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

 

ksla-jar.jpg

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.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okB-489l6MI

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.

ksla-test-results.jpg

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

ksla-test-results2.jpg

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:

http://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/comment-page-8/#comment-23164

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:
http://www.csicop.org/si/show/curious_contrails_death_from_the_sky/

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:

http://www.examiner.com/x-10438-Human-Rights-Examiner~y2010m3d13-video-White-Clouds-of-Death-Aussie-exposes-geoengineered-chemtrail-contents?#comments

976 thoughts on “Barium Chemtrails on KSLA

  1. Stryker says:

    Okay, I have just perused through the vast amount of articles and posted comments on this site! I now have a firmer understanding of the processes involved in contrail formation, Thanks to captfitch for responding to my post. The only thing that still bugs me is that of the humidity at night time..I realize that the weather at ground level is different than at altitude,but I would have thought that given the time of night, it would have been unlikely that the humidity could be high enough for contrail formation?? However, obviously, I am not an expert in this field and I have no data from the night in question… I am sure that there would be a rational scientific explanation for this in any event. Cheers for your help folks!! I have the answers I need!! Contrails!!

  2. captfitch says:

    I don’t have good numbers but I would venture to guess that unless there is a thunderstorm involved the atmosphere isn’t chsnged from day to night at an altitude of around 10000 ft. Maybe as high as 18000 feet in the summer.

  3. Stryker says:

    Thanks to Uncinus as well!!! I saw a psychologist posted something about this problem of people believing in chemtrails in one of the articles and so thought I should add: I am thirty years old and as a child I used to enjoy looking to the sky to watch planes overhead. Back then, as has been stated on this site many times, the engines of these planes were less efficient than they are now and thus produced a less prominent contrail!! My point is that it is precisely this reason (The change in trail) that got me interested in this phenomena… and then I saw all that crap on you tube about chemtrails and it freaked me right out!! Not saying I believed it but it concerned me enough to do some research on the subject! I started looking for the truth and got lead here to do some real research, However, there are people who will be suckered in by this and why not!! Some of it appears very well researched to an individual with no understanding of the physics involved and its far easier to believe a simpler theory like conspiracy, than to learn about a complex issue! Either way, I feel more comfortable than I did when I first noticed the trails!!

  4. Stryker says:

    Thanks for the info guys, keep up the good work!!

  5. Thanks for the feedback and the reasonable questions and discussion Stryker.

  6. Stryker says:

    Hey no worries! You guys have answered all questions on this site as far as I am concerned!! Clearly you have toiled hard here and mate, you are helping! Thanks again, will refer future doubters to these pages…
    Strykes out!

  7. ruffneck says:

    Just watched a progam on CBC last night, called playing god with the weather and there was one scientist on there that wanted to do a simulation of the aerosols and its effects on the planet. I think he is not in the loop, because they have been doing it for a while now. Open your eyes and your mind.

  8. Show some evidence that “they have been doing it for a while now” (or even, at all).

  9. ruffneck says:

    The gig is up the news is out, your on the wrong side Uncinus and you know it. This ruffneck is educated in the art of detecting bullshit and it is clear that this site is just that. You are good at what you do,but the evidence is written all over the sky.

  10. Ruffneck, what do you make of all the evidence I’ve presented here – the historical photos, books, etc? Do you think it’s all fake?

  11. Questioning says:

    then why does the air smell peculiarly funny on the chemtrail spraying days?And also explain clearly why my nose always gets stufft too and my throat feels numb when they spray?

  12. TheFactsMatter says:

    “why does the air smell peculiarly funny on the chemtrail spraying days?”

    Someone farted?

    I never understood this one….

    The particulates are hanging too long in the air and that’s why people are suspicious, yet they insist that they smell something odd. Which is it?! The particulates are staying too long in the atmosphere OR they are falling 26,000 feet into your nose. Ya can’t have it both ways.

    You could be smelling just about ANYTHING, yet your reaction is to believe that you’re actually smelling the trails?! Why? Isn’t there anyone cooking, cleaning, spraying insecticide, painting, using a lawn mower, or anything of the kind anywhere near you? But, you automatically believe that the trails in the sky are the source of the odor and that all your ailments are caused by them. What sort of evidence do you have to come to this conclusion? Couldn’t there be ANYTHING else that could have entered your body to produce such symptoms?
    Why don’t ALL of us who see these trails have these symptoms? Why am I unable to notice any unusual odors?

    Too many assumptions. Sounds like you need some vitamin C.

  13. There’s two likely explanations:

    A) It’s the weather – you are sensitive to something that varies with the weather, like pollen, or the humidity or temperature level.
    B) It’s your imagination. You see the planes, think they are spraying poison, and then imagine you are smelling that poison. It’s quite natural. I have a similar reaction myself when handling car batteries – I keep thinking the acid is leaking, and I can smell it, or it’s burning my skin or eyes. Silly, but I can’t help it.

    Most likely B.

  14. Mach6 says:

    Regardless of a deliberate spraying of chemicals of any kind, Barium sulphate is used in jet fuels as an anti-static, (Dupont’s Stadis 450) most likely Mr Sheen, Static 450. It could also be used in engine lubricants. This along with toxic, like aluminium, and some heavy metals reacting in and outside the combustion chamber, and nucleation in the exhaust, lead to a jet exhaust being a lot more than just CO2 and water vapour. A “normal” contrail is in effect a chemtrail, you could say that the exhaust itself would be a cover up, since ingredients in additives are “secret” The exhaust and its reactions in the air are not nearly investigated enough, any investigations that have been done and published are short in areas, as they do not deal with “unknown” substances.

  15. So… you are saying that “chemtrails” are just normal contrails, but you are a bit concerned about pollution from jet engine exhaust?

    Aircraft emissions are actually very strictly monitored and regulated:

    http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=702&pagetype=90

  16. MikeC says:

    There has been a lot of study of the effects of aircraft exhaust pollution – eg se http://www.greenaironline.com/news.php?viewStory=947

    Back when Concorded was still flying there was concernt that it was dumping its exhaust into a completely different layer of the atmosphere – eg see http://www1.american.edu/ted/SST.HTM

    Ther are plenty of others.

    I don’t know what you mean by “unknown substances” – the exact nature of some fuel additives may be commercially secret – but the nature of the exhaust gasses is most definitely not!

  17. Mach6 says:

    Hi, Uncinus.
    The pollution is there, nevertheless. Even the link you give carries a disclaimer. Here’s a couple of links to evaluate,
    http://www.trbav030.org/pdf2010/Black_Lung_deposition-Jet_engine.pdf

    http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFullText/RTO/EN/RTO-EN-AVT-150///EN-AVT-150-15.pdf

    The second one is quite long, but both a worth a read. Then there is the Welsbach patent, nobody seems to know if it ever was evaluated?

    http://www.willthomas.net/Chemtrails/welsbach-seeding.pdf

    Also the Eastlund/HARRP patent,

    http://www.bariumblues.com/haarp_patent.htm (I used this site for convenience of the patent details) I know this patent is about use in the Magnetosphere, but that does not preclude the material returning to Earth wholly or partially, as is often said. I don’t know if this patent was ever used.

