Home » contrails » Chemtrail Myths

Chemtrail Myths

Some people believe that the government is spraying something into the air, and this creates unsual looking contrails. They call these “chemtrails”. Now, there is no real evidence that “chemtrails” are real, but there are several myths on the internet about “chemtrails”. All these myths can very easily be shown to be false, and I’ve gathered the most popular myths here as a little time-saver for the person who has encountered “chemtrails” for the first time.

Myth #1Normal contrails don’t last very long, but “chemtrails” last for hours and sometimes spread out.

False – Contrails fade away, or persist, or even spread out to cover the sky, depending on the weather conditions. you can confirm this by looking in an encyclopedia. such as the Encyclopædia Britannica

[Contrails] may last for several hours. The trail may be distorted by the winds, and sometimes it spreads outwards to form a layer of cirrus cloud.

For more info on this myth, read “Persisting and Spreading contrails

Myth #2 Contrails have been observed to persist and spread when the humidity was too low, so they must be “chemtrails”

2004chambersgraph.gifFalse – Nobody has ever measured low humidity within a persisting contrail. The fact is it is very difficult to measure humidity in a specific region at a specific altitude, at a given time, the best you can do is make a rough prediction. Measurements are made by weather balloons at just a few stations that average 235 miles apart, at 12 hour intervals, and then local predictions are extrapolated from this. The weather balloons can drift as much as 100 miles in their ascent, so you never know where the measurements are coming from. Humidity can vary by as much as 80% in a 12 hour period, and vary by similar amount over just a few miles. The fact that the contrail is spreading is actually a far more accurate indicator of high humidity than the available humidity predictions. NASAs own experiments (right) show persisting contrails over a large range of calculated humidities, even down to 10%.

Myth #3 – Long lasting contrails have appeared in “parallel lines”, “grid” and “X” formations, which are not normal, so must be “chemtrails.

False. Well, the last bit is false. Yes, contrails make all kinds of patterns in the sky, simply because there are a lot of planes flying overhead, and they fly in all directions. This is pretty much a function of where you live, and the prevailing winds. For example, if you live the Willamette Valley, Oregon, the overflying planes are nearly all North/South, so you’ll get parallel lines. If you live live in more central place, like North Texas, you’ll get planes flying overhead in every direction, so you will get “X” patterns (and “H” and “grids”). If there’s enough wind, and the trails last long enough, then the grid might spread out to cover the sky.

Myth #4 – A bill to ban chemtrails was introduced into congress by Dennis Kucinich, but quickly had chemtrails edited out.

False – HR 2977 was written by a bunch of UFO enthusiasts intent on exposing a conspiracy to suppress alien technology. Dennis Kucinich did not write the bill, he not know what chemtrails were, and when he found out, he distanced himself from that language. The bill was re-written in order that it might pass. See the full article: Kucinich, Chemtrails and HR 2977.

Myth #5 – Public Law 105-85 gives the military permission to experiment with chemical and biological weapons on humans, without their consent

False – 105-85, Sec. 1078, actually prevents experiments except for peaceful purposes, and those can only be performed if informed consent is obtained from each test subject. It’s basically the same procedure as for human drug trials.


Those myths are really the basis of the “chemtrail” conspiracy theory. There is more, of course, like the halos and sun-dogs that you sometimes see (normal atmospheric optical effects), the dark lines (shadows of varying types), the stuff on the ground (unconnected). But these things really get to the heart of 99% of the chemtrail argument. After they are dispensed with, the theory holds about as much water as alien mind-control implants.

Let me know if you’ve got something else you’d like investigating, and I might add it here.
Just leave a comment below.

1,275 thoughts on “Chemtrail Myths

  1. Steve Funk says:

    Joe, if you are really a scientist you should know that anecdotal data is not reliable. If you have some real data on China, I would like to see it. If you want an anecdote, I can tell you that in my region we sometimes go months without persistent contrails during the summer. They occur mostly in colder months, and typically about 48 hours before a front hits. If they were doing geoengineering, the summer would be the logical time to do it. They would have few weather problems, and get more bang for the buck since the sun is higher in these months. But the summer is when persistent contrails are least likely here.

  2. Jay Reynolds says:

    Joe, as a hard core PhD. scientist, exactly what single-most irrefutable empirical evidence for chemtrails or geoengineering do you find most compelling. Hard data or something which can be confirmed, please.
    I’d be very interested in the sort of presentation a PhD scientst can put forward, the sort of thing you would seek to get published in a professional journal, like you did for your PhD.

    You can post it in the forum and I’m sure plenty of folks would love to see it. Just look at the forum link at the top of the page.

  3. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    How on earth can you claim that somewhere has no “chemtrails”?

    It’s ridiculous. It’s impossible to prove.

