Home » chemtrails » Barium Chemtrails on KSLA

Barium Chemtrails on KSLA

Brief Summary:
  • Samples of water were collected in August 2007, in Stamps Arkansas, by leaving some bowls outside for a month
  • The resultant dirty water was tested by KSLA and was found to have the same amount of barium in it as most municipal tap water.
  • The reporter misunderstood the results, and said there was a lot of Barium
  • The reporter now admits he was mistaken, and that he found no evidence for chemtrails



Some conspiracy theorists think that persistent spreading contrails indicate some kind of deliberate aerial spraying, probably by the government. They speculate as to what could be in these trails, and one of the most common things they claim is barium.

Some people are so obsessed by this idea that they have rainwater tested to see if it has barium in it. They usually find some, and then trumpet this as evidence that their theory is correct.

Unfortunately they are wrong. I’ll explain why, but first, some basic science.

What is Barium?

Barium is a metal, like calcium. You never find it in its metal form (outside of a lab), as it oxidizes rapidly in the air. Instead you’ll find compounds, usually barium sulfate or barium carbonate. Barium compounds are used in the plastics, rubber, electronics and textile industries, in ceramic glazes and enamels, in glass-making, brick-making and paper-making, as a lubricant additive, in pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, in case-hardening of steel and in the oil and gas industry as a wetting agent for drilling mud. Barium in water comes primarily from natural sources as it is present as a trace element in both igneous and sedimentary rocks. Barium is generally present in air in particulate form as a result of industrial emissions, particularly from combustion of coal and diesel oil and waste incineration.

µ and Parts Per …

When you measure the concentration of a substance in water, you can express it in various ways. You have to pay attention to units when converting from one way to another.

A liter of water weighs 1 kilogram, which is 1000 grams.

A milligram is 1/1000th (a thousandth) of a gram. 1mg = 1 milligram = 0.001g

A microgram is 1/1000000 (a millionth) of a gram. 1ug = 1µg = 1 microgram

Note that last line, because it’s important. The symbol µ is the greek letter “mu”. In measuring, it’s used to mean “micro”, or “millionth”. (To type µ, hold down the Alt key, type 230 on the numeric keypad, and then release the Alt key). Since it’s difficult to type, it’s often written using the letter “u”. Make sure you understand the difference between a milligram (mg, 1/1000th or a gram) and a microgram (µg, ug, 1/1000000th of a gram). A milligram is thousandth, not a millionth. It’s a little confusing sometimes.

A microgram is a millionth of a gram, so it’s a billionth of a kilogram. Since there are 1000 grams in a kilogram, and 1,000,000 micrograms in a gram, there are 1,000,000,000 µg in a kilogram. All this is basic high school science.

Concentration in water is measured as ppm, ppb, g/L, mg/L, µg/L. These are parts per million, parts per billion, grams per liter, milligrams per liter and micrograms per liter. We can convert between these easily:
1 ppm = 1 mg/L = 1000 ppb = 1000 µg/L
1 ppb = 1 µg/L = 0.001 ppm = 0.001 mg/L
(remember that 1 Liter is 1000 grams, so 1 mg in one liter is a thousandth of a gram in one thousand grams, or 1 part in a million).

Chemtrail claims

This video is very popular right now. Claiming that water was analyzed and found to have barium in it.


airteamimagescom.jpgThe video was taken in Stamps, Arkansas, which is not entirely surprising as that’s in a region of the US the might be renamed “Contrail Alley”. It’s at the intersection of the cross country routes between the West Coast, and the major airport in Atlanta, Orlando and Jacksonville. Stamps is midway between the two major regional VORs (Texarkana and El Dorado), right next to the major East-West airway Victor V278, and on the edge of a MOA that traffic has to skirt occasionally. It’s also directly below the Atlanta to Dallas, San Antonio to New York and Houston to Chicago flight routes. On just ONE of these routes (Atlanta to Dallas) there is a scheduled commuter flight, directly overhead, at contrail altitude every 15 minutes! The same frequency of flights is found on the Houston-Chicago route, which crosses at right angles almost exactly overhead. Hence, when the weather is right, it is inevitable that you will see contrails in a grid pattern, “a giant checkerboard”. See this Google Earth file: airlines-over-stamps.kmz

ksla-jar2.jpgBut back to the video. It shows a jar of dirty water (collected 9/1/2007), which was collected by Bill Nichols. He’s posted some comments on the YouTube video describing how he collected the water:

it was rainwater. i collected it in two separate bowls on the hood of a pickup truck in my backyard. we are 25 miles from the nearest interstate. this is a very poor county, the only industry is chickens, logging , farming, a little oil—no coal burners or anything like that. i wasn’t looking for attention. i was looking for answers, ksla said they would pay to get it tested. i dropped it off, and they asked my opinion

i put 2 clean bowls there specifically because i wanted to catch what was falling. i don’t recall exactly when i put the bowls there, but they were there for about a month before i contacted ksla. the goo that i caught was full of barium. have a cool day!

Pause for a second, and consider if you left a bowl out for the month of August in rural Arkansas, what would you expect to find in it after a month? Some dirty water? Perhaps a little dust? What’s dust made of outdoor? Dirt, dried topsoil. What would you expect to find in the dirt in Arkansas – one of the richest sources of barium in the US? You’d expect a bit of Barium – but did they actually find any more than you’d get in tap water?

This dirty water was tested, the test results are available in full here. You can also see the results in the video, at around 00:55 to 00:59. Here they are pieced together.


And just to be clear, here’s a closeup of the results, and the units:


That’s quite straightforward right? Barium found at 68.8 µg/L. That’s 68.8 parts per billion. Now listen to the audio at that precise point (also transcribed on the KSLA web site):

“The results: a high level of barium, 6.8 parts per million (ppm), more than three times the toxic level set by the EPA”.