  18. Mach6 says:

    Hi Mike,
    The “unknown” substances are in some cases known, like the barium sulphate in Stadis 450, but they are only supposed to be secret. But in at least one of the links I placed above they did not test for minute quantities of otherwise unknowns, only that they made reference to them without actually naming them. That would not include sacrificial heavy metals from the engines, which they do include. Dupont btw, don’t make or distribute Stadis 450 any more, but another company does under licence, so it’s still in widespread use.

  19. Well, of course there’s pollution. Just like there is pollution from cars. My point was that we do know what’s in the exhaust. Just like car exhaust, it’s studied and regulated.

    I’m not sure what you point is with the patents. There’s a huge amount of research about many different things that involved spraying things in the atmosphere. But there’s zero evidence that anyone has every done it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_sulfate_aerosols_(geoengineering)

    Discussing is not doing.

  20. barium sulphate in Stadis 450

    Okay, can you actually quote a source that says (or even suggests) that there’s barium sulphate in Stadis 450? How much? Stadis 450 is mixed at 2ppm in the fuel. If there was any in there to start out with, it’s going to make zero change to normal environmental levels of barium when mixed with the air.

  21. MikeC says:

    Mach – so it is not so much that substances are unknown, as that they were simply not tested for in the report you linked.

    what is the problem with that?

    BTW Barium sulphate is non toxic – I don’t know why people are getting all the up about it – probably hundreds or thousands of people have “Barium meals” of it every day world wide – I had one 25 years ago with no known ill efects (appart from the hassles invlolved in filling my somach with gas to get a good X-ray picture – yuck!)

    In aviation there are all sorts of chemicals – the hydraulic fluid “Skydrol” and its more modern successors are organo-phosphates IIRC, & they & synthetic lubricating oils are far more objectionable than Barium sulphate..but still “irritating” rather than “dangerous”.

    We used to wash with Methyl Ethyl Ketone, use chemical paint strippers, clean parts with sprays of Tri-chloro-ethylene (and vapour tanks of it for “power” degreasing), seal tanks with foul smelling & sticky PRC 2 part mixes, use 3 or 4 different greases on various parts of an aircraft (wheels, flap mechanisms, bearings, etc) and different ones on a/c from another manufacturer….)

    If you had any idea of what chemicals go into aviation you’d not be worried about a miniscule amount of Barium Sulphate that is inert anyway – the health and safety of mechanics, cleaners & other workers is much more directly affected than anything being sprayed at 30,000 feet after having been combusted in a jet engine!

  22. MikeC says:

    the MSDS for STADIS 450 can be seen at http://www.laroute.net/data/docs/Stadis450.pdf – ther are a couple of “TRADE SECRET POLYMER” ingredients – one containing sulphur, the other Nitrogen.

    Barium is contained in DINONYLNAPHTHYLSULPHONIC ACID – which has a wiki page if you ned to know more about it – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic_acid. this is 10-30% of the product, according to the MSDS.

    I can’t find any reference to just how much barium is in this stuff……but presumably it is only a fraction.

    So if STADIS is being added at 2ppm, and DINNAS is 10-30% of STADIS, and Barium is only a fraction of DINNAS……well you can do some math to figure out what the maximum amount of it in ppm of fuel can possibly be!

  23. TheFactsMatter says:

    Nevermind the billions of sources of chemicals all around us. As I’ve said before, It seems so ridiculous to focus our attention on the imaginary problem of “chemtrails” while everything we do as humans, right down here at ground level, creates MORE than enough REAL problems to worry about.

    I’d much rather breathe the air at altitude, with a little added oxygen, then breathe what a jogger breathes while running along regular everyday road traffic. Especially in ANY major city on the planet. Let’s face it, all of us breathe in a mixture of several different chemicals all day long…Who are we going to be whining about next? Now it’s the airlines (or “them” with their “chemtrails”). Next it’s going to be dry-cleaners and plastics manufacturers.

    To focus on “chemtrails” as an environmental issue is to ignore the real problems. It’s a waste of energy and resources. It’s so sad.

  24. Getting a little afar from field here, but Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid is C28H44O3S (Carbon, Hydrogen, Sulphur, Oxygen). Barium would be in Barium Dinonylnaphthylsulfonate, C56H86BaO6S2, which is about 1% barium. That IS used as a fuel additive, but not in Stadis 450.

    (Note, on the edge of my chemistry there – but basically there’s hardly any barium in all these things, given that it’s found in the ground at 450ppm)

  25. Mach6 says:

    Mike,
    That’s really the point when you say,”If you had any idea of what chemicals go into aviation you’d not be worried” go and look at just what is contained in aviation alloys. Then, you have to combine the high temperatures in a jet engine with what is going through it and new chemical reactions forming inside and parts thereof and outside the engine at the exhaust, never mind even the air coming into the engine. The second link I gave has this in quote,”The complexity
    associated with the chemical composition of kerosene-type fuels is well recognized [5], and a detailed
    computational consideration of all of the fuel components of kerosene would be prohibitive.
    Doute et al.”
    From my first link, health and safety is a primary issue anyway. Uncinus asked about Barium Sulphate as an additive in Stadis 450 mentioned anywhere, well Wiki has had it online for yonks except it is described under Barium salts, or firstly Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid but does not exclude a Barium salt as part of it but as you say, Barium sulphate is the most benign description. Anything other like Barium sulphide, makes it readily toxic.

  26. Okay, so you’re worried about trace chemicals in jet exhaust, as pollution. That’s really not what people are arguing about here. It’s the “chemtrail” theory.

    Unless you’d like to present some evidence that some additives make the trails more persistent?

  27. MikeC says:

    I’m an aircraft mechanic – I did a 5 year apprenticeship (10,000 hrs) including courses on the makeup and general properties of aircraft alloys that were in our aeroplanes – everything from Magnesium alloys to the properties of “alclad” duraliaum, high strength aluminium alloys, high temperature steels, stainless and other steel alloys, titanium, bronze, the toxic properties of cadmium (widely used in electroplating of small parts inside a/c especially nuts, bolts and screws), chromium, nickel, copper, some welding alloys, and I’ve probably forgotten some stuff – but there’s nothing particularly weird about any of them that I recall.

    Many metal sulphides are poisonous because they release hydrogen sulphide when con contact with a strong acid like stomach acid. Are you aware of any of it in contrails, or anywhere else that might actually be harmful? How does it affect the contrails if it is there?

    Why do they need to do a “computational analysis” – why not spectrographic?

    how about studies that apparently contain no such limitation – eg http://tinyurl.com/24z9bv8
    (only the abstract) or http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFullText/RTO/MP/RTO-MP-014///$MP-014-14.pdf – which (if I read it correctly) discusses modelling a hundred or more products of kerosene combustion.