    Although you can easily google china chemtrails and see that contrails do indeed persist in China and then wonder why on earth someone would try and claim that they don’t.

  4. Jay Reynolds says:

    Joe, I am very disappointed. I had really hoped that you could show for once some PhD. quality evidence.
    Maybe there isn’t enough?

  5. Chris says:

    Thanks Mick for your dedication to this myth. They should add you to Mythbusters. =D

    It really pains me to know there are so many people out there that aren’t willing to pick up an old meteorological book and read. I remember well when I was a kid looking up at the sky and following a contrail to see if the plane was still there. Then I’d sit and watch the trail turn into a cloud. And sometimes they would break up or dissipate, but I always enjoyed watching them turn into a big cloud.

    I’m a Libertarian, and I know a ton of chemtrail-conspiracy-theorists are in this party, but I really wish they would just leave and form their own crazy group. They really give us a bad name.

  6. bryansail says:

    Greetings Mick and all,

    Anyone have any guesses as to what the 2 trade secret / undisclosed ingredients in stadis 450 are?

    Mick, I have a series of 5 or 6 pictures taken over los angeles of an unusual contrail. I took them from my phone and would like your thoughts on what this is. If you e-mail me, I will send the pictures in the order that I snapped them.



  7. Jay Reynolds says:

    Bryan, it doesn’t really matter what is in the additive, because only 10 ml per 1000 gallons is used. 10 ml is two teaspoons. If you want to know, buy some and get it analyzed. You actually should do two tests, one with straight fuel, and one with the additive added at the proper rate to the fuel. Most likely, there will be no difference noted, because so little is needed.

    But the it’s in the fuel (additive) or whatever is a red herring. Contrails only need water to form and persist, and the water produced when fuel is burned doesn’t depend on anything but the hydrogen in the fuel combining with the oxygen in the air. Contrails have always been able to persist, despite the claims of the chemtrail misleaders.

  8. G says:

    I hear lot’s of emotion from the chemtrail cult…not much info like the calm debunker

  9. MikeC says:

    Oddly enough TankerEnemy has the composition of Stadis 450 in a document on his web page – http://www.tanker-enemy.com/PDF/Stadis_450_sds_eng.pdf

    Lo and behold there is nothing listed that is unknown – the exact quantities are not specified – each component has a range for the % of the product it can be.

  10. Chopper says:

    Greetings friends. I only become aware of this idea of chem trails this past October, so I’m trying to catch up. I live in southern Colorado, and this past Saturday we saw a LOT of persistent chem trails/contrails. I have to admit that I haven’t read this entire thread going back to 2007, so some of what I’m going to ask may have already been addressed (and I apologize in advance if this has been discussed).

    I’m seen Michael Murphy’s documentary, and I’ve seen interviews with him on Gaiam TV. Based on what I’ve digested thus far, I’m ready to accept the idea that all contrails are natural and harmless to human beings, but there’s a few things I need answers to:

    1) What about the patents on the aerosols and distribution systems for these chemical cocktails? I haven’t looked up the patent numbers myself, but I’ve heard them quoted. If these patents exist, then what?

    2) Is there truth to what Michael said about treaties between the US and other nations which state we won’t spray over foreign soil? If these treaties exist, why? If they don’t, Michael is obviously lying.

    3) Why is it that you can observe a great big trail in the sky left by one plane, and then minutes later another plane, leaving a dissipating contrail, will fly right by it or under/through it? If these persistent contrails are all the accumulation of ice, how is it that one flight leaves a huge trail and another does not? I’m imagining any scientific answer to this question will involve the altitude of the plane, but from the untrained observer on the ground, they look about the same altitude. Is it possible that domestic flights would vary in altitude to such an extent that something like this could happen naturally?

    4) Finally, are we to assume the US government (or for that matter, ANY government) wouldn’t relish the ability to modify/control the weather? I can’t help but think to myself that if a group had this ability, it would be a huge strategic advantage. Are we to deny the obvious here? See, this is where I think most people start getting hot under the collar: very few people in this country believe that our government wouldn’t jump at the opportunity to have this ability. We’ve been lied too before, and that’s not conspiracy. We’ve been pulled into wars through false flag events, and that’s not conspiracy. Are we honestly supposed to believe our government wouldn’t use these technologies?

    Sincere thanks for thoughts and feelings on this comment!

  11. 1) The patents are mostly for innocuous stuff like crop dusting, or clouds seeding. There are some for geoengineering, but a patent only states the possible future use of an idea, it does not mean that it works, or that it is being used.

    2) The treaties, if they exist, are probably either for cloud seeding, or for some other form of spraying. Ask him what treaties he is referring to.

    3) It only takes a few hudred feet for the difference between no contrail and a persisting contrail.

