Check out climateviewer.com. He has all the patents, all the documents, all the history, compiled on his site. The biggest problem his website is a tangled mess. Other than that, it's full of very good information and research.

https://climateviewer.com/2016/12/09/geoengineering-weather-modification-and-weaponizing-nature/

It's in the military documents and patents. One of the stated purposes is to change the conductivity of the atmosphere. Good observation.

It's called chaff. No source here either but I agree with you

Just to add to this: http://imgur.com/a/Jl9EP

There aren't special systems in aircraft to inject chemicals into the atmosphere, they would've been noticed.

It's easy enough to obtain samples of jet fuel, there doesn't seem to be anything that's been added to it for nerfarious purposes.

That having been said, contrails (not chemtrails) may definitely have effects on the atmosphere and the climate.

What are contrails? Well, when you burn a hydrocarbon - jet fuel, gasoline - the hydro- part of hydrocarbon, hydrogen, breaks off and burns with oxygen to become water. If you've seen water running out of the tailpipe of a car, well, now you know why.

Jet aircraft fly through the upper layers of the atmosphere, where it's quite cold. Moisture levels there tend to be low, excepting where the updraft from thunderstorms pushes moisture upwards. Water released from jet engines cools and condenses into clouds. These are contrails. The harder the motor is working, the more fuel it burns, and the more moisture it releases, so heavily loaded aircraft and aircraft that are increasing their altitude will create heavier contrails than other aircraft.

Condensed water vapor is a much more powerful greenhouse agent than carbon dioxide, reflecting heat back at the ground, although it also tends to reflect sunlight away. In the week following 9/11 when air travel was temporarily banned, night time temperatures dropped significantly more than "normal".

So...

Chem trails don't really make sense. Mainly because the people who would be using chemicals in the air to control the population would be breathing that very same air.

There are also issues with dispersion of the chemical in the air making it nearly impossible for anyone to be affected by the relatively small amounts of chemicals they'd be spraying into the air.

Why bother when you already have control over the food and water supplies?

Heard about them years ago. It was interesting at the time but I've thought about it and it just doesn't make much sense. What with mandatory flight plans, etc., it just seems like there would be easier means of affecting some sort of diabolical impact on whatever they're targeting. I don't know, I've just never heard a real compelling argument for them. Not saying it's impossible though.