    In fact there are massive studies of combustion dome by the aircraft engine manufacturers – they are vitally interested in what goes into and comes out of their engines – a different of 1% efficiency can mean billions of dollars in sales thse days!

    these are probably not available online….I haven’t seen any…and wouldn’t expect to – but you do see articles from time to time in aviation magazines such as Flight about combustion efficiency, and in the 90’s there were a lot about combustion products – particularly NOx and SOx pollutants.

    All in all you seem to be getting down to arguing about minisculy small amounts of Barium, which may or may not be hazardous depending upon what compound it forms….but even if it is the dangerous ones the amounts are so small as to be harmless! Angels on the head of a pin stuff I’m afraid.

  28. MikeC says:

    Come to think of it, if you want to know what sort of things aircraft engines “generate” by way of waste product, you could do worse than look at the sorts of things that they do oil analysis for – http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/whatisoilanalysis.htm

    The link is for generic analysis of any engine and is completely true for turbines – we used to do monthly analysis of every engine on our fleet – IIRC 200ml of oil sent off to Mobil, and details reports came back within a week of its contents.

  29. Atom says:

    I’m from Tokyo. They are spraying all over our country almost everyday.

    You can find very clear chemtrail aircraft over Nagasaki on Google Earth.

    http://quasimoto.exblog.jp/13507876/

  30. captfitch says:

    That looks like the top of about a hundred possible 767s or 777s.

  31. Steve says:

    Barium is found everywhere naturally in the environment? Ha, yea right!

    “Barium is never found in nature in its pure form due to its reactivity with air. Its oxide is historically known as baryta but it reacts with water and carbon dioxide and is not found as a mineral. The most common naturally occurring minerals are the very insoluble barium sulfate,”

  32. Alexey says:

    Steve,

    Have you read all of the wikipedia article? In particular, this bit on “Occurrence”

    “The abundance of barium is 0.0425 % in the Earth’s crust and 13 µg/L in sea water.”
    Naturally, it is found there not in its pure form, but in various compounds.

  33. MikeC says:

    And the same applies to Aluminium – you will not find “pure” metallic aluminium in nature – if nothing else it instantly oxides to Al2O3.

    the aluminium in your boat or aircraft or cooking utensils is also coated in Al2O3 wherever it has ever been exposed o oxygen a any time in its life.

    You will find Al3+ ions in strongly acidic and basic soils – but the Aluminium does not cause the acidity or alkalinity – it is a result of it.

  34. snowman says:

    You people need to remember that conspiracy theories aren’t all theories! they typically start from some leaked information. The United States owned up to conducting biological open air tests in 1949 after ww2
    This is all open public information, easy to find these documents on the internet.I have Personally witnessed Kc 135 stratotankers with my high power binoculars , IN CANADIAN AIR SPACE!!!
    CANADA does not have a fleet of these planes, we have kc 130 four engine prop plane that can only go roughly 22000 ft when loaded and you have have to be well over 30,000 ft to leave a contrail. They laid it down pretty thick in 1999 in Espanola Ontario until concerned citizens petitioned the government when a lot of elderly people and children fell ill weeks following . Canadian government official answer ITS NOT US..
    Now they are trying out here in BC. but we are very active and involved out here and there is a big movement being put together here lobby the government. The bottom line here is that there is a few professional debunkers working together pretty hard on this site and i can tell you with 100 % certainly they are government employed. If you really want to take back control of your skies build a chembuster
    once you understand how etheric energy works you will understand why these work. i feel sorry for you people in these highly populated chaf zones be vigilant and continue your quest for clean air Peace 🙂

  35. Mr. Suntour says:

    No snowman, airplanes don’t HAVE to be well over 30,000 feet to leave a contrail.

    http://contrailscience.com/ground-level-contrails/

  36. captfitch says:

    So there are multiple governments at work using highly organized methods to poison people all over the world and a simple chembuster device is all you need to protect yourself?

    If it sounds to good to be true it probably is

  37. Janet Detwiler says:

    snowman; Can you site some sources for 1999 in Espanola Ontario? I’m not familiar with that one.

    Re: persistent contrails over the BC area, there sure ARE a lot of them. There are a lot over the Seattle area, too.

    Re: air pollution ~ I’m against it. I’m not being flip, I’m just saying that I am for cleaner air and less pollution. I think the chemtrail hoax keeps good people from focusing on the real sources of pollution, and I think that’s a shame.

  38. Janet Detwiler says:

    snowman; All I could find online was this Rense article ~ http://www.rense.com/general20/cc.htm ~ Do you have any other data re: this? I noticed that there are no published lab reports included in this article, just hearsay. Also, sentences that say things like “the air traffic controllers were all concerned”, doesn’t tell me much except that the reporting is very poor.

  39. we have kc 130 four engine prop plane that can only go roughly 22000 ft when loaded and you have have to be well over 30,000 ft to leave a contrail.

    The KC-130 service ceiling is 28,000 feet.

    But the altitude is not the important factor. It’s the temperature. Altitude is just given as rough rule-of-thumb to indicate the temperature, it’s not a requirement. Planes can leave contrails at any altitude, if it’s cold and humid enough at that altitude.

    I think the source of snowman’s claims are this 1999 article (one of the first articles about “chemtrails”)

    http://netowne.com/environmental/contrails/important/ontario.htm

    No photos, unfortunately.

  40. snowman says:

    I do not need to banter with you frito lay couch potato cronies “aka professional debunkers” But I do get great joy knowing my canadian dollars are not funding your msg laden ass. Ps. it doesnt matter in the end anyway. Oh yeah tell your piss poor pilots who cant seem to fly in a strait path to quit spraying victoria so i can see the damn red planet coming for us . CANT SNOW THE SNOWMAN!!!

  41. Janet Detwiler says:

    “it doesnt matter in the end anyway.”

    If you say so, snowman. I find the discussion interesting or else I wouldn’t read or post on this site.

  42. Tony says:

    Wow what a lot of stuff to take,with some really smart people. OK then Chemtrails, contrails, all kinds of trails. I am 55 years old and always marveled at the sky, day and night. About 5 years ago I started to notice something different. The sky had different colors at dawn and dusk, first a greyish blue, but more and more I noticed red or iron color, both in the morning and dusk. Then I started to notice white clouds at night (AT DARK), almost everynight, but they would be gone by 1 am or so. This was about 5 years ago, I am talking about the white clouds at night. I mentioned it to a friend, I said something is changing, I never had seen white clouds at night and it is only certain hours, at this time I never heard about chemtrails. Then about 3 years ago I witnessed the worse thunderstorm I ever was in. The clouds were orange and red, lightening was stricking continueously. The FM radio in my car went static, there were these shining balls of light in the red clouds. I thought what the hell is this. Never,I mean never ever in my 55 years, from AM radio to FM radio did a storm ever block out the radio signal. Then one day looking at youtube, yes I came across a video of a guy on his house trailer with a cam recorder, I was laughing as he was talking about chemtrails and his water collections, also he did no even know how to work his cam right. then after all this there is a cut in the film. He is now trying to focus a jet leaving a chemtrail, still laughing at this guy, he cannot get the jet in focus for a couple mins. Then all of a sudden this guy gets the jet in focus, as he does he zooms in, I mean he zooms right in, and there is the jet, and mounted on each side is a giant red tube, and guess what is coming out of the tubes, chemtrail. Now you cannot find this youtube anymore, but there is one simular without the jet, it has the same report in water samples as the one I saw, but it is not the same video. also the new copy is the one being rebuked in the beginning of this thread.