    4) Sure, but the point is that there’s no evidence it is being done.

  12. Chopper says:

    Mick, thank you very much for the response.

    It seems to me that the #1 thing chem trail folks point to the most is the persistent contrails. You’re explanation on this web site makes a lot of sense to me. I can see how humidity and altitude (and even the plane itself) could play into this.

    The question that’s bugging me right now is this: if chem trails were getting sprayed, how would we tell the difference between a chem trail and a normal, persistent contrail being formed in humid air? Maybe there would be no way to tell the difference?

    It seems to me that the real proof would come from water and soil samples, which is why I found Michael Murphy’s documentary so compelling. He touched on that, but I think a real scientific study would need to be conducted to give any credibility to the claim that these chem trail flights are changing the water the drink and the soil we plant our food in. Has anyone set out to try and prove/disprove this on their own? It doesn’t seem like it would be too hard for a biologist to run around at take samples.

  13. cloudspotter says:

    Soil and water tests are carried out regularly around the world and as far as I’m aware have yet to show up anything unusual. Performing the tests isn’t the hard part, identifying the source of anything that was found would be. Aerosols sprayed at that altitude would stay aloft for weeks or even years and drift around the globe. What they need to do is fly into a trail with in a plane equipped for sampling which is perfectly doable and MJM is aware of it. You have to ask, Why In The World Aren’t They Doing It.

  14. Chopper, it really depends on what is being sprayed. But the two biggest difference would be:

    1) There would be no gap between any nozzle and the trail, if powder were being sprayed.
    2) The trail would quickly dissipate like smoke does. 99.9% of the mass of a contrail comes from atmospheric vapor. A “chemtrail” could only be that thick if it were very short.

    Also there would likely be some difference in color. Both reflected, and refracted (water contrails sometimes create nice rainbow effects from the ice crystals).

  15. Chopper says:

    Cloudspotter, that’s a brilliant idea, and that would definitely provide some answers. This seems like it would be hard to pull off, though. Wouldn’t you need a plane with the capability to fly at the same altitude as these commercial flights? You’d also have to have an idea which flights to tail, and then you’d probably need permission to be up there at the same altitude as these flights (I wonder how the FAA would feel about that?). I imagine if you started tailing military flights (which would likely be the source of distribution), you’d run the risk of getting yourself in some serious trouble with our nation’s Air Force.

    Then again, maybe you could fly at a lower altitude with a smaller plane.

  16. Since the “chemtrails” supposedly hang around for hours, you could just wait (on the ground) for an hour until the plane (military or otherwise) is long gone, and then fly up and sample the trail.

  17. Chopper says:

    Yup … okay, no reason then why that theory can’t be tested.

  18. captfitch says:

    chopper- just carry testing equipment on a regular commercial flight. All that air people breath comes directly from the outside anyway.

    Shouldn’t people who fly often have some kind of symptom?

  19. Jay Reynolds says:

    The soil and water tests in Michael Murphy’s movie are interpreted in a very bogus way, and all the actors in his movie have been made aware of that fact, yet they refuse to address the issues..
    Point 1: Their tests of “surface” water, the ones from ponds, included soil, dirt from the bottom of the pond. They thus analyzed dirt not water.
    Point 2: The snow sample from Mt. Shasta was taken from dirty snow in July, and a susbequent test which duplicated it found ordinary dirt blown onto the snow, and clean snow underneath. The elements found were from dirt.
    Point 3: Rainfall samples from 30 and 40 years ago found the same amounts of aluminum as the tests from Michael Murphy’s movie.
    Point 4: Aluminum is the third-most abundant element in earth’s crust, it has aways been there since the beginning to time. Most aluminum is in the crust associated with either oxygen or silicon. A subsequent test of rainwater at Mt. Shasta found, guess what? Aluminum associated with silicon, not the signature of “geoengineering”, but the signature of mother earth itself.
    Please see the research, documentation and lab sample results here (3 pages)

  20. Chopper says:

    I wonder why he’s approaching the issue this way, then? I’m very happy he’s out there looking for issues related to contamination of our earth’s resources. That’s something we need. But pointing to persistent contrails in the sky and saying, “look out for those”, when it’s a naturally occurring thing does nothing more than mislead the public and confuse people who are trying to learn the truth for themselves. Maybe Monsanto and other companies really are planning something. I could find that very easy to believe given their track record elsewhere in the world.

  21. captfitch says:

    He’s taking advantage of the general public’s almost complete lack of understanding of weather, aviation and the scientific method. I work in that environment every day and Mick and others here know way more about weather than I do.

  22. Chopper says:

    I just don’t understand why … unless he’s making $$$ off this somehow.

