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.

SUMMARY

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. Thanks Primal, I do this mostly for my own interest, but I like to think some people may have found it useful. There are a lot of young and impressionable people using the internet, and being sucked into a fearful, unscientific state of mind is not doing them any good.

    The true-belivers themselves are only rarely going to change, despite what the evidence is. However, the arguments they put forth serve as the context for the subject – so by explaining things to them, you are actually explaining things to the casual reader.

    Plus, I like clouds!

  2. Snorkle says:

    Ramsey….

    “The left is the untouched screencapture, the right is the version with emphasized edges. The object appears to be some kind of spherical aircraft, with 4 fins visible and a thrust that is consistent with the motion of the object in the video”

    It’s rather obvious that the “orb” in question is stationary and the camera is moving…

    Also, From when I was a youngster I’ve noticed the contrails. One of my mom’s friends was afraid of them and said that they could contain chemicals and such that would be bad for us or the government was doing something malicious on purpose. Even from that age I thought it was a lot of rubbish. If you’re malicious enough to test chemicals on people, why would you do it to your own? You (being the evil tyrannical emperor) may end up inciting riots or maybe even a rebellion (Not that it would matter with the ridiculous weapons at your disposal).

    No, no, no… You test that out on OTHER countries.
    Duh.
    If anyone ever found out, you could just tell them it was for national security.

  3. Aaron says:

    @Uncinus

    You very astutely pointed out the premise of the entire debate in post 20 when you said “The government is evil.”

    Most people believe the government is good, but just inept and wrong a lot. Most people somehow simultaneously believe that the government is also corrupt. Good and corrupt can not both be right.

    Bad decisions continually come out of Washington, from all branches. The question is, are they caused by ineptitude or corruption? I say corruption.

    The agenda of the corrupt is flexible to those who have what they desire, be it money or power or both.

    Only certain types of people will take advantage of a corrupt government. I’ll suggest that using a corrupt government to further your own agenda is bad, and any who do this have either potentially or surely harmful goals. Some of these will be after money, some power and some are just evil. Remember, evil people do exist.

    The governed then experience an either non-beneficial or evil agenda. A non-beneficial agenda is bad because it occupies our leaders. It distracts the electorate from the truly important issues of our time.

    Our society degrades until all personal freedom, health and wealth have been eliminated or consolidated through legislation. The corrupt government has been a tool wielded by evil men to accomplish personal goals.

    On the current and historic status of chemtrails I am unsure, but what I can tell you that if anyone approached our government with enough money or information and an agenda of chemtrails, those planes would be in the sky shortly thereafter.

  4. Just to be clear, I don’t think “the government is evil”, I was listing that a general belief underlying chemtrail theory. Your version is that the government is corrupt and easily manipulated by “anyone”.

    The point remains though, there is ZERO evidence that anything is going on. Leaping from an assumption about the evil/corrupt nature of government to something being up with all those contrail, is just entirely specious.

    Talk about contrails please. Actual evidence.

  5. Aware says:

    Question everything that doesn’t seem right, we are at present attempting to get to the bottom of why fluoride is being added to our water supply when a balanced diet will do the same and has been proved..NEW WORLD ORDER?

  6. Mickus says:

    This type of “contrail” i.e a chemtrail never existed in the 70s and 80s – I used to live in one of the worlds busiest airspaces. Chemtrails never occured back then – I was a plane freak as a kid and you just did not see what you do today. Besides the German government has admittted to spraying chemtrails. Google it!

  7. Your personal recollections are one thing, the evidence of photographs and science is quite another. Perhaps you noticed contrails more after you moved. Airspace is nothing to do with it. I live next to the LAX class B airspace, you don’t see contrails in class B airspace because it’s too low. You see them when you live under flight paths between distant airports – often on another continent.

