Chemtrails Rhetorical Analysis

The general message being sent by Chemtrails theorists is one of suspicion and skepticism towards the official EPA, and military reports regarding the white lines left along the flight path of commercial and military aircraft known as contrails, a word derived from the words condensation trails; similarly the word Chemtrails is derived from the words chemical trails. Versions of the Chemtrails theory abound; all of which can be placed into two categories: Various global powers, including the US government, run clandestine and harmful chemical-spraying programs to mitigate global warming, or, more sinisterly, to weed out the old and sick with toxic substances. (Knickerbocker) Their message uses a number of rhetorical elements, as part of the

larger ever-present discourse about the general mistrust of the government and their agencies. Within this polarized view, the facts are reduced to arguments that support the intentions of the good and the bad without consideration of the truth. This way Chemtrails conspiracy theorists can rely on posits rather than knowledge to justify their belief system. Whether or not the Chemtrails conspiracy is valid is not as important as determining how Chemtrails conspiracy theorists are able to persuade their audience of the validity of their arguments regardless of the scientific data that several departments in the U.S. have released to argue against it. The analysis of the Chemtrails conspiracy theory begins with a look at three elements without which no conspiracy theory can be complete: the ethos, the pathos and the logos, and considers how those elements compare to conspiracy theories in general.
   In a majority of the conspiracy theories that are brought against agencies within the U.S.

government, there is a significant reliance on the negative perception of the government as a whole. The Chemtrails conspiracy theorist uses this perception as a continual appeal to pathos. While a conspiracy theorist is likely to already be distrustful of government agencies–groups like the CIA, and the DoD who that are known to conduct clandestine operations, as well as the FDA, EPA, FAA, and NASA who’s policies are declared to be set by big corporations who would profit from catastrophe (Knickerbocker), appeals to pathos are mostly used as a way to unite these various individuals (Green Party members, fans of right-wing radio, etc.) into a collective ‘us’ who are speaking truth to the power of ‘them.’ This use of pathos, of course, works to reinforces the distrust. By using of broader categories such as the EPA, the DoD, or even Big Pharma has the additional advantage of being so broad that it could include anyone. The governmental agent is more than just an employee of the government, but also through identity politics, anyone who is not ‘us.’ Therefore, persons who are not of the government, but are deemed to be complicit, will be placed in the same collective. The Chemtrails conspiracy theorist treats the government collective that is created by pathos as having a single personality and regards individuals within it as its agents of conspiracy. A particular example of identity politics among Chemtrails conspiracy theorists, which is a characteristic of the way demagogues think, was described in the article written by Carey Dunne in The Guardian. The woman who was the subject of the article stated her dislike of Donald Trump, but admitted that had she been allowed to vote (she is not a U.S. citizen) she would have voted for him. Her decision was based on a ‘false news’ online article where someone had posted fake ‘tweets’ from Trump stating that his first