    I started to really look at the sky after this and I noticed this guy who lived in a house trailer was right. He noticed, he was paying attention. I had a job which required me to walk 10 to 15 miles a day. I had lots of time to lookup. from early morning till dusk.. they always start spraying in the east sunrise over the sun. it is not regular commercial air traffic. I have seen 3 or 4 jets in a row follow a pattern then return coming back in the other direction. they are white wiith no markings, and sometimes they come back mostly in the afternoon and spot spray, turning on and off the sprayers. I just would like to mention the jets I see here do not have the red tanks on the sides, they are all white

    All the stupidness being said, why anyone would respond to this thread who is not part of the people who posted it, put themseleves in danger and identified themselves. These guys are too smart, and have to much info to be working alone. Their arguments to debunk focus on the same points. even the Chemtrail believers, seem to have the same style of writing as if wrtten by the same hand.

    The debunkers never address the color changes which anyone can see. we know NASA has a Barium delivery spray system. we know they are doing it, and we know they are poisioning us. This site is just to see what people know and who they are that know, nothing more nothing less. Not for anything but what makes us different from animals is compassion, We can feel for one another like no other animal on this earth. The people of this site do not have this, that makes them psychoic. I pray that you really think about what you are doing by helping who ever is poisioning us and our children. I pray that your hearts open and you rejoin the human race.

    Lastly I accept the title of nutcase, at least my eyes are open, and I am still human

  43. JFDee says:

    Tony said:
    “The debunkers never address the color changes which anyone can see”

    There are no color changes where I live (Europe). I would have noticed.

    I’m actually fascinated by thunderstorms – there may be all kinds of colors during their life cycle, especially when the sun is about to set at the time.

    I don’t remember having noticed these things earlier, but since the time I studied meteorology for my flying license exam, I’m paying a lot more attention.

    I’m not convinced though that you need chemicals to explain the play of colors. Also, increasingly violent weather is one of the things predicted as a consequence of global warming.

  44. captfitch says:

    Tony- what measures are you taking to avoid the ingestion of Barium or other chemtrail products on your daily walks?

    How do you see the planes well enough to confidently say they have no markings?

    Why would you assume that all aircraft of a commercial nature require distinct markings?

    Look up Omni Air Int’l or Ryan or even Janet on airliners.net.

  45. Tony says:

    JFDee,

    I will answer you, The thunder storm I spoke about was in the east, while the sun was in the west.the storm did come from the west. Also the clouds in all rain storms I see now even just cloudy days have clouds that have orange or iron color in them, as the cloud coverage is usally full, you can look closely and see the colors in some of the clouds. The sun does help to bring out these orange red clouds but not usally from the sun being behind the clouds, These color changes I never witnesssed in my life before these last 5 years or so. I would also like to mention that when ever there is a blue sky you can see them spraying except some Sundays. it takes about 2 to 3 days before we are fully over cast with clouds, usually followed by rain. I never smelled anything odd. The other thing I notice is birds are flying higher in the sky than I ever witnessed before, I will admitt this could be part of me looking up more, and thinking WTF are they doing spraying us. Also I think to find out why or what they are doing would have to do with what is Barium used for. It could simply be to block out Gamma rays blasts from the sun, which could damage military eletronics. The Government could also use it as a deleivery system for biolgical. Then there are the harp theroies and mind control and transmitting signals at 4 megahtz. Maybe all of the above and more. I dont know, I am just a regular guy. But no Doubt, they are spraying us, there is not even an argument about this, anyone, even an idot can see it. Also anyone can figure out that barium is poisions and gives you metal poision symptons (flu like) chest apin and high blood pressure as long term effects. That is all I have to say believe what you will

  46. Tony says:

    captfitch

    Maybe you can advise on what precautions to take on my walks? I used binoculars to see the planes, I have been to many airports and drivin bu many airports, I have watched many planes lans and take off. I have never seen a commerical airline with no markings, maybe this is something new, commerical airlines now fly in groups of 4- 6, then circle back, the criss cross over the top, ( always over the top) then come back through out the day to spot spray and leave areil contrails (since you say chemtrails dont exsist) in the places that are not covered in the sky? I just observe, you can look up too.. does take a rocket scienetist, look at me I cant even spell and I can see it. Like I said before empty arguments. and Again I PROUDLY TAKE THE TITLE NUTCASE, but I dont lie and Isee what I see you can see too if you look and become a nutcase like me,, or you can keep looking down, andd live in OZ, your choice , be human or not to be human
    [img]http://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/001.jpg[/img]

  47. MikeC says:

    At 30,000+ feet you won’t see any markings without some significant magnification – binoculars may not be enough. Check out this setup – http://www.skystef.be/scope-setup.htm ….and some of his photos are at http://www.skystef.be/contrail.htm

    Airliners do not usually carry markings on their lower surfaces, so you need to get some sideways “angle” to see the tail and fuselage markings – which means that the a/c is even further away than just it’s altitude.

    Quote:
    ” I mean he zooms right in, and there is the jet, and mounted on each side is a giant red tube, and guess what is coming out of the tubes, chemtrail.”

    Sounds like red painted engine cowlings with contrails coming out of them. what was the evidence they were anything other than contrails?

    A few airlines have red painted cowls – eg Virgin Atlantic – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Atlantic_Airways and here’s some shots from that photo site above – http://www.skystef.be/contrail/virgin-atlantic.htm

    Here’s others I found by looking at the photos on Skystef’s page with wiki links if htye also show red cowls, otherwise to the photos themselves (which are easy enough to get at using his “operator” search function):
    Sterling Airlines – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterling_Airlines
    Kingfisher – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingfisher_Airlines
    Kenya Airways – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_Airways
    Danube Wings – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danube_Wings
    air Berlin – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Berlin – but they often also ahve a big “Air Berlin” on their fuselage underside as an exception to het general lack of underside markings
    gulf air – http://www.skystef.be/contrail/gulf-air.htm (the wiki page doesn’t have any photos of the a/c with red cowls)
    Air India – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_India
    Flyglobespan – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyglobespan
    LTU – http://www.skystef.be/contrail/ltu.htm
    Czech airlines – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_Airlines

    …and I give up half way down the photos on his 2-engined page – the 4 & 3 engined pages are a lot smaller! 🙂

    anyway – I’ve blathered on – my point is that large red tubes seem likely to be engines, which is exactly what contrails come from!!