    There is lots of evidence that such contrails quite common back in the 70’s. See, for example:

    http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/

    And the German government did not admit spraying chemtrails, they admitted spraying chaff, which is perfectly normal.

    http://contrailscience.com/germans-admit-they-used-duppel/

  8. bardofely says:

    Uncinus, I think you are doing a brilliant job here and I speak as a person who has been a chemtrail-believer for several years. I recently found out the truth in the course of a long and heated argument with JazzRoc who asked me if I realised that the halos around the sun and moon were formed by ice crystals. I had long known and accepted that this was the cause of the phenomenon around the moon but due to my belief in chemtrails I had blinded myself to seeing this was the case for the sun too. And what’s more, I could then see that all the white artificial cloud cover that was formed by the trails and the trails themselves were nothing more than harmless ice crystals that some people had been saying they were all along but I had chosen not to believe. Well, I can admit my mistake and have JazzRoc to thank for that!

    Keep spreading the word!

  9. Marcus says:

    Whoever runs this website is a complete propaganda agent. Are you getting paid to lie like this? Ok, for starters, I live in a flight path. None of the planes leaving the airport heading west leave trails at any level. Only big white C-130’s from the military flying north/south ACROSS the flight path of my house leave chemtrails. Also, the Airforce has stated that contrails cannot be formed under 33,000 feet. Well, our military laid trials are below 10,000 feet. And finally, and this cannot be disproved either is the fact that I constantly see the military jets turning the sprayers on, then off.

    Debunk that

    I hate liars, and traitors

  10. Marcus says:

    p.s. for all of the non-believers, just go to weathermod.com. Ben Livingston, the “father of weather weapons,” a retired Navy physicist works for them now. He has stated on record that we have been manipulating the weather since the Vietnam War to hurt our enemies. You can hire this company to manipulate the weather now. If you own a ski resort, they will spray chemtrails, and you will get more snow! If you own an insurance company, you can hire them to spray chemtrails, and reduce the size of hail, so as to not pay out such high claims to your customers.

    Also check out the government document titled Owning the Weather by 2025 if you don’t believe our government is spraying chemtrails and manipulatng the weather.

  11. The Gregger says:

    Whoever this uncinus person is….wow! Ice crystals that form from high-flying jets are only able to form under certain conditions: 1) 33,000 feet and above 2) They can only be-at maximum-1/2 mile long-not 50 miles like the chemtrails are. 3) They have to melt from back to front. Chemtrails often disappear in the middle, leaving the end, and front in tact. 4) Ice-crystals from contrails can only last, and spread when there are two factors in place: That is COLD TEMPERATURES, AND HIGH HUMIDITY. It is VERY RARE to have cold temperatures, and high humidity. Uncinus you are so wrong, I feel like you can’t even have an intelligent conversation about this topic. You may want to google: German Government Admits Extensive Chemtrail Operations. In that nation wide news-release the Germans also stated that CHEMTRAIL ACTIVITY HAS BEEN HAPPENING IN THE UNITED STATES FOR AN EVEN LONGER PERIOD OF TIME.

    Uncinus-your excuse is all about the lie that these lines are caused by jet exhaust forming ice-crystals at high altitudes. Your THEORY is wrong on so many levels. Why aren’t any of these lasting CONTRAILS coming out of commercial aircraft, just military ones?
    p.s. The head of the FAA told me that NONE of their planes leave chemtrails, only military ones.

    Take care

  12. Where are you getting this 33,000 feet number? Contrails just need air that is very cold (around -40), and to persist, the air needs to be humid. Altitude itself is only a factor when it affects those other factors.

    Contrals can form at ZERO feet, in places like Alaska.

    In the US, a more general figure would be 26,000 feet.

    And contrails obviously do come out of commercial aircraft. I think you have this misconception because you can clearly identify the commercial planes leaving your airport. But those planes would obviously not leave contrails, as they are too low. But the commercial planes passing overhead at 30,000 feet, you can’t identify them, so you assume they are military.

    Perhaps you could provide some source for your assertions, like the maximum 1/2 mile long. The first contrails in 1921 were longer than that.