Immediately you can see something is wrong here. it’s 68.8, not 6.8, and it’s not parts per million, it’s parts per billion. So it’s actually 0.0688 parts per million.

And what of “three times the toxic level set by the EPA”? They are referring to the EPA Limits, as quoted by the CDC:

“The EPA has set a limit of 2.0 milligrams of barium per liter of drinking water (2.0 mg/L), which is the same as 2 ppm [parts per million].”

So the EPA limit is 2 ppm (2000 µg/L), and the tests actually found 0.0688 ppm (68.8 µg/L), just 3.4% of the allowable limit.

That limit’s not really a “toxic level” either. There’s no evidence that it would be toxic even at that level (which, remember, is 29 times higher than what was actually found). The world health organization has set a drinking water level of 7 ppm after doing studies into the health effects of barium.

Barium has always been in water

The WHO also reported on the barium levels in drinking water (meaning, from a tap, not some dirty puddle) and they found:

In a study of water supplies of cities in the USA, a median value of 43 μg/litre was reported; in 94% of all determinations, the concentrations found were below 100µg/litre (IPCS, 1990)

So the average was 43 µg/L, but most were below 100µg/L. This means the amount of Barium found in this supposed chemtrail residue was about the same as was found in the municipal water supplies in the US, back in 1990. This is pretty low, it varies with geography based on the type of rocks in the aquifer. In Tuscany, Italy, the Barium in drinking water was around 1000µg/L (1ppm), high, but still within safe limits.

The amount of barium will also vary based on the weather. Very heavy rains will leach more barium out into the groundwater. So you’d expect more barium after very rainy seasons. This is actually what you find if you look at the historical records in California (which has very uneven annual rainfall). You see spikes in barium whenever there is a wet year after a dry year. Recent years like these are 1991, 1995, 1998 and 2004 (2001 and 2003 also spiked to a lesser extent). The expected peaks were confirmed by the results of Rosalind Peterson at California Skywatch.

So what’s going on here? Chemtrail theorists are constantly claiming that “chemtrails” are made of barium, and that it’s affecting our health. But whenever water is tested, it is found to have perfectly normal levels of barium, which vary as expected based on the rainfall. In the cases where they claim it’s got an unusual amount, this is just a misunderstanding of the units and limits involved.

Yes, there is barium in the drinking water, there always has been, and always will be. Trace amounts, mostly from the environment and some industrial pollution. It’s a very small amount, and not dangerous. There is no evidence to suggest it has anything to do with “chemtrails.”

Update #1: 5/2/2009

Jeff Ferrall, the reporter in the story now says:


Yes, I did make corrections to my first report, which originally aired almost 2-years ago now… after quickly realizing my very embarrassing mistake. I was not happy with myself. Unfortunately, the first version of my report got out to the internet before I could make the correction(s), and the wrong version is shown repeatedly.

My feeling is, and maybe you’d agree, that if such aerosol mixes were created and loaded into jets with either a separate/independent dispersal method other than the exhaust, or actually in the fuel itself… somewhere, somehow, you’d expect someone to talk. I have not heard that yet.

I also interviewed the scientist who originally patented what some believe was a precursor to so-called chemtrail technology. He’s a very kind, helpful man who could not have been more helpful. He says he knows nothing about any such conspiracy.

There’s also a mention of this story In Skeptical Enquirer magazine:

Update#2: 3/14/2010

More people make the same mistake.  This time someone in Austrailia, and the story was picked up by a Los Angeles environmentalist.   Again mg is confused with µg, making the results 1000 times as high:


976 thoughts on “Barium Chemtrails on KSLA

  1. boogeyman says:

    oh, and by the way.. why would Monsanto be developing ‘Aluminum resistant biotech seeds’???
    Why on earth would anyone be developing that?

  2. Strawman says:

    The Monsanto topic has been discussed elsewhere, please read that discussion first.

    Also, please decide. You can’t claim the government is denying and admitting chemtrails at the same time. Well, you can, obviously, and it doesn’t help making your case look better.

  3. JFDee says:

    boogeyman said:

    “‘What in the World are They Spraying’ and ‘Why in the World are They Spraying’ are good video documentaries to watch.. check them out.. you might also learn something”

    This statement suggests that you did not look around this web site much. Both videos were discussed extensively, the first in the blog:

    The second in the forum:

    You will find a trove of knowledge here, contributed by pilots, meteorologists, aircraft engineers and environmental scientists. Don’t dismiss it with a wave of your hand.

    Give the site a fair chance to compete with the ones you linked in your posts. As on other forums, some people react more emotional than others, but generally you will find the discussions around here quite levelheaded.

  4. Rude bastard says:

    If it’s on aircrap.org…I MUST be true!!

  5. boogeyman says:

    oh that’s very good rb.. yes, and i believe in the tooth fairy too.. did i mention Santy is expected to visit my house this year? Oh goody!!!

    My point is that there is such a huge amount of visual evidence that Chemtrails exist. All these thousands of people are wrong? They’re all delusional and should visit Contrail Science in order to get right?? Just because I happened to choose aircrap.org does that now mean I’m a totally naive brain dead automaton?

    There’s obviously something going on in the skies… you guys can try as much as is humanly possible, debunk till you’re green in the face, it won’t matter.. those with a light on upstairs can tell the difference.. nice try though.. =)

  6. boogeyman says:

    I’d like to offer up this report for debunking:

    “CASE ORANGE is a 300-page research report commissioned by the
    Belfort Group on the topic of Geoengineering with “Chemtrails”. In the absence of
    whistleblower protection an international team of “inside experts” remain anonymous in order
    to safely and effectively author the most useful data to the public domain.”


