Here is a topic which positively begs for due diligence. The phrase "due diligence" is shorthand for the following general idea: On subjects that could seriously impact your life, you should take the time to look into those subjects yourself, rather than simply taking someone else's word for it.
For example, if someone comes up to you and asks you to invest what to you would be a substantial sum of money in some business venture that they have heard about, you should probably conduct some of your own "due diligence" rather than simply basing your decision on hearsay.
For example, if someone comes up to you and asks you to invest what to you would be a substantial sum of money in some business venture that they have heard about, you should probably conduct some of your own "due diligence" rather than simply basing your decision on hearsay.
The above video makes assertions which, if true, could seriously impact people's lives in a very negative way. The assertions are so serious, in fact, that it is worth taking the time to watch the entire presentation.
The video presents substantial evidence to support its assertions. It is, of course, possible that for some reason the video is presenting false information, made to sound plausible through the creation of false charts, photographs, and other deception. While it is difficult to imagine a motive for creating such a deception, it is certainly possible. Readers are encouraged to watch the video, and then look into the issue for themselves.
Some websites have emerged to "debunk" the information in the above video. Here is one list of counterpoints offered by critics of the above assertions. Many of the arguments on that page appear to be challenging technical details of some of the assertions made in the video regarding impacts and effects, while ignoring the bigger question of whether deliberate geoengineering is actually underway. If deliberate geoengineering is actually being conducted, and being conducted without the knowledge of the populations being exposed to that activity, that would seem to be the bigger issue. That question should be addressed, rather than haggling over whether or not some of the compounds allegedly being used for such geoengineering are harmful or not.
Elsewhere, the same "debunkers" actually do appear to argue that deliberate geoengineering is not taking place, saying that aerial spraying is a myth and blaming "ship trails" caused by ocean-going vessels for the cloud patterns discussed in the above video. Again, this is a very important topic, and readers should examine competing explanations for themselves and decide which proposed explanations best fit the evidence at hand.
If in fact no deliberate geoengineering is taking place, then perhaps there is no cause for concern in that area. On the other hand, if deliberate geoengineering is taking place without informing the human beings who are potentially impacted by that activity, then there are potentially enormous ramifications. Because the potential ramifications are so severe, everyone should take the time to investigate this issue for himself or herself. The video above is a good place to start, followed by the counter-arguments presented in the pages linked above (and elsewhere on the internet).
After that, the documents library at the Geoengineering Watch website presents numerous papers published over the years relating to this subject. A visit to that library to read some of those documents would certainly seem to be in order. After all, prior to making a monetary investment in an company, it is advisable to spend at least as much time as the above research would take, examining the financial statements and other filings and materials related to that company prior to investing money in it. That's because "due diligence" is called for regarding subjects that could seriously impact one's life (such as the potential loss of money from a careless investment). It would seem that the subject discussed above is deserving of at least that much due diligence, and possibly more.