  13. Marcus, can you show where Ben Livingston describes anything that even slightly resembles contrails or chemtrails?

  14. Marcus says:

    Hello Uncinus, I noticed you didn’t respond to many of my statements. They’re very difficult to just brush aside. The head of the FAA really did say that “none of our planes leave lasting low-altitude trails, only military ones.” He also stated that I would need to talk to the military to find out what they are doing. The head of Project Globe (NASA’S Contrail Education section of their website) also stated that they are trying to explain to children why there are persistent trails in the sky. He also stated that there is a government ran program involved in manipulating the weather. The program is entitled The Indirect/Semi-indirect Aerosol Campaign. This is ran by the Department of Energy’s ARM section. I really wish you would read Owning the Weather by 2025, which outlines how important it is to control the weather of our enemies during war. You can also google Iraq Chemtrails, and see satellite images of chemtrails formed in half circles. Chemtrails have microscopic polymers in them, which when sprayed in the sky can show the military if biological weapons are in the air. Furthermore, when they spray the barium and aluminum particles in the sky, they become ionized by the sun; this allows the military to use theses clouds as a base for ground to air communications. Pretty heavy stuff, you probably haven’t heard of before. As far as Ben Livingston goes, google: Former Naval Physicist Says Military Can Control Hurricanes. Of course I am well aware of the long-standing cloud-seeding effort that has been going on for decades-using silver iodide to help it rain. However, you CANNNOT use this product to shrink the size of hail as weather modification inc., claims to be able to do-they use another form of chemtrails.

    Talk to you soon

  15. Marcus says:

    Hey Uncinus, I think I wasn’t clear enough about living by the airport. You are right, when planes take-off, and fly over my house they are obviously too low to leave contrails. They are flying do west over my house, which is next to the Pacific Ocean. The important part of what I was trying to say is that all white large jets are flying north-south over the beach and they are leaving chemtrails that the commercial planes taking off eventually fly ABOVE! They fly above the chemtrails, and even when the commercial planes get above the chemtrails, they are STILL not leaving any chemtrails themselves. Can you respond to how this could be possible. Also, I noticed that you said, planes leaving trails, and doing u-turns are waiting to land. Can you explain why I occasionally have large, white jets making COMPLETE circles over the ocean just west of my house? Are they really commercial, and just stalling to wait to land? One last thing, you never responded to; is how can you explain the turning on, and off of the sprayers? A plane is flying, turns the chemtrail sprayers on, flies for a while, and turns them off. Next, the plane goes to a HIGHER altitude, and there is no trail coming out! Wow.

    thank you

  16. SR1419 says:

    Marcus and Gregger clearly have their minds made up and simply dismiss any attempt at fact based analysis as shill fodder…

    Thats sad.

    Clearly, the atmosphere is a dynamic, changing place and the areas of ice supersaturation would not be uniform across a given a given plane (flat surface)…moreover planes (craft) due make changes in altitude which would result in flying through different patches of ice supersaturation- hence the broken trails…

    Clearly Marcus is ignorant of a great many details if he expects to see trails from planes departing and arriving at his local airports…

    Sorry to burst you bubble…but given the FACTs- the long known, well studied facts of contrail behavior involving persisting for hours and days and morphing into cirrus sheets…the ability of determining that what you see in the sky is a “chemtrail” or not is virtually nil…as in impossible…

    Thus, even if “chemtrails” existed you could not tell you are seeing one just by looking at it. Without sampling the plume directly you are merely guessing…and poorly at that.

    Even military planes can leave supersaturated persistent contrails. Just saying 🙂

    (…and yes, I am a government shill…thanks for you tax dollars 🙂

  17. SR1419 says:

    Gregger wrote:

    “You may want to google: German Government Admits Extensive Chemtrail Operations”

    Gregg- you may want to look at what the Germans really said in that report. Since, Uncinus has clearly dismantled that supposed “admission” here:

    http://contrailscience.com/germans-admit-they-used-duppel/

    I suppose you will say he is lying. Don’t take his word for it- get it translated yourself.

    Also- please explain why a contrail can only be a 1/2 mile long at most…ever? That just doesn’t even come close to being logical…much less reality…

    If you truly believe that any contrail that lasts for more than a few minutes is a “chemtrail” then you really are ignorant….why are there studies by peer-reviewed scientists detailing persisting contrails dating back 40-50 years??

    How do you explain that away????