    Or did it already get covered on this site already? Sorry, I went through months of reading on the forums, not sure if I’ve seen any mention of this.. you guys seem to be pretty thorough so apologies all around if it was already mentioned..

  7. boogeyman says:

    thanks Mike! looks like you guys have everything covered.. i guess i was wrong.. me and thousands of others are just delusional.. there are no Chemtrails.. only Contrails.. thanks for wisening me up!

  8. boogeyman says:

    oh.. i forgot.. one last thing before i leave you people alone..

    There is some buzz about Chemtrails and DNA mutation that caught my attention. Apparently, the theory is that Chemtrails are being used to stop our ascension process. Have any of you heard of that?

    In conjunction with HAARP, the top secret Chemtrail program is being used to halt our cell mutation disallow our mutation to 12 strand DNA… It’s 2012 don’t you know? We are due for a DNA upgrade! TPTB don’t want that apparently, and will do everything in their power to keep us under their control… preventing us from ascending by using biological agents that attack our DNA will accomplish just that.. is this just quack science speaking?

    VERY interesting read:

  9. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    me and thousands of others are just delusional..

    So there must be a god if so many people believe in him?

  10. Rude bastard says:

    No, there must be many gods because so many believe in them.

  11. MikeC says:

    I don’t think you are delusional if you have been fooled by clever con men – you are a victim, along with many others.

  12. JFDee says:

    boogeyman said:

    “Is this just quack science speaking?”


    Man has all but stopped evolution by suppressing (understandably) the cruel, but essential component of selection.

    Evolution (in the sense of DNA improvement) consists of mutation and selection.

    Quoting an “Account of an Airline Mechanic” as one of the evidences for the daring hypothesis you are referring to is not very convincing, is it?

  13. boogeyman says:

    why not? you’re discrediting the hypothesis because it comes from an Airline Mechanic? How unscientific is that? He’s not to be believed because of his profession? In my opinion, there are far too many accounts of Chemtrails and their effects to be ignored.

    I should of course give you full credibility based on your incredibly verbose answer ‘Yes’?

    What empirical knowledge do you possess that qualifies you as an expert on evolution or selection for that matter? Are you aware of the workings of the DNA molecule and its ability to be changed by Gamma Rays, Cosmic/Solar Radiation etc? All of which have been steadily increasing.
    Solar Magnetic fields increased by over 230%. What is causing this? It’s the natural cycle of the Earth.

    I don’t remember a time in history where the sun has been so blocked out by this white haze in the sky.. and increasingly so. I don’t need to tell you that Chemtrails have been suspected of being the cause. Which brings up my earlier point that Cosmic rays are being blocked out in order to prevent our ascension aka our evolution.

    But the media has done such a great job of dumbing people down, and keeping them clueless as to their true heritage – our connection with source etc.. that people cannot make the connection between the two.

    TPTB are trying to control the evolution of this planet.. but i’m sure you already know that..

  14. JFDee says:


    the airline mechanic story is just the lighthouse example of how unscientific the DNA-altering hypothesis is.

    About chemtrails and their effects: neither their existence nor the connection of any trails with randomly picked ground measurements is backed up by solid evidence.

    You would have to rule out all possible ground sources for stuff you find on the earth’s surface before you have a point in assuming that it is released at 35000 ft altitude. This is simple logic.

    Can you forget all that media influence for a moment and rely on your own (evolved) logical thinking?

  15. boogeyman says:

    @mymatesbrainwashed and rudebastard – well we can’t actually see God can we? at least we can see the Chemtrails.. Kind of helps the credibility thing along when we can actually SEE them..

  16. boogeyman says:

    @MikeC – I don’t think I’ve been conned or feel a victim, why would I? They are just concerned individuals witnessing something that doesn’t seem right to most rational thinking humans and they’re attempting to enlighten everyone.

    Why would I feel any sort of negativity towards another person for trying to help me? Why would anyone? Why wouldn’t the rational/prudent course of action be to investigate the veracity of such claims and not persecute the messenger instead of listening to the message?

    Since the government has demonstrated to us on so many occasions that they are liars, why would I trust an operation of this magnitude which is so shrouded in secrecy? They’ve already been caught performing secret experiments on people in the past, and apologized because they were caught. They’ve also shown us that they are quite willing to lie to us and sacrifice innocent human lives in order to start wars or restrict our constitutional rights. It all seems too fishy to me.This is why I continue to be skeptical.

    So saying that I’ve been brainwashed further reinforces my belief that this site is not about information but rather disinformation (no offense intended)- given the amount of data on the subject thus far. And judging by the correspondence dating back years, this site doesn’t appear to be wavering on that stance – even in the face of all this evidence to the contrary. (CON-trary get it??) =)

  17. Strawman says:

    We can’t “see” chemtrails. We can see trails in the sky. None of them have so far been proven, by evidence, to be chemtrails.

  18. MikeC says:

    you not feeling conned or like a victim shows jsut how successful the con job can be. Even now – with verifiable evidence available to you, you still tout the words of an anonymous “airline mechanic” as evidence of something that has never been shown to exist.

    Let me give you another steer – I am an airline mechanic too. I worked for New Zealand National Airways Corporation, air New Zealand and Ansett New Zealand. As well as a mechanic I have been a manintenance planner and a quality assurance engineer. I also worked for a maintenace company called Safe Air and the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority – the later as a compliance auditor and a safety analyst.