  23. Makoto_Hitoshie says:

    I can’t say I’m very knowledgeable on the subject but I would like to point out ‘Global warming’, ‘more planes now in the sky than before” and ‘the planes aren’t the same as they were years ago, so they can’t be expected to perform exactly the same as previous models’. These are all points I didn’t see in my findings here and I’m sure all 3 could effect things such as what people remember.

  24. JFDee says:


    your points are all very valid.

    However, note the time stamp on this article (May 2007); since then, many other articles have been posted, some of which do focus on the issues you raised.

    – More planes:

    – Differences between older and newer planes:

    No article on global warming so far – I assume that the specific effects on contrail formation are not easy to predict or even to explain.
    One – obvious – consequence of warming is that the capacity of the air to hold water vapor is increased. It’s probably not outright false to assume that this may eventually have an influence on the humidity levels at contrail altitude, through vertical convection (e.g. increased thunderstorm activity).

  25. Jake says:

    I’m 27 and I remember when I Was 8 skating out side and seeing the contrails and they staid around for a very long time. Then on other days it would be quick… I knew about contrails since I was young. All this stuff is possible you do know this right? Let’s say they are all normal Contrails…Either way white reflects sun light… As far as planet earth there shouldn’t be plains in the air making contrails… Have you heard of this? IF everything in the world was made white or you were to paint there roofs ( just have the color white ) white it would slowly (years and years) cause global temp to decrease.. So since global warming is already affect the Atlantic Ocean and the East Coast Beach lines of the United states… Wouldn’t it make sense for the government to make contrails that last longer so they can deflect more light out and prevent the average temperature from going up globally? IF they did cloud seeding years and year ago you don’t think they have came up with way of doing other things?

  26. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    Clouds aren’t white.

    Something made of water is quite different to a painted wall.

    If a cloud reflected all the light it would appear black to us.

    Clouds scatter light.

  27. Captfitch says:


  28. Clouds do reflect a portion of the sunlight though. However, they also trap heat. I

  29. bryansail says:

    So clouds ( contrails ) are currently modifying the atmosphere and weather.

    We know that the Navy and Air Force have been very interested for a very long time in weather modification for numerous reasons. We also know that weather historically has been a force multiplier extending back to the earliest recorded history. It can not be argued that weather is a closely studied component to warfare.

    What are the effects of Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (barium salts) on the atmosphere and rainfall ?

    Are there any military applications for barium salts in naval communications and military defense ?

  30. Jay Reynolds says:

    There is a substance called Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid which is a component of an anti-static additive used in jet fuel called stadis 450. Here is the chemical formula for it:
    As you can see, that substance does not contain barium.

    There is also a susbtance called Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (barium salts), but that is not used as a jet fuel additive, it is used in greases and lubricants.

    Sorry to break the news to you, but the idea that chemtrails contain barium was a hoax perpetrated by a US Postal Service worker named A.C. Griffith. You can read the history of the hoax here, and will find that he was a consummate liar about many things, including his own life:

  31. bryansail says:

    Hi Jay,

    With all due respect Jay, I am not interested in A.C. Griffith, nor in the history of chemtrail web sites.

    I am interested in dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid and wikipedia .
    Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid is CAS number 25322-17-2 which is used in greases and lubricants and stadis 450 as well as for imaging the human body. It is also referenced as Naphthalenesulfonicacid, dinonyl. http://en.vionto.com/show/me/Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic+acid is a currently used anti-static agent in jet fuels. Here is the epa data sheet for it, http://www.epa.gov/hpv/pubs/summaries/dinapcat/c15766tp.pdf which details that DINSS is a high production volume chemical.

    The molecule that you noted C28H4403S is dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (aka barium salts.) See; http://www.chemicalbook.com/ChemicalProductProperty_EN_CB8233796.htm

    Maybe you were being a little to dogmatic in scandalizing the messengers and chemtrail community. Barium is a component of contrails and as has been mentioned before on this website, it comprises a small portion of jet fuels.

    Did you have answers to any of the other questions that I asked?
    I will be discussing barium and the atmosphere soon.

    God Bless,



  32. Jay Reynolds says:

    bryan, sad to see you aren’t interested in how this idea about barium started, Unless you know the mistakes of history, you are likely to repeat them.

    I don’t think you fully understand one of the mistakes you are making. The links you have list three members of the DINNSA family, but only one of them contains the element barium, and it is not used in Stadis 450, or any other jet fuel additive!

    Here are the three chemicals, along wih their CAS numbers:
    Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (barium salt) CAS 25619-56-1
    Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (DINNSA) CAS 25322-17-2
    Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (calcium salt) CAS 57855-77-3

    As you can see, these are three entirely different chemicals, with different CAS numbers, different chemical properties, and different elemental makeups. For instance, one is an acid, CAS 25322-17-2, while the oher two are salts (CAS 57855-77-3 and CAS 25619-56-1) formed by the addition of a base compound of barium or calcium, after which the acid is neutralized and no longer acidic at all.