    What is this guy in 1970 referring to??:

    http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/098/mwr-098-10-0745.pdf.

    “Aircraft contrails first attracted public attention during
    World War11; but as air traffic has built up to
    its present level, they have come to be accepted as part of the environ-
    ment. Even during World War11,it has difficult to watch
    the cloud cover laid down by a large bomber formation
    without wondering what it might be doing to the weather;
    at present, there is widespread belief among the general
    public and some feeling among scientists (Fletcher 1969,
    Reinking 1968, Livingston 1969, and Schaefer 1969) that
    contrails are increasing cloudiness, if
    nothing more, in some regions. ***The writer himself has seen instances in
    which a single contrail seemed to grow until it became an
    overcast covering the whole sky. “***

    I just do not understand the persistent (pardon the pun) denial of persistent contrails by “chemtrail” believers…It defies logic.

  18. Marcus says:

    Dear SR1419, How about you try to debunk what I actually say? How about debunking the government papers, and government programs that I listed. How about you discuss why there would be complete circle chemtrails sprayed over the ocean in front of my house. Yes, that’s right, just a complete circle, and when the circle is completed, they turn the sprayers off. Now, we are also getting near vertical chemtrails sprayed. Vertical means from the ground towards the sky; like a rocket. Debunk that. Read ALL of my details, and try to refute them. You disregarded 10-20 facts that I’ve stated. As for what you have said, it means nothing. You’ve debunked nothing. This site is ridiculous; it’s like listening to the lamestream media trying to debunk the 911 truth movement. (I’m sure you do that too!) Actually, they have lost the fact war, so now they just call everyone crazy. You seem not to be able to read everything, or digest it. Deal with the facts. All you said was planes fly through chemtrails, and break the middle up. You funny guy. I would be embarrassed if I was as clueless as you. No need even speaking anymore, unless you can take all of what people say, and refute it. You can’t. You know it. Just give up, and go hang out with the brain-deads who will listen to your nothingness. By the way government has ALWAYS been the biggest liars, cheaters, and propaganda agents throughout history. And you say you are one of them.

  19. the Gregger says:

    Wow… I’m being qestioned by a braindead? Are you kidding me, sr%[email protected]&? given all the information that has been put in front of me thanks to the freedom of information act, i am well aware of millitary honks like you. My old man is one as well. Coming to defense of Marcus, and myself i guess, did you even read any of the facts he presented? How bout the story out of russia where the militry planes dumped a full sack of cement out the hatch to aid in the “Nice DAy” they were making for Russia Day! She refused the money the government wanted to give her and shes suing them! thier government admitted it “SIR”! …. oh and how about the little “clingon jet” i saw with my own 2 eyes on the backside of a jet leaving my local airport? Not to mention i witnessed this sme plane fly back and forth in our sky that day, just laying big fat strapps of chemtrails that by the end of the day covered the entire visible sky. I have been a sky watcher since i was just a wee lad. From my bedroom window i would look out to the distant hills and admire all the blue sky! now when i am back at the house and looking out that window all i see 80% of the time is a sky filled with jet crap and the blue sky rare! Next you’ll probably tell me it’s gotten worse lately because of global warming! You should probably go back down to your bunker, put your little luminatty sweater on and try again S! i don’t buy your schtick. You have nothing on what’s real. I can’t be brainwashed like the rest of em. I came to this website so i could read what your type is saying about all this neat stuff happening right in front of us, and guess what? Just as i expected. HAHA!Wow!

  20. Hi Marcus, I think the head of the FAA would have been talking about chaff, if your quote is accurate. Military contrails are basically the same as commercial contrails. Chaff, however, is not a contrail.

    Which FAA head was this, and when did you talk to him?

  21. Marcus, you raise some interesting points regarding the government’s involvement with weather modification, I think I’ll write a post about it in a few days that should answer your questions.

    I find you descriptions of low altitude contrails interesting, perhaps you could provide some photographs or video to back up your claims?

  22. Jet’s making circles and racetrack shapes are simply jets in holding patterns. You see them over Iraq because there were lots of jets performing missions that were not point-to-point, and so involved holding.