    A so-called airline mechanic’s account that I read smacks of ignorance to me – it is not my experience at all and contains a number of features that I consider show the writer is not a mechanic at all – but I dont’ know if it is the same one you refer to because I cant’ find a working link that takes me to it.

    Here’s the one I refer to – http://pragmaticwitness.com/2009/11/24/chemtrails-airplane-mechanic-reveals-up-close-experience/

  19. Anonymous says:

    “My point is that there is such a huge amount of visual evidence that Chemtrails exist. All these thousands of people are wrong? They’re all delusional and should visit Contrail Science in order to get right?? ”

    You say there is visual evidence, on that I agree. I have seen the visual you refer to for 15 years now, and have some information for you on how to take the mystery out of what you are seeing.

    It is possible to positively identify these planes, to track them in flight and record not only their moment-to-moment movements but to record their unique identifying numbers. That information will allow you to know where they come from, where they go, who owns them, what cargo and/or passengers they carry, who flies them, etc.

    Once that is known, if there is anything else further you need to know, you have identified the perpetrator down to a specific time and place. This common sense approach hasn’t yet been discussed or implemented by anyone in the chemtrails leadership, and now you have to ask yourself why not?

    Get back to me on how this is working out for you. thechief762(at)gmail.com.
    see the details:

  20. Jay Reynolds says:

    Here is an example of what can be done.
    Now, don’t blame me for showing you that ordinary jets like a tiny Embraer can make persistent contrails. Blame the folks that have told you otherwise. Hold them accountable. Ask them why they haven’t shown you how to take the mystery out. Then spread the word about this, so that others won’t be fooled.

  21. boogeyman says:

    so you guys are still sticking to your guns that these are persistent contrails then? lol. i’m standing directly underneath a chemtrail right now.. photographing it… i’ve just videotaped it and photographed it… i’ll post later?

    I don’t know how you can all sit there and tell me what i’m seeing is Contrails.. lol! now they’re criss crossing in the sky.. can you also explain why these aircraft are looping over the ocean and returning to spray again?? i suppose all jets that leave contrails do that.. they loop over the ocean and return for a 2nd or 3rd run at us?? OK!!!! If you guys happen to have swamp land in Florida, i might be interested too!!!

  22. Why would they not criss-cross? Flight path criss-cross, and the trails get blown by the wind. See:

    As for looping over the ocean, I see that occasionally, see:

    and more generally:

  23. boogeyman says:

    Uncinus! long time no see! actually, i’m staring at these trails, and they all have something in common.. their trails all spread out and cover the sky.. now, the jets are changing their flight path and heading toward blue sky.. trails come out.. then start to fill THAT part of the sky… they’re obviously ensuring the entire sky gets blanketed with the stuff.. the planes I’m seeing are intentionally turning off and on their trails.. i saw what i thought was a normal jet with normal contrails coming out it.. then, all of sudden, THICKER trails that start intermittently.. then a while later, they’re not intermittent at all.. they’re solid..

    i must say you guys are pretty good at providing ‘evidence’ to counter just about anything anyone has to say about these things.. very interesting.. very, very interesting.. talk soon!

  24. MikeC says:

    How do you know what yuo are standing under is a “chemtrail”? Have you analysed it’s chemical makeup?? some othe method – because it lasts a long time, despite teh facts yuo ahve ben shown that contrails (and clouds) can last a long time too??

    how do you make this conclusion?

  25. boogeyman says:

    actually, i DONT know.. l do know that it’s extremely unlikely for multiple contrails to remain persistent in 20 degree weather… and some of the trails aren’t that high up.. they descend so that I can almost jump up there and touch them.. so when multiple planes are in the air, and they’re ALL laying these trails, naturally I’m going to wonder.. wouldn’t any rational person?

    Which brings up my next idea.. i’m going to try and get a sample of them.. i’m going to get an r/c airplane and figure out a way to collect a sample if possible.. which i plan on videotaping.. then have the sample analyzed.. a friend of mine lives on the upper floors of a highrise.. and I’ve observed the trails almost touching the building.. so not that far up.. i’ll keep you guys apprised as to my progress.. toodles!!

  26. Strawman says:

    20 degree weather?

    You do know that temperature, air pressure, humidity etc. (weather) can be, and usually is, completely different that few miles up, right?

  27. JFDee says:

    boogeyman said:

    “I’m going to get an r/c airplane and figure out a way to collect a sample”

    Good luck with that, but consider you may be not quite right about the altitude of the trails. It is probably an illusion that they are coming down, caused by them spreading wide.

    Also, the temperature at ground level is very different from the temperature at around 35000 feet where trails usually form. You might want to look up “Lapse Rate”.

  28. boogeyman says:

    Strawman, I know this.. this is why, if you read my entire post, I mentioned that it seems very close to the tops of the highrise buildings.. but again, I’ll have to try and confirm this..

    no thanks JF.. i believe my eyes when this stuff is so close.. it’s definitely not 35000 ft.. and like i said, Contrails don’t persist at the altitude I saw them at..so it must be something entirely different than contrails.. thanks though.

  29. Unless you live in the arctic circle then contrails will be nowhere near the top of a high-rise building.

    Don’t believe your eyes. Eyes are very easily fooled, as shown by the numerous optical illusions out there.

    If you think it’s close to the top of a high-rise building, a good way to test this is to take a photograph, then move to the other side of the building (or just move 1000 feet sideways), and take another photograph. Compare the two, and you’ll get a better idea of the height.

  30. boogeyman says:

    You know what Uncinus, you’re probably right. Contrails (from jets) probably won’t ever be near the top of a high-rise. Unless the pilot has rocks in his head..

