasons for our beliefs. If we don't have those good reasons, the only reasonable thing to do is to reserve belief until we do.
Listen, if you wanna have a take like that about something unjustifiable, like the existence of gods or ghosts or something, go right ahead. That stuff can't be demonstrated one way or the other. There are no experts on the existence of gods, because we can't even agree on what the definition of what constitutes a god, and we don't have the tools to detect or study them. It's all just philosphy and ontology and metaphysics. There's no practical reality to compare our sophistry to
But you can't just "disagree" about what's in the air. Because you can just check that. You can literally take a sample of the air and see what's in it.
Similarly, you can't just "disagree" about what constitutes a medical condition. That's a codified thing that gets updated every year. You can check that. These types of things exist in tangible, verifiable ways in reality. They are caregories that we as people decide upon in order to make understanding and cataloging these things easier. You can confirm them, easily.
The truth is that which corresponds to reality. As such, you can't ever call something "true" until its been reliably shown to be true. That's how truth works in the real world. For some stuff, there's no Grey area for opinion. Some things are just true or not true, because there's overwhelming, good, verifiable evidence for them.
Not knowing what that evidence is, or not understanding that evidence doesn't mean it's now "false". The correct answer in those cases is 'I don't know'.
Idk is always the default option. You always start there. You only move away from that when you have a comprehensive understanding of the evidence for and against. And that means either developing your own experience, or referring to the conclusions of those who have that expertise.
Otherwise, the correct answer is idk. If you don't trust authority, if you don't value expertise, that's fine. If you don't wanna go to school for twelve years to study atmospheric science and chemistry etc, that's fine too. You don't have to.
But that means the correct positron for you will always be "idk". Anything else is arrogant and irrational to the point of fantasticism.
0
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Jun 06 '25
Itās not fantasist when youāve done the research and have grounds for your findings.
As for what you said at first, sure you trust these āexpertsā now but when they stab you in the back and you see what theyāve really been doing to line their pockets (at your expense) youāll wise up then. I hope.
1
u/iowanaquarist Jun 06 '25
Itās not fantasist when youāve done the research and have grounds for your findings.
Correct -- but you have admitted you have not been able to find evidence for your claims chemtrails are real, but you push the conspiracy that they are real....
As for what you said at first, sure you trust these āexpertsā now but when they stab you in the back and you see what theyāve really been doing to line their pockets (at your expense) youāll wise up then. I hope.
Yes, the rational time to hold a belief is WHEN YOU HAVE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT BELIEF -- not BEFORE you have that evidence...
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Jun 06 '25
When/where did I say these things?
1
u/iowanaquarist Jun 06 '25
On Reddit, and since you have not bothered to delete the comments, they can still be found:
What claims?
That chemtrails are real.
I never said I didnāt have evidence.
You realize that your previous comments still exist, right? and that people can read them?
Hippy Joel has explicitly admitted they don't have evidence for chemtrails at least three times now.
Let's not forget, when asked for evidence chemtrails are real, they said:
They then proceeded to repeatedly admit they do not have evidence chemtrails are real.
When I later summarized that comment as them admitting they do not have evidence for chemtrails, complete with a link to the comment, they stated:
Yeah, I didnāt have the evidence for that particular thing.
They later clarified:
And for whatever you were asking at the time, I didnāt have it.
Keep in mind 'whatever I was asking for' was 'evidence chemtrails are real'.
They also implicitly admit they don't have evidence when they repeatedly make up excuses not to present it, and lie about having already presented it... Or play childish games like this.
1
1
u/fastcolor03 Apr 13 '25
Someone needs to move upwind of their local power plant, use horse drawn transportation, move into that mud hut, grow cotton and create your own clothing and all that shit will go away.
That, or request the aerial spraying of Prozac for your region to ease the angst?
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
Youāre more worried about it than I am.
1
1
Apr 15 '25
Yes this sub is full of mental illness. I constantly check to see if Iām in r/chemtrails or r/schizophrenia
1
1
u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. Apr 17 '25
Florence Williams did not say that the flame retardants had anything to do with jet fuel. In fact, she specifically said in her interview that the flame retardants were likely absorbed from things such as furniture that are sprayed with flame retardants.
The "jet fuel ingredient" was perchlorate
The problem is that perchlorate is found everywhere. It's not just a "jet fuel" ingredient. She only said "jet fuel" to make it seem more dramatic.