  48. Stupid says:

    Tony…. you said,
    “…commerical airlines now fly in groups of 4- 6, then circle back, the criss cross over the top, ( always over the top) then come back through out the day to spot spray and leave areil contrails (since you say chemtrails dont exsist) in the places that are not covered in the sky?…”

    I have never seen this (“…commerical airlines now fly in groups of 4- 6”).
    Is this only in your area ?
    By your description, if this happened everywhere…surely MANY more people would notice it.
    _____________________

    “Then there are the harp theroies and mind control and transmitting signals at 4 megahtz….”.
    4 Mhz …is a marine band (marine mobile).

  49. Tony says:

    stupid is as stupid does,

    seems in typing fast I wasnt as clear as I shoould have been. I was answering the post from captfish. It seems he was or she was, sugesting that the planes I saw flying in goups were unmark commercial flights. So I answered maybe this is something new.

  50. tony says:

    wow again,

    I cannot believe people actually, did research on what I said, typing comments in a thread for me was just my experience. Let me try to explain and clearify some things. I am still in awe that people want to tell me what I saw.

    first Mike
    the red tanks mounted on the side of the plane. I thought people would understand I meant seperate red tanks not the jet engines. the engines where clearly visable on the wings, these tanks were mounted behind the wings on the jet body sides lower sides but not under body and much larger than the 4 jet engines, 2 on each wing. so they were clearly not engines unless it was a new space shuttle design with red pocket rockets attached < sarcastic remark. it was a regular jet with no windows or markings and was white except the red tanks mounted. How close was the zoom. the whole plane fit in the frame clearly. so I doubt seeing his cam that this plane was at 30,000, but heck I cannot know this. Oh and by the way there were no contrials coming from the engines. unless the engines were off and they were testing the red pocket rocket engines < sarcastic remark. sorry it seems I have to cover every angle, this team looks at anything it can in a statment to debunka and cannot take a simple face value statement. there must be 10 perry masons reading my post and tearing it apart looking for a lie.

    ok mikes 4 mhtz. I saw a Jesse whatever ( the navy seal guy who became Gov.) show about harp and they used 4 mhtz as the feqencey. I dont know if this is the correct feqency, I do know however you can use sound freqency to control dogs emotions stop them from barking, they sell the devices on television. they are cheap and battery operated. So mike did not rebuke they can do it ( conntrol your mind) just my freqency, This tells me I am unto something and maybe my posts have more in it than meets the eye. cause it I was just the nutcase who cant spell. I doubt they would put so much research into debunking me. Thank you for letting me know I am on the right track,, you guys are dumber than me. All I want is my life back that was stolen from me, < this is for the spies here, they understand

    mike says
    my qoute
    ” I mean he zooms right in, and there is the jet, and mounted on each side is a giant red tube, and guess what is coming out of the tubes, chemtrail.”

    Mikes quote
    Sounds like red painted engine cowlings with contrails coming out of them. what was the evidence they were anything other than contrails? see above

    mike says
    At 30,000+ feet you won’t see any markings without some significant magnification – binoculars may not be enough. Check out this setup

    I donot have dollar store binoculars, like mike, enough said on binoculars
    Stupid says,

    Commercial jets dont fly in groups of 4- 6 .. I will clearify.. I know they dont . The jets I seen on a daily basis did fly in groups of 4 to 6, I was making the sarcastic remark that maybe this is somethig new,, which is not. only military fly in groups. except I am not sure what full size jets they have that are all white with no visable markings to see from the ground with a good set of binoulars, I will refrane from the sarcastic remark of duh maybe the the markings are on the top so the they can idenified by aliens and the space station. < this is sarcasim get it?

    Lastly in the piture I posted, you will notice the sky is blue above the sun, and therre is cloud coverage which turns red orange. This is the sunrise over the Atlantic ocean taken by me with my mobbile phone, what you dont see in the picture is the two jets leaving chemtrails across the front of the sun. This can be seen every morning, I guess may flights fly at sunrise level and this cause contarils? , Another sarcasitic remark. go watch a sunrise or a sun set ,, or read my post a thosans time have a team analize it and tear it to crap. or join the human race open your eyes , and stop being brain washed. And it would help to bring Jesus in your life , instead of the dark guy Satan,, just saying,, Don qeote stricks again

  51. Then I started to notice white clouds at night (AT DARK), almost everynight, but they would be gone by 1 am or so. This was about 5 years ago, I am talking about the white clouds at night. I mentioned it to a friend, I said something is changing, I never had seen white clouds at night and it is only certain hours, at this time I never heard about chemtrails.

    What color would you expect clouds to be at night?

    Do any of these images look like the clouds that worry you?

    http://www.google.com/images?q=night+clouds

  52. MikeC says:

    Red tanks on the side of hte fuselage certainly sound suspicious – and sorry if you feel I was being condescending, but yuo get so many obvious stupid things that it beggars belief some times!! :/

    OK – so something suspicious. Now where ‘s the verifiable evidence? You say you do not have “store bought” binoculars – and no, sorry, that is not really “enough said” – what are you using? Some high powered binoculars would certainly be enough to give a good view – so why not state what you are using? “Store bought” binoculars go up to 32x……which is pretty powerful…..but a 10″ telescope such as that used by the photographer gets up to 500X!! And it’s not that expensive – US$700 or so – see http://tinyurl.com/4kf8ajc – a lot less than large binoculars.

    the 8″ version is a couple of hundred cheaper & would probably be good enough for a/c spotting! 🙂

    I’m tempted myself at those prices….but in these parts we just don’t get anough contrails to justify it 🙁

    Aircraft with odd things on the side of the fuselage have to land somewhere, so see if you can figure out where they might be from & if there’s someone near there can photograph them – I think there’s plenty of people around the world worried about this who would love to do so.

    A personal observation of something suspicious is a start point – but that is all it is.

  53. Stupid says:

    Tont said…
    “So mike did not rebuke they can do it ( conntrol your mind) just my (4 Mhz) freqency, This tells me I am unto something and maybe my posts have more in it than meets the eye….(snip)…Thank you for letting me know I am on the right track,, ”

    No, we’re no talking about it too much, because HAARP is not the topic here. The topic is contrails.
    In fact I regretted even mentioning it, after typing it.
    If you find us not discussing some aspect you are intrigued by, and feel that that is a sign of something is either being hidden from you or above our heads……then you are welcome to that assumption.

    It is better to limit the discussion to contrails and their behaviour, otherwise everybody ends up chasing a different chicken.

  54. Tony says:

    well It is nice to see that things are the same here. so there is more than one person tearing apart posts, I think I am finished here. I think uncius, the point I was making about the white clouds at night was that they were timed. they wer also low clouds and a bit unsual for the area I live in. The other point about it is, that seeing the odd white coulds brought me to the realization of the Chemtrails. So we are here to talk about chemtrails, not harrp, which could use chemtrails or white clouds at night.