    Clouds do however form at very low altitudes.. near the ground.. wasn’t it you who told us that contrails and clouds are similar? If that’s the case, then I’ve seen clouds form close to the ground.. they call this ‘fog’ i believe…

    But as you said, these aren’t Contrails are they? Therefore, they must be something else…

  31. boogeyman says:

    and yes i do have pics of the trails i spoke about yesterday.. just trying to find a way to get them linked on here.. hold on…

  32. Jay Reynolds says:

    Be sure to show us these planes flying at high-rise level. Matter of fact, at that height, your pictures will probably show us what airline the planes belong to. Good luck with that!

  33. Jay Reynolds says:

    Oh, be sure to wear earplugs, jets flying that low will hurt your ears!

  34. boogeyman says:

    Uncinus, the pics I have didn’t turn out that great.. I’ll be watching taking more pics as the opportunity arises..

  35. boogeyman says:

    Jay, your sarcasm is well received.

  36. boogeyman says:

    Uncinus, I’ve just sent you one I took.. you can’t really tell how far up that is.. but soon after that one went by, another one also went by and it looked much lower..

  37. There’s nothing to suggest that’s not at 30,000+ feet. It’s a bit blurry though.

    Some people make the mistake in thinking that if a trail is closer to the horizon (or to the top of trees, etc), then it’s lower, when really it’s just further away.

    I’ve added a yellow line to your photo. Would you say this looks like it’s lower?

  38. Jay says:

    There are far too many comments for me to read through right now, so forgive me if someone has already posted this information. Please look at this link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/55753918/4296839-US-Patent-3813875-Barium-Release-System-to-Create-Ion-Clouds-in-the-Upper-Atmosphere

    I’m not saying that chemtrails are bad, I myself am still in the middle about them, I neither believe nor disbelieve that they are harmful. I haven’t reached a conclusion yet as I have not yet analyzed all chemical compounds in them. However, that document does pretty plainly state that tests can be done with barium in the upper atmosphere.

  39. Jay Reynolds says:

    I am Jay Reynolds. The document is from 1974, and relates a process for sendinga rocket up nearly into space where an explosion causes a cloud to form a brilliant green cloud of barium. This has been done to study the ionosphere, and is an announced event which you can observe.

    There is no relevance here, since what people see are not green explosive bursts from rockets in the ionosphere near to the edge of outer space. That is why they have to use a rocket.

    People are seeing white lines from airplanes at about 6 miles altitude.

  40. Alexey says:

    Hi Jay,

    This patent has nothing to do with chemtrails or contrails. It is for the studies of upper atmosphere at the altitudes above 20 miles and delivers a tiny amount (a few pounds) of barium. You can read a NASA technical report about this experiment at http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19750009803

    Title: Results of magnetospheric barium ion cloud experiment of 1971
    Online Source: Click to View PDF File [PDF Size: 4.2 MB]
    Author: Adamson, D.; Fricke, C. L.; Long, S. A. T.
    Abstract: The barium ion cloud experiment involved the release of about 2 kg of barium at an altitude of 31 482 km, a latitude of 6.926 N., and a longitude of 74.395 W. Significant erosion of plasma from the main ion core occurred during the initial phase of the ion cloud expansion. From the motion of the outermost striational filaments, the electric field components were determined to be 0.19 mV/m in the westerly direction and 0.68 mV/m in the inward direction. The differences between these components and those measured from balloons flown in the proximity of the extremity of the field line through the release point implied the existence of potential gradients along the magnetic field lines. The deceleration of the main core was greater than theoretically predicted. This was attributed to the formation of a polarization wake, resulting in an increase of the area of interaction and resistive dissipation at ionospheric levels. The actual orientation of the magnetic field line through the release point differed by about 10.5 deg from that predicted by magnetic field models that did not include the effect of ring current.

  41. Alexey says:

    Sorry for the typo, it meant to be above 20,000 miles (in that part of atmosphere that is called ionosphere or magnetosphere)

  42. Patrick Mchenry says:

    I commend Uncius for his purity of thinking, reasonably requesting some unequivocal evidence, other than perception alone, in this I believe he is right. Nevertheless, there is one anomaly I have found associated with the Mt. Shasta California region that- if true- would present evidence that something unusual is happening or was happening. And that is laboratory analyses of snow on the mountain that indicate very high levels of the element Aluminum. The documentary wherein this is presented and discussed by residents of that area, including biologists and a solar energy expert, is viewable on “You Tube.” Dr. Edward Teller among many other scientists have proposed the dispersal of reflective particles in the atmosphere to reflect solar radiation and reduce solar warming of the planet. In the very well expressed comments by all the contributors above, I did not see any mention of the element Aluminum, which seems to be in high concentrations here in the Western U.S., rather than Barium.

  43. Patrick, the Shasta Aluminum tests are explained here, starting at around post #5, but worth reading both pages, as Steve Funk duplicates the tests at the end.


    And a variety of related threads:

    Feel free to ask over on Metabunk for more details. But the bottom line is that Aluminum is around 8% on average of dirt, hence it’s found everywhere.

  44. Patrick Mchenry says:

    Thank You, Uncinus. I’ll read them. Sorry about misspelling your user-name.

  45. Patrick Mchenry says:

    The material you have gathered altogether makes exciting reading and gives a scientific explanation for the lab reports. You have helped me think more clearly. Jay Reynolds and the contributor at the end who did snow tests on Mt. Shasta have delved deeper in the geology and natural history of that region than those have who made the documentary, I want to thank you sincerely for presenting this wealth of information for everyone who wonders.