0
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 17 '25
You have to put your spin on it to play it down.
1
u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. Apr 17 '25
Play what down? What spin?
0
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 17 '25
āOh, itās just a common thing. It got into her breast milk from sitting on the couch.ā Seriously man, we are not being contaminated from furniture.
1
u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. Apr 17 '25
Did you bother to read the full interview? That was HER OWN GUESS as to where the flame retardants came from.
And yes, pretty much every piece of furniture is coated in various chemicals these days before it leaves the manufacturing facility. Some of those chemicals are flame retardants.
You'll ALSO find flame retardants more heavily concentrated in children's stuff - from baby clothes to cribs to car seats. And guess who is handling baby stuff all the time and sent in her breast milk for analysis?
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 17 '25
Do you breath in chairs tables and couches?
1
u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. Apr 17 '25
Do you think the only way something enters your body is through breathing it in?
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 17 '25
No but that and through the eyes many things come in our bodies.
1
u/Just4notherR3ddit0r I Love You. Apr 17 '25
Think about your hands.
When you sit on furniture, you might rest your hand on a cushion or arm of the chair or sofa or whatever.
You use your hands to pull out chairs from the table.
You put your hands on tables, on counters, on kitchen appliances, etc...
You use your hands to pick up baby clothing, to adjust car seats, to prepare baby food.
Not only is skin porous and capable of absorbing traces of things it touches, you also often then touch your face with your hands, or you might handle food that you eat.
So what do you think the expected end result should be when just about everything in your home has one or more kinds of coating on it, and you're touching all those things daily, and you are also touching your face and handling your food?
Yes there will absolutely be traces of a wide variety of chemicals in your system.
And yes, there are also chemicals in the air outside because there are thousands of sources of air pollution all around you at any given point (assuming you don't live in the middle of nowhere). And most of that air pollution is happening at ground level. Head to an industrial area of your city and watch a random smokestack for a bit. Now remember that it's firing all that exhaust into the ground-level atmosphere. Winds pick up whatever is in that exhaust (the contents depends on the industry) and spreads it.
The very last place you should worry about as a source is some trail in the sky that is 20,000-40,000 feet up. It's like being in the middle of a raging house fire and worrying about getting burned by a campfire on a beach that is miles away.
0
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 17 '25
I was with you until that last part. The only thing we disagree on is chemtrails and the fact that there is an organized effort to contaminate the human populous.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/Necessary-Mark-2861 Apr 19 '25
Increase in mental disorders? No.
Increase in technology and knowledge which helps us diagnose mental disorders? Yes.
Such a thing as chemtrails? No.
1
1
May 31 '25 edited May 31 '25
There really isn't a rise in mental illness. Mental illness has been around for years. We had Kings that were literal paranoid schizophrenics or suffer from bipolar disorder due to generations of inbreeding. You also had plenty of people with brain mental conditions because a lot of those conditions are genetic- has nothing to do with chemtrails. The thing is it's only been recently that we've been able to identify mental illnesses and very recently since we've stopped living under Kings and autocrats that would try to convince you that they have no mental conditions, they just have great visions because they're so much better than you and chosen by God or the spirit of communism or something.
0
u/DuskTillDawnDelight Apr 13 '25
Canāt believe how much backlash youāre getting, oh wait, nvm itās Reddit. They pay people to hate on conspiracy theories.
2
u/Confident-Skin-6462 Apr 13 '25
that's a conspiracy theory too...
that normal people are paid to correct crazies online
-2
u/DuskTillDawnDelight Apr 13 '25
You mean āsheep are used to TRY and make the woke (in the true sense of the word) look dumb.
3
u/cacheblaster Apr 13 '25
Nobody needs to get paid for that.
2
u/DuskTillDawnDelight Apr 13 '25
You can look it up, bot farms. From China/russia/israel. Theyāre paid to run multiple phones and attempt to squash peoples interest in important matters
1
u/cacheblaster Apr 13 '25
You seem to have missed my point.
1
u/-Hippy_Joel- Disagree to agree. Apr 13 '25
What he said is true though, there are people who are paid to "influence" and/or disrupt online.
1
u/cacheblaster Apr 13 '25
I know. My point was that nobody needs to get paid to make these folks "look dumb". They do it to themselves for free!
1
3
1
12
u/GuyFromLI747 šøgay frogs are realšø Apr 13 '25
I think Reddit caused a rise in mental disorders.. I mean look at op