    I am a simplton, I solve problems differently, I cannot ever know where the Jet with the tanks landed, but I know this. If you never look at all the information out there whether real or fake, you will never be able to discern the truth. our brains work like a computer sort of, in as if you dont have the information, you cannot discern, the truth. example only one way thinking, or only bad info will never get you the truth. If you look at all the info you can you will get the good with the bad, and somewhere in there lies the truth.
    SO I did look at alot of stuff, read alot of stuff, and ponder for a couple years. I watched the sky, I used my memory of 55 years. and I have come to this conclusion. Yes they are spraying Chemtrails. Sadly you cannot know what I have seen or read, countless documents, I gave a hint that there is a patent (NASA) has for a barium delivery system, its use is suposed to measure currents of weather in upper atmosphere. you can find the patent. SO I know the system exsist, I know who owns the patent, I see the planes spraying, and never, never , never, in the 60’s , 70’s or 80’s 90’s did jets ever leave trails that did not disappear quickly behind the jet in my area. never ever ever. look at old movies look at the sky, never ever they are not present,, look at movies today they are there. the only other thing I saw growing up and my younger years were sky writers. this chemtrail thing started in the 90’s late 90’s .. if you want to stay blind do it,, but if they have the patent , and you see it spraying, , you can bet it is real
    the choice is yours ,, like I said find Jesus, open your eyes,, just some advice from the nutcase who cant spell. I have marine binocluars 80x and just skip over my picture, and the stuff that maybe makes some sense. I wonder do any of you have children, enjoy your life, I pray you wake up

  55. MikeC says:

    Sigh…….once more….

    the weisbach patent is well known – has anyone actually managed to find it or see the device on any aircraft? I haven’t seen any report of such.

    The existance of a patent does nto mean it is beign used for anything – if you believe otherwise then there are sites that highlight some bizarre patents that are probably much more dangerous than barium at 30,000 feet – here’s one such site – http://www.bpmlegal.com/weird.html – I wonder where they are hiding all these trains?? http://www.bpmlegal.com/wjetrain.html

    Yes there are persistant contrails in old movies – not many, but then there were not many jets “back then”, and their engines were less efficient, therefore there were fewer contrails. But they are there – all the way back to “Memphis Belle” in 1944, and short movies of the Battle of Britain.

    Other movies people have seen contrails in are listed in the comments section at http://contrailscience.com/contrails-in-the-movies/

    Sorry you choose to live a life of fear.

  56. Janet Detwiler says:

    @ Tony;

    “I see the planes spraying, and never, never , never, in the 60′s , 70′s or 80′s 90′s did jets ever leave trails that did not disappear quickly behind the jet in my area. never ever ever. look at old movies look at the sky, never ever they are not present”

    Have you looked at ANY of Uncinus’ pictures on this site? He’s got historical documentation of this going back decades. I don’t think you’re “stupid” or any of the things you said about yourself, but I do think some people have been lying to you.

  57. Janet Detwiler says:

    Oh, but speaking of Jesse Ventura…I’d love 30 minutes out of that fellas day and ask him WTF bills he had to pay to do that damn “Conspiracy” show. I’m figuring it’s the IRS, ex-wives…or is it just the fame that drives him? Alcoholism? Drug addiction? I’ve had issues with the latter two of those in my life and some difficulty with the first, so I’m not putting him down. But he ought to be ashamed of himself. Not at any time when I was a chemtrail believer did I think Jesse Ventura was a scientist or knew anything about atmospheric science. But I know his show is big in the CT world. It’s really a shame.

  58. Alexey says:

    Here is a photo of a two-engine jet with two “spraying attachments”:

    [img]http://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/106869928_998b7d8309_z.jpg[/img]

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/ccgd/106869928/

  59. MikeC says:

    I’d guess fuel dumping. Somewhere on here I posted a pic of a B727 fuel pipe schematic – that’s about where they dump nozzles are IIRC.

  60. Casey says:

    It seems quite obvious that that is fuel dumping.

    Probably a VC10 like this:

    http://www.skystef.be/images/Contrail/RRRVC1-2008-12-30-1443-Kampenhout.jpg

    Here is a photo of a VC10 dumping fuel:

    http://lh6.ggpht.com/_TgDX9yq-KdQ/SgnyHP4UyYI/AAAAAAAAB4Q/c0XTw8jDEH8/s576/DSC_7517.JPG

    Here is a pic of another plane dumping fuel

    http://nycaviation.com/newspage/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/saudi-777-fuel-dump1-heeshung-620.jpg

    That was a Saudi Arabian Airlines Boeing 777-200ER having to make an emergency landing at JFK. You can see in the photo the left rear landing gear door is still open, which I am assuming is why the pilot made the emergency landing.

  61. Casey says:

    Oh my god. I found a photo of a a secret government plane. Its engines are not leaving any contrails, and out of the left wing there is a Chemtrail!

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/rob-the-org/5422792359/in/photostream/#/

    Only kidding, but perhaps one of the experts here could address the science behind why a fuel dump will look like a regular contrail in atmospheric conditions that regular contrails do not form. I imagine its already been addressed here several times, but I haven’t come across it yet. I assume in this picture, (which also shows a plane at higher altitude that is forming contrails) it is due to altitude.

  62. MikeC says:

    the original photo is names “VC-10 and chicks” – the 2 extra contrails are 2 other a/c (the photographer thinks Tornadoes) fueling from it – they are just barely visible as off-colour “splodges” in flickr, even when magnified.

    It illustrates perfectly why better magnification and photography are required!

    I think Alexey knew this hence his comment about “attachments” 🙂 – as would we all if we’d checked all the available info! 😉

  63. MikeC says:

    Casey it is because the fuel dump doesn’t disolve into the atmosphere as water does. It is pure jet fuel – one of various mixes of hydrocarbons generically described as kerosene.

    So it stays liquid regardless of temperature/pressure (more or less), until it dissipates &/or falls to ground. It can affect plants on the gound if done at a low altitude – IRC somone reported such on here not so long ago as “evidence”, and it was traced to a flight in trouble soon after takeoff dumping fuel at relatively low altitude.

  64. Alexey says:

    MikeC,

    My apologies, I did not mean to confuse anybody. I think that the two refueling fighters could be distinguishable in the original resolution upon magnification.

    PS As a rule, I normally give a reference to the source of a photograph, if available.

  65. That’s an excellent photo Alexey. The photographer is in Scotland and comments that he frequently sees circular contrails from these planes. It makes you wonder if some of the more ardent chemtrail enthusiasts simply live under similar flight areas.

  66. Alexey says:

    Uncinus,

    I’ve found several excellent ground photos of circular contrails from Scotland on the “enthusiasts” sites and suspect that they are either AWACS or tanker contrails. Unfortunately, I cannot prove this, as they all are dated by the last third of 2007, for which no MODIS satellite data are available.

  67. perhaps one of the experts here could address the science behind why a fuel dump will look like a regular contrail in atmospheric conditions that regular contrails do not form.