  46. Noble1965 says:

    Yeah, “claim”

    There’s a lot of that going around…

  47. Anonymous says:

    This is absolutely ridiculous if this was going on you would have to believe that everyone that was inolved could keep a secret witch if it was the government is not possible why dont you conspiracy theorists give it up jesus chris you do nothing more than bring down the countries credibility down if you think it all a conspiracy go live somewhere else because you are nothing more than internet terrorists

  48. Jerry says:

    In my 57 years of life, I have seen thousands of BLUE Skies… Now they are gone; the skies are gray; unlike 98% of my life. There are no more defined clouds in the sky; they are 90% milky and murky.

    I have been an engineer for 20 years; I most recently got a new job 5 miles from my house. I started riding my bike through this bedroom community with NO factories. On my forth ride to the office, my throat was burning, my chest felt heavy. For the first four hours at work I was coughing up shiny METAL bits.

    I fly to cities all over the US, and now while we are landing you can see it. This layer of gray metal sky that hovers over the WHOLE country.

  49. Jay Reynolds says:

    Would you mind telling me what town you are speaking about? I doubt that there is any place in our country where 90% of the time the sky is cloudy, or places where people cough up “shiny metal bits” for hours either, but I will check out your claims if you want to be specific enough that what you say can be checked out. You do want someone to check this out, I suppose? Don’t you?

    I am a 57 year old engineer and see no such thing.

  50. Jay Reynolds says:

    why did you wait for 37 years to become an engineer?

  51. den says:

    So you so called “non government” want evidence? Well then try this…
    On the 11 november 2010 I awake to find myself lying in my garden looking at a sky full of chemtrails in the sky(they where criss crossing and all sorts)in my own garden. I was in agony and the smell from the “persistent nontrails” lol was terrible. And the nontrails were white in the sky. At night!
    I managed to get to hospital and after x rays i was told i had a FRACTURE OF THE CALCANEAL.
    NEVER before had this happened, nor had I ever seen such “mysterious” (not mysterious for those in the know) cloud formation.
    I asked the barman the next day from the pub that I left at 3 in the morning if he had seen the chemtails and he said he had and said coz i had been infected I was no longer welcome.
    What more PROOF do you people need?

  52. MikeC says:

    Den is that from your stand up comic routine??!! :D:D:D

  53. Steve Funk says:

    Sounds like you were very drunk, fell somewhere in your garden, and woke up with a broken foot and a terrible hangover. Plus you got 86’ed because of something you did the night before that you can’t remember.
    Reliance on anecdotal evidence is one of the items to watch for in various baloney detectors.

  54. 57states says:

    Contrails only happen under the right circumstances and NEVER do they linger for hours only to expand 1000 fold (literally 5 to 50 miles or more) then slowly disperse into hazy synthetic manmade artificial clouds! if contrails only happen under the right circumstances then why do we see them everyday i mean EVERYDAY? what happened to my post? why did you take them down! About 3 months I put some comments on here and they are now gone? So tell me, Why did you take them down? A CHEMTRAILS DEBUNKER AS A HOBBY? lol thanks for the laugh ….. I’m 54 When we were growing up the skies did not look like this PERIOD! if you sat down 100 elderly people and asked them to draw a picture of a sky with some clouds they would most likely draw white fluffy cumulis clouds, because that’s what we all saw most of the time growing up! If you showed them grid patterns from chemtrails, chembows, plane exhaust turning into clouds that white out the sky they would say they dont remember planes manipulating the skies like they do now! TAKE YOUR VIT D I TELL THEM! i have asked some elderly and they do not recall clouds looking like these artificial ones that our gov or whatever private company is working on!! ! I have not seen a perfectly sunny day in over a year! A YEAR! they are for whatever reason dimming out the sun! i mean geoengineeing scientist so this!! they also say they would use aluminum and barium! funny i was coulging mucus that tasted like metal!! i have walking pnuemonia for the 2nd time this year! never had flu sysmtpms like this! im getting pissed now give it up and tell these people in charge WHEN THE TRUTH COMES OUT we are coming for them and will get them …… mussolini style yeah …. it’s me wiki pedia man!! once the truth comes out!! oh simve you have an answer for everything WHERE DID THESE NEW CLOUD SHAPES COME FROM? lately when I look up at the sky I think i’m on some far away planet with these strange skies, strange clouds, prism clouds or chembows …those are the norm now too! CONTRAILS ONLY HAPPEN UNDER THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN THE 60’S 70’S 80 & 90’S YOU HARDLY SEEN THEM AND WHEN YOU DID THE PLANES WERE VERY HIGH UP AND CONTRAILS WOULD DISSIPATE VERY QUICKLY!! They form under the right and rare circumstances …… So why do we see chemtrails everyday? i guess the right circumstances for contrails to appear is everyday anytime! I mean I see contrails at night morn, noon during heatwaves with high humidity low humiidty snow storms, rainy weather!! Chemtrails we now see everyday! EVERY DAY! SO THESE JUST RIGHT CONDITIONS THAT allow chemtrails to exist are now the norm?

  55. Jay Reynolds says:

    57 states,
    Look along the left side of this page and ou will find several articles showing that indeed contrails persisted 10-20-30-40-50 and even more years ago. Perhaps you didn’t notice them but the photos of them, the descriptions of them, even scientific articles written about them dating back to the dawn of aviation show otherwise. By the way, I am 57 and my own father flew bombersand made persisent contrails in the 1940’s. I will not call my own father a liar. You need to understand that there are tens of thousands of pilots flying ordinary jet airliners all across the USA every day, over your house and mine. They see themselves making the persistent contrails you all chemtrails.