order as president would end the Chemtrailing across ‘America.’ In fact, after Trump won the presidency, one theorist who supported Trump, and apparently unaware, or preferring to remain ignorant of the falsity of the post, commented on a Chemtrails conspiracy website “Beautiful Blue Skies!!! I haven’t seen any Spraying Activity since Trump took office.” (Dunne) Trumps greater agenda does not matter, even if that creates agenda the Chemtrail theorist’s best interest. Trump’s (false) tweet makes him a member of the “us” and therefore he is good. A strong pathos is incredible important for the Chemtrails conspiracy theorist because the ethos of the Chemtrails conspiracy is especially vulnerable to attack from defenders of the government’s official report.
Apart from the ability to determine the category in which participants in the discourse about Chemtrails should be placed, the Chemtrails conspiracy theorist do not have much else to use in their efforts to gain support. The ethos of the Chemtrails conspiracy is based on minor, and unscientific facts such as gut feelings, and garbage bags full of leaves that have been home tested and found to contain “abnormal levels of aluminum, barium and strontium,” (Dunne) in other words, findings that rely solely on the Chemtrails audience’s convictions. In fact, most of what is claimed by theorists is solely supported by circular reasoning, where theorists reference each other as proof of their own claim. They lack the scientific or ‘expert’ credentials of their opponents to effectively challenge the government’s official report. This main failing point is the reason that the audience of the Chemtrails conspiracy is so small, only 5% of the U.S. population. (Dunne) Whereas, other groups, such as the 9/11 Truth movement, are able to claim that the science is on their side, and are able to garner much greater support. Yet, Chemtrails theorists are able to overcome the lack of ethos by never holding their arguments up to self scrutiny which allows weak logic to effectively downplay the ethos of the government’s arguments and maintain the pathos. This way, any challenge against the ethos of the Chemtrails theorist, even from credible sources, can be dismissed because those challenges are reasoned to be false simply because of the enthymeme that the government lies. Conversely, the stronger ethos of the government is advantageous. The elite status of the defenders of the government’s official report is often the easiest way of identifying the agents of conspiracy. This tactic of using pathos to replace ethos creates more of a burden on the government’s official report to show proof of its veracity while, at the same time, relieve the Chemtrails conspiracy theorist of the same. For example, Chemtrails conspiracy theorists claim that the spraying of chemicals by aircraft started in the early nineteen-nineties because there are no images of aircraft leaving a trail of white lines in the sky before 1992 when the Chemtrails conspiracy was firsts conceived. When Chemtrails conspiracy debunkers produced illustrations of an article created by the military during during World War II, ironically, explaining how aircraft ‘vapor’ trails are formed, Chemtrails conspiracy theorists claimed that it was proof of early government planning to spray chemicals in the sky. (Metabunk)
The key aspect of the logos of Chemtrails conspiracy is that the information that would be most damaging to the government’s official report is held in secrecy by the government agencies who are conducting the chemical spraying effort, that is, the proof that the conspiracy is true is based on the fact that there is no proof, as is to be expected of the master-minds who wish to keep their plans hidden from the public, censorship is considered to be the ultimate paradigm for information manipulation. A similar argument is made by the 9/11 Truthers who claim that online information that was once readily available to the public is now missing, proving that there is a conspiracy to hide the truth about how the twin towers collapsed. What’s worse in the case Chemtrails conspiracy is that the theory was first conceived before the internet was as ubiquitous as today, so the information has never been there to begin with, and only supported by the information garnered by the majority of its following within the last decade. (Metabunk). Another aspect of the logos is confirmation bias. Most of the evidence used in Chemtrails conspiracy is photographs of what they believe are Chemtrails. Additionally, the color of the sky in those photographs are compared with the photographs of the sky where Chemtrails are believed to not occur. In Dunne’s piece the Chemtrails conspiracy theorists points to the sky and asks “see how the sky is a steely color?” Rather than providing answers the Chemtrails conspiracy theorist asks a question that tries to use the fallacy of appealing to ignorance. There is no way for someone to step outside and determine that the sky is more “steely” than any it ought to be. The act of questioning is not in itself wrong. This is how investigations begin. However, the scientific evidence that is available at the moment of question is not enough to deny the premise that is implied by it, so in the absence of information the denier is not able to make a claim otherwise. Making an implication through a question is another way in which the Chemtrails conspiracy theorist will compensate for a weak ethos, by using a question to establish a conclusion that would be false if argued logically. Effectively, asking questions is a means for turning the discussion away from the competing facts and toward a space where the Chemtrails conspiracy theorist is able to use pathos to denounce the denier as short-sighted for not seeing what is obvious to them. In addition the use of questions is a way to use errant and irrelevant data to control stasis. What color is the sky? Does the government’s official report explain the color? Why is the sky that color? Thus, allowing them to offer their own answers as a better explanation than the official report and diverting the audience’s own questions about the missing data in the Chemtrails conspiracy theorist’s own arguments.
The Chemtrails conspiracy is easily deconstructed, but it is important not to be tempted into declaring its proponents as paranoid or delusional because that would only perpetuate the polarization that gives it its life. Similarly, It is important to bear in mind that all conspiracy theories persist for the same reason. Considering that the Chemtrails conspiracy has a devout and growing following despite that weak science and logic, says a lot about all conspiracy theories in general. Common characterizations of the out-group, cherry-picking of facts, and the use of rhetorical tropes, is what makes all conspiracy theorists alike. They persist on the basis of the interpretation of information gathered after the fact that, by its nature, is difficult to dispute, and in some cases, such as eyewitness accounts about sounds and smells during the 9/11 attack, indisputable. Additionally, the importance of maintaining identity results in an attitude among conspiracy theorists that will not allow compromise or concession, so, rather than admit that an error in judgement was made, arguments are modified, restated, or abandoned so as to appear as though their discourse is able to withstand all scrutiny. Therefore, when confronted with conspiracy theories that are backed by solid ethos and logos, say for instance the 7/7 Conspiracy theory about the British government’s involvement in the fabrication of a report claiming that a terrorist attack in the London Underground had occurred, so that it is much more capable to compete with the “official record”, can be much more difficult for a neutral party, someone who is hearing the arguments of either side for the first time, to discern the truth.