    Note, the DINNSA is the compound used for jet fuel additive, NOT the barium or calcium salts..

    Another point in which you are mistaken is that none of these are used for imaging purposes. A completely different compound called barium sulfate, a common mineral also known as barite found in earth’s crust, is used to provide contrast for body CAT scans.

    So, considering that you have been mistaken on a number of basic chemical points, maybe you need to do some further study on the matter first before jumping to conclusions…..

  33. Jay Reynolds says:

    Brian, here are your questions and answers:

    Q: What are the effects of Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid (barium salts) on the atmosphere and rainfall ?
    A: Since the substance you mention is not commonly released into the atmosphere or found in rainfall, there would be no effect on the atmosphere or rainfall.

    Q: Are there any military applications for barium salts in naval communications and military defense ?
    A: I know of no military applications for barium salts in naval communications or military defense. All trails leading backwards to where the claims about this came from lead to the unsupported claims of A.C. Griffith, and end there as he never documented any such usage. However, there is documentation about howhe was able to easly perpetrate this hoax by faking articles, depicting ordinary websites as something secret, and lying about his resume.

    You see, Brian, I am very happy you came here and got what none of the chemtrail websites will tell you, the straight truth about how this particular gambit of the hoax started and what is has led to. Just another chemtrails myth.
    If you ned to know more, the discussion is waiting:

  34. bryansail says:

    Hi Jay,

    Thanks. I am getting more familiar with dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid and agree that the molecular category C28H4403S includes DINNSA, Barium Salts and Calcium salts.

    Apparently Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid by itself does not function as an anti-static additive.
    Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid is prepared by reaction of naphthalene with nonene, yielding diisononylnaphthalene. Diisononylnaphthalene then undergoes sulfonation.

    diisononylnaphthalene Basic information
    Product Name: diisononylnaphthalene
    Synonyms: diisononylnaphthalene
    CAS: 63512-64-1

    I will be posting more on communications functions, artificial duct creation, and aerosol issues.


  35. Jay Reynolds says:

    Bryan wrote:
    “Thanks. I am getting more familiar with dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid and agree that the molecular category C28H4403S includes DINNSA, Barium Salts and Calcium salts.”
    No, actually not.
    The element barium is abbreviated Ba.
    Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid’s chemical equation is:
    C28H4403S, which stands for 28 carbon atoms, 44 hydrogen atoms, 3 oxygen atoms, and one sulfur atom. Ba is not included in the formula for dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid because it DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY Barium!

    Bryan also wrote:
    “Apparently Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid by itself does not function as an anti-static additive.”

    No, dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid does function as an anti-static additive by improving the conductivity.
    It is dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid, NOT INCLUDING BARIUM, which functions as the antistatic additive in Stadis 450 used in jet fuel. Here is the spec sheet for Stadis 450, in which you will find listed:
    CAS # 25322-17-2 Dinonylnaphthylsulfonic acid

    The barium salt CAS 25619-56-1 is not a component of Stadis 450!

    Lastly, Bryan wrote:
    “I will be posting more on communications functions, artificial duct creation, and aerosol issues.”

    No need to repeat A.C. Griffith’s claims here.They have aleady been debunked here:

  36. Jay Reynolds says:

    Stadis 450 MSDS sheet link:

    Note that the typical Stadis 450 concentration in jet fuel is 10 mL additive per 1,000 gallons.
    Not much good for creating Griffith;s claimed “ducting”. Look at it this way, if thejet burns 3000 gallons per hour, it will be emitting the burned residue of 30 ml of Stadis 450. However, during that time, it will have flown over 500 miles. 30 ml. is about two tablespoons.

    Two tablespoons spread over five hundred miles.

    Give it up, Bryan.

  37. Captfitch says:

    Even 3000 gallons over 500 miles seems like a very low concentration.

  38. bryansail says:

    Greetings Jay,

    Thanks for your responses.

    I will be making a post over at the metabunk site sometime in the next 2 weeks or so re; anti-static agents, fuel improvers, radar platforms and other military research. My reference documentation will not be entirely familiar to you based upon your responses here.

    The information re; artificial ducting does not require A.C. Griffith. None of the papers and links that I will provide make any mention of his name.

    I will also be taking a closer look at the DINNSA family and research documents showing that metal oxides are a component of jet exhaust.

    I don’t have a strong emotional attachment to this issue any longer but I do still find contrails interesting. There is ongoing investigation and experimentation in moderating the atmosphere that is much more interesting than chaff.