    This site explains in detail why the chemtrails claims are wrong.
    Read the articles here fully and then explain in similar detail why anything on this website is incorrect.
    Try tellig us the number one best most irrefutable evidence for chemtrails.
    Think about it carefully and you will probably see that there are major factual or logical defects for allthe claims. Read the articles on the left margin and you will find most all of them have been addressed.
    If you have a novel argument, I’d be interested in it, because I’m always willing to look at new evidence and find it a great intellectual challenge.

  56. John says:

    Of course you find barium in drinking water also, that is where it also ends up!
    Chemtrails are not selective, they drop to the ground where ever they are sprayed!
    So of course they’ll also end up in tap water.

    Wow, are we dealing with propaganda misinformation or what?

  57. Steve Funk says:

    John you are begging the question, assuming that chemtrails exist without providing any evidence. You ought to spend an hour or so going through the main threads on this site.
    The average soil contains 425 ppm of barium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barium), so it is possible that ground water could contain some barium. However, the main barium compounds are insoluble in water, and would tend to be naturally filtered out as the ground water trickles slowly through the soil to a spring or well.

  58. Jay Reynolds says:

    It is unfortunate that the people making the barium claims have not fully disclosed information which due diligence would have revealed. They do this now because they failed to properly research what is considered normal, and now that they have ‘made their bed’, they are sticking to their story even though it doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. This is why the folks who originally made these claims are not here discussing the matter like adults normally would. They are embarrassed and ashamed to face up to what they did.

    The fact that you come is encouraging, because it shows a deeper curiosity and hopefully a willingness to come to a deeper understanding. Below I will give you several links to help you in your search. Please get back and ask any questions you may have about the matter.




  59. Mr.Me says:

    These clouds are being sprayed, I have seen them being laid out many times. It is a known fact by government leaders around the world that population is rapidly increasing, resources are being used up, and the elderly are living longer and longer. It is a fact that Social Security will collapse if drastic measures are not taken. Being a leader of millions and billions of people is not for the faint of heart. They are not trying to kill everyone, just shorten everyone’s lifespan by ten or twenty years which when taken by perspective is to return our average life expectancy to what it was fifty years ago, a sustainable life span. Our economy can not afford for a large percentage of the population to reach 85 years of age, the FED can print lots of extra money to print it but this leads directly to inflation which in turn leads directly to economic depression. If they were so set on simply depopulating us they would be putting birth control chemicals in the air and water, but birth rates have not dropped and sterility is still rare. Certainly my thoughts are likely to be deleted as I see so many have been on this site, clearly there is an agenda here and agendas concerning discoveries in science, a word used in the name of this site, are counter to the scientific method and counter to the honest investigative qualities that science claims to possess. The modern commonly held idea that science has in many ways become a religion ignores history, in fact science is still trying to learn to separate itself from the religious traditions of assumption, dogmatism, and aggressive censorship but has a very long way to go before these principles are decommissioned. A large part of that is because our highest leaders calculate which truths are to be released through government agencies and their partners in the embedded mainstream media. The thing about most truthers is that they discover many facts and inconsistencies which leads them to overestimate the the bad intentions of our leaders. Global Warming is a myth but global pollution, destruction of habitats, global DNA defacement due to large amounts of pollution, and the resulting destruction of a majority of the species genetic lines on this planet are not myths but undeniable. Global Warming wasn’t designed to make money or take power like many people who recognize it as a smokescreen, the Global Warming advertising campaign was actually meant to reduce the panic of how bad a spot we are really in, the world may go up or down a few degrees as it has always done, but that is a code for something, the global destruction of species and the deterioration of hundreds of millions of DNA improvements across all remaining species through human overpopulation, unavoidable pollution due in a large part to the overpopulation, and the constant invention of new and more poisonous byproducts of advancement since most notably the advent of the Industrial Revolution. Pandora’s Box was opened by fossil fuels, the stretched by the nuclear holocaust in Japan, and we are on the verge of it being blasted wide open to the limit in the near future. I never did agree with the methods of the globalists but I am not sure I know of an alternate route, and I say this with literally a cough because there has been an enormous amount of spraying done in the skies here in Austin over the last couple days and on three occasions they stopped spraying with their camouflaged aircraft as soon as I turned on my video camera. The government is actually so far ahead of us in technology and computing that we can only marvel at the government funded bureaucratic and military dramas that have been pouring out of Hollywood, it is not diabolical technically, it is Machiavellian, frigid, and inhumanely practical.

    Let me include a retort to some of you here, should this post last long enough on the site for anyone to read it. First of all, don’t try to play word games with me on the technical definition of science, I am speaking in logic and facts, not on narrow interpretations of the meaning of words like science that do not fit the current state of things but satisfy only conservative academics sense of accomplishment by immaturely changing the subject from the facts of the matter to a lame attempt to insult my intelligence. Also, many of you will say its paranoid to think the military is funding Hollywood, and you would only say that because you have never researched the issue nor even pieced together readily available facts that you don’t need google or the internet to gather. The movie Top Gun and so many others like it could never have been made without enormous support from the Pentagon, the price of the equipment used and displayed on set was many times what the hit movie produced in revenue and if you would like to get out your google and look around you will find that those abundant movies of that similar genres involve pre-approving all scripts through the Pentagon and constant monitoring on set by military intelligence to ensure cooperation and perhaps the biggest cost of noncompliance is that they will have no use of the essentially priceless military equipment that is illegal to acquire outside of official channels as well as priced well out of their range should they choose to ignore the law.

    Take a look at some of the chemtrails I have filmed lately including one that actually is still being laid out as film rolls then suddenly stops as they have so many times before then the cameras come on. My video camera is HD and there is no vehicle to be seen at the front of that extending trail nor was there before the camera was switched on because they have their entire hull covered with diodes that project the images and colors it picks up from the other side of the craft. This is technology our government has publicly possessed for over five years, announced fully cloaked tanks at a hundred yards sight distance in press releases.