    I don’t actually think they look that similar. A fuel dump is essentially spraying out a liquid at 200 mph, so it immediately aerosolizes into a fine mist, which then fairly quickly evaporates. This gives a fairly smooth looking trail that starts out very narrow at the point of exit and fades out evenly over its length.

    A contrail’s most notable difference is that it starts further away from the plane, as it takes a fraction of a second for the water to condense and freeze. It’s clumpier, with more well defined edges. It also fades away more abruptly. I’ve not seen that many fuel dumps, but they don’t tend to be as brilliant white as contrails.

    The basic similarity, and the similarity of sky-writing smoke trails, comes from them being fairly dense trails of refractive or reflective aerosols being sprayed from the back of a plane. The structural similarities come from the effects of wake turbulence.

  68. Casey says:

    Thanks Uncinus. You’re absolutely right. They don’t look that similar. Only at a glance.

  69. TONY says:

    To the group of closed eyes, here is a website for you to check out, you can debunk this easiely with all your resourses I am sure.

    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread503526/pg1,

    This should keep you busy for at least 10 min. I agree the Easter Bunny is not real, but I know Chemtrails are,, so if you use a little common sense you will see it for yourselves and become a believer,, you will find the truth,, not made up stuff in your head sorry I know you want to believe the government wouldnt do this, I know it upsets your thinking process, but be open and see, I will pray for you

  70. Debunk what? Those experiments are in the ionosphere, 150km up, nothing to do with contrails, which are at 1/10th the height. Can you say in your own words what you think I would debunk?

    It’s not about believe if someone might or might not have the mindset to do something, its about if there’s any actual evidence that they are.

  71. TONY says:

    OH I for one thing, yes there have been Chemtrails in the past as far bback as the 30’s I believe, they use them all the time. they were called and still are called crop dusting

  72. But:

    1) Crop dusting has never been called “chemtrails”
    2) Clearly the chemtrail theorists are no-more talking about crop dusting than they are about car exhaust.

  73. LIES says:

    I wouldnt even bother with some people. I DONT CARE IF ITS NOT ALOT> It adds up and its legitimately coming out of a plane. Even if its not bad for you right away it will most definitely have long term effects. 75% of the BULLSHIT put in boxes and sold in stores today contain multiple volatile chemicals that the EPA and FDA don’t give a shit about. ITS KILLING YOU> ITS KILLING ME>

  74. LIES says:

    HAHA and you idiots caling it crop dusting you are more than ignorant and completely unintellegent. Since when do they crop dust from 15,000 feet? haha it wouldnt be very effective at hitting your target less than spreading out and getting everything else too.

    Do a little research people. They have open discussion about this stuff in state and federal meetings…just because you dont see it on your televesion doesnt mean it isnt real.
    Try some other phrases or words in your research instead of the conspiracy theory name of CHEMTRAIL!
    Try Operation Garden Plot and find out what VTRPE is and that will will then lead you to why this became. THEN look into where this technology has moved to be used today. They have admittedly dropped pesticides with these planes and there have been 1000s of local town and state meeting about this and a GeoEngineer and Ecologist HIMSELF actually admits that if workers were in the feilds WHICH THEY WERE, would this harm them. He answers yes.

    So ask yourself should I really be so stupid to think that planes these days are all of the sudden starting to produce visible exhaust that sticks around in perfect stripes eventually spreading to cloud cover…..DUHHHHH NO THEY DON’TTTTTTTTTTT End of it.
    And to dispute this as contrail……SO I guess now a days condensed air and water from the jet engine of a plane just stays in the sky as a perfect stripe and breaks into cloud cover?????

    JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVENT SEEN IT DOESNT MEEN IT ISNT TRUE
    Eventually you will see these planes spewing there garbage in your skys and creating nasty clouds in the sky YOU WILL REALIZE HOW STUPID YOUVE BEEN YOUR WHOLE LIFE.

    EVERYBODY HAS CANCER. EVERYBODY HAS MENTAL ISSUES. EVERYBODY IS SHOT FROM THE CHEMICALS YOU EAT, DRINK, AND BREATH ON A DAILY BASIS. ENJOY

  75. SO I guess now a days condensed air and water from the jet engine of a plane just stays in the sky as a perfect stripe and breaks into cloud cover?

    Yes, just as it always has. Have a look in any old book on clouds and you’ll see this described.

    Like this one from 1963:

    http://www.youtube.com/user/Epoxynous#p/a/u/0/_ZP_qBDtcoE

  76. Janet Detwiler says:

    Wow, “LIES”. This contrail phenomenon has been with us for decades. The reason people are noticing it so much these days is, #1 ~ they’ve found a conspiracy theorist web site that tells them this is unusual, and #2d ~ they’re not aware of the very real fact that there are a heck of a lot more planes in the sky these days than there used to be.

    I live in an area with a lot of high-altitude flyover. Contrail season is coming up, and I can expect to be seeing dozens to hundreds of lingering contrails on most days, if atmospheric conditions are right for them to form.

    I’m not sure where you’re getting your data that everybody is sick or has cancer, because the fact is that people are actually living longer and healthier lives in this country. There are pollutants that threaten health and life, but you’re wasting your energy thinking they’re coming out of the back of a jet. Please just keep reading the data here! It won’t change your mind if you’re right, I mean, right?

  77. Janet Detwiler says:

    @ TONY; I have already spent a lot of time on ATS.com. Ten minutes? I used to spend days over there, and there’s no way I’m going to waste my time over there anymore. There’s no scientific data to be found there, but if you can find some and post it over here? That would rock.

  78. justin alexander says:

    I worry about a world where internet searches and amateur analysis are replacing science and reason. I just wish that these people who are passionate enough to scour the internet for days, postulate theories, and demand the people “wake up” would focus their energy on getting a real education. the world needs it. i think these people would realize that academics world wide are not ever going to “wake up” to the chemtrail phenomenon. there is simply no scientific evidence to support the notion. of course, the academic professors, air traffic controllers, pilots, toxicologists, countless air force personnel, and family members of mine who were pilots for years are all in on the conspiracy, right?

  79. Janet Detwiler says:

    @justin alexander ~ You put that nicely. Thank you.