    May peace be yours,


  39. Jay Reynolds says:

    There is a small amount of erosional metal particulates from engine parts, but jet fuels contain practically no metals. Metals erode fuel systems, the combustion path and the hot gas path parts and eroded engines fail. No substantial metals come from jet fuel, period.

    You seem to be concentrating on jet fuel. I’m sure ou can find pleny of references to stuff that COULD be added to jet fuel, and maybe even ways that people think these IDEAS COULD accomplish something.

    But have you bothered to actually get some samples of jet fuel and have them analyzed yet?

    If these things were in jet fuel, by the way, wouldn’t they also be found on runways, at ramps, etc. where the engines run at idle or power up for takeoff? I’m thinking more on the practical side of things, because there are many ‘idea men’ out there, but planes fuel up and take off every day.

    If all you want is a discussion about theory, that doesn’t get much done to solve any mysteries.

    Still, I’ll listen to what you say at metabunk. I trained as a gas turbine field engineer with GE back in the 1970’s, and worked with them during the 80’s and there are active pilots posting who have plenty of first hand knowledge here and over there. We are willing to look at ideas, bt most of us would prefer action and are more solution-oriented. Most of the chemtails advocates seem to prefer the status quo which leaves room for them to continue endless speculation leading nowhere. That is why these myths have persisted for decades, the Borg as no collective memory and even less self-correction. It is more like a revolving door of new converts proselytizing new converts just to uselessly perpetuate itself.

  40. Niall says:

    What if it’s not the composition of jet fuel that has changed, but rather the atmosphere itself?


  41. bryansail says:

    The atmosphere has is does and will change. Temperatures aloft change, the size of our protective shield changes. The sun – earth – cosmic ray variability appears to be poorly understood area. There are researchers who disagree and believe that we understand this variability pretty well but there is reams of data that shows that many variabilities and dynamics are poorly understood.

    Where I am in Southern California, I have not yet seen noctilucent clouds, I HAVE seen an amazingly beautiful deep (electric almost) blue hue when the Sun is 5 to 10 degrees below the horizon in early summer. Some of the nights that I have seen this have been evenings in which people from more northern latitudes have documented noctilucent clouds. Some of these images show the same brilliantly deep atmospheric color that I have noticed.

    Volcanos and cosmic/meteor dust is the only intervention that I whole heartedly embrace!

    “I am a passenger on the spaceship Earth.”
    ― Richard Buckminster Fuller

  42. bryansail says:

    Cloud variability study that is interesting


    – Being ‘right’ is often short term.

  43. Gerty says:

    Unicus/Mick, I think you deserve a medal for consistently remaining polite, calm and factual in the face of large amounts of astounding idiocy. Thank you for your supplying succinct, sound, scientific information.

    Conspiracy theorists in our area of the world are now blaming ‘chemtrails’, ‘aerosols’ and some obscure masterminded manipulation for our current drought. Based on no discernible science at all, of course 🙂


  44. Jacob Wedderling says:

    Why am I able to see on many occasions, multiple planes flying either at the same time or within minutes of each other in the same part of the sky and one has ‘persistent trails’ and the other doesn’t? I suppose you will say they are at different altitudes, different humidity, different temp with really no way to prove that, like you have stated.
    [politeness edits]

  45. truth is the lightest element says:

    Hi Jacob,

    You may want to take a look at patent citations as a way to guage the quality of the technology claims and to better ascertain if it is being or has been developed.

    The group here likes to dismiss patents for geo engineering in general.
    It is intellectually dishonest and / or llazy. There is not a genuine search for truth with regards to development and testing of technology that is more effective than chaff or that has alternate and expanded cabilities to effect weather systems.



    Also You may want to look at aerosol scientists and look for their other research projects. Often times you will find very interesting results. The authors of studies used here by Uncinus and others to support their contrail theories often will be involved with research projects for the USAF, BAE or Raytheon or other defense contractors that are clearly related to modifying the weather. Follow the money trail with citations, University funding etc. The Military is huge business. Contract award information re; current weather and geo tinkering is available if You really research. Don’t use the info. that you have seen from chemtrail web sites, ther is more damning information than they are using in many cases.

    Obviously if there are programs that relate to contrails being used for DOD purposes or to cause droughts, it is not going to be publicly announced. Barring a story covered by all the major media outlets (who are tied in to military money) and a press conference announcing an aerosol program, the people here are not really even interested or open to the idea. All the modifying stuff is just ideas and flights of fancy until the 23rd century at the very earliest.

    Breathe deep, You just inhaled aerosols that originated hundred, thousands and even millions of miles away from where you are. Dust from deserts and the cosmos, diesel soot, industrial contaminents, cleaner solvents in your cupboard. Nano materials from your clothes and sunscreen are circulating in your blood stream and some of them will certaimly be deposited in your brain and bones. Components of plastics and styrofoam are either attacking you right now or planning to very soon. All in all, uncombusted chemicals from contrails are only a small piece of the picture.