  60. captfitch says:

    But why would you cloak the craft and then leave a massive white line behind it for everyone to see? This massive program to depopulate does not possess the technology to hide the trails? Perhaps the program is designed to easily identify those who are looking at the sky often.

  61. And why are people getting healthier by just about every measure, all round the world?

  62. Jay Reynolds says:

    Mr. Me,
    It seems you have no idea of the actual identity of thes planes you (cannot?) see. The situation you find yourself in is not an accident, you have been programmed to get your information from somone like Alex Jones, &Co., and they aren’t telling you what you need to know.
    You need to adopt some tech and get your act together.
    None of the chemtrail promoters are telling you how to do this, so I will.

    The rest of what you say doesn’t make much sense to me, but start with the above and come back to us with photos which can see the actual planes. It is possible, others are doing it every single day, and you can too ifyou really want to solve the mystery of chemtrails.

  63. Deyan says:

    Oh man. Uncinus, I applaud and congratulate you with dealing with the illogical and unreasonable foaming-at-the-mouth crazy kooky uneducated nuts you have to deal with on a regular basis over the past five years. That is an incredible feat. And yet, its amusing and interesting to note that after reading about 2 pages of the comments here, not ONE person opposing your arguments has proposed any actual counter-evidence.

    Sir Uncinus, keep up the good work. May logic, reason and scientific skepticism reign supreme, rather than emotions, agendas and fallacies.

  64. Stephanie says:

    So we are supposed to believe that these “contrails” are normal, and not anything to be concerned with? Are we supposed to trust the government to do right by us and tell us if something is harmful? I see these “contrails” behind planes stop spraying, and then turn it back on a few second later. You can ACTUALLY WATCH with your own eyes, it being cut off and then back on. It’s being sprayed.. No question in my mind! This is not normal, and anyone who says it is, well I am sorry but I disagree and believe that there is something else going on. You can provide a scientific explanation for anything, but in the end it takes someone to actually think outside the box that you’re conditioned to think in.
    Drink clean water, eat healthy and take organic chlorella to fight off heavy metals that are in your body.

  65. Strawman says:

    So you don’t really want to know how contrails actually form and behave, but you still want to judge what’s natural and what’s not?

    How does that work?

  66. Stephanie says:

    Look, even if they are “normal” contrails, they are still modified contrails. Aren’t they supposed to dissipate if its too cold or not humid enough? They are still lingering and disperse into a haziness that eventually turns the sky overcast. How can you explain that the most fundamental piece of “evidence”- the trail itself- is identical in behavior to normal contrails?
    Also, I see 3 or 4 planes in the sky, like they are trying to cover a particular area. They will stop their “contrails” from coming out, just to fly off. All of them! They just stop it like they can control it and then move to a different area to spray. Sometimes it even sputters when it’s turned off and then back on again
    Like this: – – – ————— – — —
    I don’t need to provide proof of something I know I saw. Then again I don’t even know why I’m trying to validate my point of view to someone who clearly just de-bunks it with scientific proof or data like its never wrong. Just keep believing what you are taught and anyone who wants to think otherwise is obviously wrong right?
    Who sticks so much of his personal time into debunking a “theory” anyways?

  67. Stephanie says:

    Stratospheric aerosol spraying- You can’t tell me that has never existed or been experimented with for geoengineering.

  68. cloudspotter says:

    Yes Stephanie, contrail persistence depends on relative humidity. Put basically too warm and dry and there won’t be a contrail. Wet and cold and the contrail can last for hours and pull moisture from the surrounding air to grow. There’s plenty of information on this site about it. Conditions change across the sky (just look at the clouds) so planes can move through areas that will or won’t support contrails so they stop and start just like you’ve seen.

    Stratospheric aerosol spraying has been discussed and studied as a way of combating global warming but as far as I’m aware has never been used.

  69. Strawman says:

    Stephanie, contrails have been around for as long as aviation (well, basically). They have been observed, researched etc. for a long time. The basic science of contrails is not controversial. Now, if contrails today don’t behave any different than before, and if the behaviour of contrails can be described and understood with well founded science, why would we need to make up chemtrails?

    Or put it this way: if you want to argue that the science of contrails is or might be wrong, then you need to actually point out where it is wrong – that is: give concrete critisicm. Just claiming that it might be wrong (without pointing any concrete point, but arguing from the mere possibility) and then using this generalised possibility as an arguement for something else, for the possibility that they might be chemtrails, again without providing any actual evidence, without showing that the percieved flaws in contrail science relate to a blindness, if you will, to chemtrails, well, arguing from mere possiblities, that’s burying any actual discussion. We can go on and on about possibilities, as we are talking ideas in our heads, but if we want to argue about reality, at one point we need to get to a concrete, fact based discussion – that is: looking seriously at the science and weighing in evidence. And, in my view, this is something that this site is doing far better, as it is its premise, than the type of argument you are putting forth here.
    Long and complex, oh well. I’ll try for shortness: argue on evidence, argue the science, let’s get to the facts, and leave discussion stopping generalisations behind.

  70. Captfitch says:

    I sometimes think that chemtrail conspiracy and science are too mutually exclusive to be argued effectively. It’s akin to arguing a religious debate with science. Both sides are guilty of that process and no one seems to be able to avoid it. Creationists use science as an explanation all the time to support the theory and evolutionists argue the creationists point with science all the time as well but it’s not possible to bring the two together.

    Without the concrete evidence, chemtrails are just a belief.

  71. Captfitch says:

    And YouTube is like the Bible of chemtrails. If YouTube shows it, it must be true.

Comments are closed.