  80. Janet Detwiler says:

    @ TONY; If you’re still here. I care about exposing “chemtrails” as a hoax, probably because I used to believe in that hoax and lost a year of my life to it. So I went over to the ATS site even though I feel I’ve already wasted a good deal of time there also. Did you happen to read this? ~ http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread378822/pg1

  81. JazzRoc says:

    Lies, why don’t you just spend some time studying the Earth?
    Wherever you are…
    Let’s assume you live on the eastern seaboard of the USA (the most heavily-traveled area on Earth).
    If you look at a MODIS satellite image on a heavily-contrailed day, you can see something like a 2% sky coverage with trails. That’s 2% coverage over the eastern seaboard, but never over the whole of the USA.
    But the USA is only 2% of the area of the Earth. So what’s 2% of 2%? It’s 0.04%, or one two hundred and fiftieth of the surface of the Earth.
    Even if the spray were of the deadliest material possible, it wouldn’t be possible for it to do as you say, to contaminate FIVE HUNDRED MILLION CUBIC MILES of atmosphere (for that is how much there is), and render us ill.
    How many planes do you think there are? How much poison do you think they can carry?
    It is finely ironical that the process that makes these trails (out of atmospheric water vapor) does it so well that they would pass drinking water standards, yet here you are, unabashed it seems, confidently claiming (without an iota of evidence) that they are killing us.
    Well, I’m quite happy if you stay inside and never come out. All the more nature for the rest of us to enjoy…

  82. JazzRoc says:

    Janet Detweiler: “Did you happen to read this? ~ http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread378822/pg1

    Ah, surely that has died a death – the last post was January this year in an anti-chemtrail position.
    It needed to die…

  83. TruthBeKnown says:

    For all those debunkers out there, the best credible evidence (should you care to educate yourselves) can be found if you go to YouTube…..type in the YouTube search box, “What in the World are They Spraying”. There is the full version 1:38…(recomended)….or several short clips you can view one after the other. After watching “What in the World are They Spraying” you still think this evil operation is not happening, then you had better hire a small corporate jet, fly behind and aerosol tanker while it’s spraying, and breath deep….that’s right…..DEEP, DEEP, DEEP. Make out your last will and testament before hand and pay the pilot up front first. Oh yeah, and tell him/her to put on a gas mask before entering the plume because you want the pilot to be able to make it back down safely. People like you who don’t use the brains they were born with, are a hazzard to the rest of us. You are a living example of what’s wrong with the world. Don’t even talk to me!

  84. Janet Detwiler says:

    @ JazzRoc ~ I thought the article itself, though rather poorly written, was a good debunk of “chemtrails”, especially for a site like ATS. That was my point to “TONY”. He had suggested checking out ATS, and I was just suggesting he read that particular post that debunks “chemtrails”.

  85. joseph says:

    im not sure bout historyconcerning the u.s. testing but the soviet union is in fact still testing today/i know the us would notice if the soviet union was in national airspace but not if they were “sabotaged” im not a complete expert on this subject but i know that the government was made on a foundation of secrecy when it came to different matters regarding nuclear war and chemtrail testing i know that the public is better off unknowing than if they were aware because people are animals and can easily over react to these things but there needs to secretivity you cant have a trusting government 100% its impossible why do you think theres so much corruption and debt

  86. joseph says:

    i also think it furthers my point whenever something strange happens and the people want more info on the matter and the government makes up some story or alibi to cover the epidemic then something else “interesting” happens and it makes people forget there questioning… weird is it not

  87. joseph says:

    whats up with this uncinus dude tryin to disprove everyone like a corprate know it all

  88. joseph says:

    Academianon i relize your skeptics and i share the concern, but ive studied government frequently and i am cleanly educated in this government secrecy yes there has been testing but it goes further back than the nuremburg trials a whole lot back as ive said i was educated in this i know for fact it has im not sayin im smarter just sayin i could give you more insight and uncinus seems so determined to prove his point and he is either part of the congress or a impared citizen now the us and uk have done testing on theyre countrys before but never anything that could sucome to immediate death however they have been know to cause a certain cancer in more active cities so they tend to only test in rural areas but the uk is more ubrupt now the problens concerning the soviet union are in fact far worse than the experiments taken here you can try to research these topics the results are horrible for the soveit union i will not share the sights with you however im not sure if im allowed to but i’ll clarify it then get back to you… might be a while though maybe a week im not sure

  89. MikeC says:

    Joseph – I don’t think anyone here is saying trust the Govt 100% – the proven historical evidence of experimentation is well known.

    But that’s part of the point – there IS evidence of it – it is verifiable, it is scientifict, it is proveable.

    Ther is NO evidence of chemtrails – not one single piece of evidence that is verifiable, scientific, provable. NOT ONE PIECE.

    However ther is a GREAT DEAL of evidence that contrails now are the same as contrails in 1944 – that they are the exhaust of hydrocarbon combustion – whether in jet turbines of internal combustion cylinders – producing water vapour (as combustion always has) that freezes into artificial cirrus coud if the weather conditions are appropriate.

    And there is a lot of evidence that people are getting scared by chemtrails – sooner or alter someone is probably goign to take it far too seriously and “take action”. In the mean time there’s a lot of people who are probably sincerely worried about it.

    All for no reason.

    And that pisses off a lot of people – like me – some possibly for altruistic reasons – others, again like me – because “we” just hate seeing a hoax like this perpetrated – it offends “us”, some of “us” would have to be part of it because of the jobs we hold in aviation – and “we” know “we” are not part of any such programme.

    That plus I hate seeing people make money by deluding the public!

  90. joseph says:

    i gets what your saying however people in the gov. will always make money deluding the public because this is not a democracy its a republic whatever the public says the gov. still gets the last say

  91. MikeC says:

    I’m not in the USA – I don’t live in a republic (but AFAIK there’s no reason why a republic can’t be a democracy and i’m not sure why that is important).

    So-called chemtrails exist over England, France, Germany, China, Russia, the Atlantic & Pacific Oceans, Australia. they exist at ground level in Antarctica and Alaska.

  92. Ross Marsden says:

    @joseph
    Can you give us a for-instance of people in the government making money deluding the public?
    Which people, how much money, what delusion? I am supposing this relates to “chemtrails”.

    I will ask you later about the reason for that being that you live in a republic (which you say is not a democracy).

  93. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    then you had better hire a small corporate jet, fly behind and aerosol tanker while it’s spraying, and breath deep….that’s right…..DEEP, DEEP, DEEP. Make out your last will and testament before hand and pay the pilot up front first. Oh yeah, and tell him/her to put on a gas mask before entering the plume because you want the pilot to be able to make it back down safely.

    You know the millions upon millions of people who travel by air every year?

    What air do you think they are breathing?

    Maybe they aren’t breathing DEEP, DEEP, DEEP enough.

  94. Deanna Munson says:

    so do u guys get paid per hour or per lie???this site is soley4wasting peoples valuable time.we arent asleep anymore.tell ur bosses

  95. Ross Marsden says:

    Hello Deanna,
    Did you see some lies posted here? Could you give the page name and post number and quote them? We can have a closer look at the issue and correct the statement, if that needs to de done.
    We are seeking the truth, and we try to explain what we and others are observing using the known science.
    Thanks.
    Ross M

  96. MikeC says:

    And not just lies – Mick has a standing offer to correct anything that is incorrct (on the “About” page).

    Lots of chemtrails believers say this site is propaganda, lies, disinfo, shills, etc., on various forums, but so far I havent’ seen any of them front up to identify what it is here that is wrong.

    Perhaps you could be the first?

  97. tryblinking says:

    I take it those 2 above are some form of spam? Is there any way to filter out comments which don’t really mean anything? …oh, wait, that might also cut out alot of the comments from chemtrail acolytes.

    So, does this win-win filter exist?

  98. One of them was. One was a pingback from a forum, so I left it

Comments are closed.