    This World is fallen. The Kingdoms here are all influenced by very dark forces. There is A Kingdom which is greater than all that you see, eat, touch, hear and inhale. Seek that Kingdom while it may yet be found.

    Oh, for future posts, you’ll get more sweetness with sugar. When u smile the whole World smiles, Sew, Reap.

  46. Jacob, there are patents for things for use on moon bases. Does that mean there are bases on the moon?

    There are patents for all kind of things.

    It’s all about the evidence. And really there isn’t any.

  47. truth is the lightest element says:

    There are also patents for usb storage devices, chaff, led’s, nickel batteries. studying patents that have been developed and are in use is a beneficial pursuit. To wave off patents by pointing out extreme examples only in order to maintain a fixed belief is relativism, a very slippery slope indeed. One might even call it ‘patent’ dishonesty.

  48. The fact remains there are many patents for things that are not being used. There are many patents for things that will not even work. A patent existing is zero evidence that the thing itself exists.

    You call a moon base an extreme example. But it’s secret chemtrail spraying an even more extreme example?

    But that aside, is there any OTHER evidence besides patents?

  49. JFDee says:


    the payrolls that scientist are on would indeed be of some relevance if there were a scientific controversy, possibly with corporate interests involved, like in the debate about global warming.

    In the case of contrails though, there is no such controversy.

    Can you point to an acknowledged atmospheric scientist who disputes that contrails are anything but?

  50. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    I struggle to understand how you can argue a secret campaign and then bring patents into it.

    If you are trying to do something secret the last thing you would do is take out a patent. A patent is something you take out before you make your secret public in order to stop people from stealing your idea.

    If you argue chemtrails from a secret angle then there’s a SINGLE ENTITY coming up with these ideas and performing them. If you want to bring patents into it then you are suggesting that this SINGLE ENTITY is scared of another entities using its ideas and making money from them.

    That would tend to suggest a rather unsecret chemtrail industry is going on and shouldn’t be difficult to trace who is doing what.

  51. not an agent says:

    Thanks for this site. The very fact that so many people are trying to discredit you is enough of a reason to create something like this. Many people need to be educated from what they are spreading. Although I would expect they would say the same about people who are trying to explain the science. That we are the ones that need education because we’re being dosed by the government. My big question to people who believe this is why are you sticking around? If I’m in a corn field that’s being sprayed with chemicals, I don’t think I’m going to lie there and take it. If you REALLY believe there are chemicals from planes why not move somewhere safe? Take your family and quit your job and leave your house and move to an island somewhere. Are jobs, and money, and the country you live in worth your lives?

    As for me, I’ll stick around and if I somehow get sick and die or find myself being mind-controlled I’ll write you a letter and send it to your island apologizing for not believing you and expressing my regrets. Once again, I’d like to stress that I am not a disinformation agent of HARP or whatever and I hope by saying this it doesn’t mean you automatically think I am. Maybe I shouldn’t deny it…but then by my lack of denial you’ll think I was hiding something. Ok, I’ll just admit it then. I’m an agent of HARP and a member of the one world government and you will soon be under our control.

  52. iain says:

    It is great to see that the world economy is that healthy that even the hippys can afford computers with which to comment. If they wanna rant about chemtrails, let ’em, after all it’s fun for the rest of us to affirm their streotype.

  53. Matt says:


    A few questions which I apologize if they’ve been answered already:

    • Are any of these persistent trails the result of geoengineering/cloudseeding?

    • Are the substances used in these practices harmful to humans and animals at all?

    I don’t consider myself a conspiracy theorist, however, I certainly believe that humans are capable of good intentions with unintended bad consequences. I also believe enough money can blind people to matters of health.

  54. Matt says:

    For what it’s worth I also agree with those above who have said we should just TEST the substance of the trails. At the very least, plane exhaust can’t be that great for the environment. Technically, that alone could be correctly labeled a “chemtrail”.

    I think we must be careful not to write off valid concerns about health and the environment with the well-intentioned, but perhaps uninformed ramblings of conspiracy enthusiasts.

  55. Matt,

    I’m not aware of any trails that are the result of geoengineering or of cloud seeding (two different things).

    Geoengineering is not yet being done, so no substances are used. A variety of substances have been proposed, the most common is sulphur dioxide, as that’s “natural” as it’s what volcanoes produce. However it’s a pollutant.

    Cloud seeding uses silver iodide, and in such small amounts that it’s basically undetectable.

  56. And testing is great, but a plane has the exact same exhaust regardless of if there’s a trail or not, and these exhausts are monitored and regulated by the EPA. See:

    Contrails just form with low temperature and high relative humidities.

  57. ChemTrailsMN says:

    Everyone needs to watch the Documentary: ” The Great Culling” many of your questions are answered in there.

  58. JFDee says:


    the film that you recommended makes the basic claim that a normal contrail will dissolve within minutes.
    This is profoundly incorrect – contrails can and do persist for hours sometimes – just as clouds can.

    I would like to refer you to this discussion:

  59. peter tasoulis says:

    Hi. I just have one question. I live in Athens Greece. I am skeptical about many things and Chemtrails is one of them. Maybe the question i’m posing has already been posed by someone else, but i haven’t read the whole post. If this contrails you’re reffering come out from commercial aircrafts (or some military), shouldn’t those airplanes be “visible” (the commescial ones) from the radar of some sites like Flightradar24 or Plane Finder etc ? I watched for half a day the Athenian sky with aircrafts passing by (counted about 10 of them) with my laptop ON and connected to the above sites and these planes weren’t “visible” from the sattelite. Why do you think this happens? Are they all military that just happen to pass by the capital of Greece leaving “contrails”? Come on now…

  60. babis says:

    @peter tasoulis

    for a better coverage of Greece look at http://rdrinfo.net , the coverage its not from Satellites or real radars but from receivers on the ground ,look better on those sites the info about the limitations of the coverage ,

  61. cloudspotter says:

    Have you checked the ‘How it works’ page on flightradar24?

  62. cloudspotter says:

    Check out this article too to make sure you’re not misjudging distances http://contrailscience.com/how-far-away-is-that-contrail/

  63. MikeC says:

    peter tasoulis – FlightRadar24 is not actually radar – despite what it says! 🙂

    It uses a system called “ADS-B” – which is a system whereby the aircraft broadcasts its position, altitude, speed, registration and other information by radio. FlightRadar24 and similar sites pick up those boradcasts and map the position, direction, etc of the aircraft in accordance with the information contained.

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADSB

    ADS-B is relatively new technology, and many aircraft do not have it – all NEW airliners do, but older aircraft – 747’s, 737’s, A300’s, etc built before 2000 or so weer not built with it and many have not had it retrofitted.

    It will be compulsory in US airspace about 2020 IIRC – so probably worldwide then too.

  64. Anonymous says:

    Yes, an aerodynamic contrail.

    The “nozzles” in the video are actually flap track fairings.

  65. Captfitch says:

    Yes, but a specific, rarely seen from above type. But don’t take my word on it. Read this site.

  66. pit_tas says:

    Ok. It’s good to know that you can actually choose if you want to leave a contrail or not.

  67. There are actually a variety of contrail mitigation techniques, but they all come with costs:

    I suspect you might be referring to contrail gaps, which are actually to do with passing through different regions of the atmosphere:

  68. pit_tas says:

    So after seeing this video Uncinus your answer to my question is yes? This is a contrail.

  69. Yes, it’s a type of contrail called an aerodynamic contrail. See:

  70. Malange says:

    Uncinus I have some questions for you. Although I don’t doubt any of the science that you share, and do appreciate it. I do find it odd to accept wholly that there is no truth to the conspiracy because of these common myths as you’ve presented them.

    Anyone who spreads information without knowing what they’re talking about and having researched it is not doing much for whatever their cause is, so to those who spread these myths if they are untrue, shame on them. However, many comments I read here and on chem-trail sites are the exact opposite and show an equal if not greater form of stupidity. For one to not ask questions when things are unusual is foolishness.

    For anyone to believe anything they hear from their Government no matter what is it at face value, in my opinion is also a supreme fool. Pick your country, pick your era, Government however useful is known mostly for lying. Concealing things at their discretion, and constantly being caught in lie after lie, with no recourse. How many politicians have come through with the things they promised in their campaigns? Very few- For this reason and deservedly so, most politicians are looked upon by generally intelligent people as self serving whores who would rather get famous rather than help anyone or do anything for there city. So for those who are raping all conspiracies in one fell swoop. Shame on you too.

    My question for you now on topic:

    There are some videos on tankerenemy and so on that show footage taken from other pilots with radio communications attempted with them from the pilots and air control, with no response. The military plains were also not reported to be in the skies at all, and appear to the naked eye to be spewing red and brown giant plumes of smoke that do not appear to look like condensation. Please explain. Cheers,


  71. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    For one to not ask questions when things are unusual is foolishness.


    But it’s not about the asking of the questions, is it? It’s about the ignoring of an answer.

    What are those white lines? Nothing wrong with that question.

    They are persistent contrails. There’s the answer.

    No they aren’t!!!!!!!! What are those white lines? You see, it gets silly at that point.

Comments are closed.