  23. p.s. for all of the non-believers, just go to weathermod.com. Ben Livingston, the “father of weather weapons,” a retired Navy physicist works for them now. He has stated on record that we have been manipulating the weather since the Vietnam War to hurt our enemies. You can hire this company to manipulate the weather now. If you own a ski resort, they will spray chemtrails, and you will get more snow! If you own an insurance company, you can hire them to spray chemtrails, and reduce the size of hail, so as to not pay out such high claims to your customers.

    Well, you can call them “chemtrails” if you like, but that’s just clouding the issue. What weathermod.com offers is normal cloud seeding, which does not resemble ANY of the “chemtrail” videos out there. If you want to call that “chemtrails”, then why not add in crop dusting while you are at it.

    The thing is, NOBODY denies that clouds seeding happens, there’s nothing at all unusual about it. But it’s low level spraying in a small area, it does not leave a persistent trail, and it does not look like a contrail. It’s also no secret that cloud seeding was used for military purposes in Vietnam:

    http://www.nawcwpns.navy.mil/nawcwd/business/tech_transfer_highlights.htm

    Geophysical Warfare — “Rainmakers.” During the Vietnam Conflict, our warfighters needed a way to interdict enemy traffic on the Ho Chi Minh Trail. “Project Popeye” helped answer the call. China Lake adapted its cloud seeding technologies to enhance rainfall thereby significantly deterring enemy activity on the trail. This highly successful China Lake technology was also used in hurricane abatement, fog control, and drought relief.

    So what exactly is weathermod.com supposed to reveal to a “non-believer”?

  24. SR1419 says:

    Dearest Marcus-

    first of all a persistent contrail is not a “chemtrail”. Persistent contrails…that last for hours and even days…and spread into cirrus sheets (hazy skies)…have been well known and studied for decades…Do you acknowledge the existence of Supersaturated Persistent Contrails???

    Then…the circles you see could be A; an airline in the holding pattern that then leaves the altitude where the conditions are right for persistent contrails….Or a training flight – military or commercial that also leaves the pocket of ice supersaturation. You claim with certainty that they “turn off the sprayer” when in fact that is pure speculation…and given the reality, the proven, well studied reality of persistent contrails and the regularity of ice supersaturation – particularly in your area…that is a more likely and logical scenario.

    The fact IS – without sampling the plume directly- you can only GUESS at what you see. My guess is that it is a persistent contrail.

    Do you know all the variables that go into any single contrail??? The altitude of the plane, the speed, the weight, the type of engine, the type of fuel mix the and more- and that is just for the plane not even mentioning all the variables in the atmosphere…2 planes can fly through the same spot- one may leave a contrail and one may not…Ignorance of all the science behind contrail formation just doesn’t help “chemtrail” believers case at all.

    That the military would like to control the weather is not PROOF that persistent chemtrails are really barium laced “chemtrails”- I HAVE read “Owning the weather” – and it says NOTHING of high altitude barium spraying in the guise of contrails.

    CLoud seeding is nothing new…and in no way relates to spraying powdered aluminum in the upper atmosphere…Russians dropping cement bags out of an airplane by mistake is not proof that every persistent contrail one sees in the sky is really being laid by a “unmarked C-130” spraying barium…The manipulation of Hurricanes is a long standing desire of a lot of scientists…trying to decrease intensity by dropping different chemicals and materials into them….Doesn’t mean every persistent contrails you see in the sky is really a “chemtrail”. Where is the logic?

    Vertical contrails???…”like a rocket”…maybe it WAS a rocket? Rockets leave very long, persistent contrails. Maybe it was Airforce training…every see the Blue Angels?? Do they ever fly vertically?? Did you sample the plume?? How can you say definitively that it was a supposed “chemtrail” ???

    You are not reading for comprehension. You wrote, “All you said was planes fly through chemtrails, and break the middle up” …I said nothing like that. I said planes fly through pockets of ice supersaturation…which results in persistent contrails with gaps in them…The atmosphere is a dynamic and changing place and the conditions at any given altitude can be different from location to location. You think they are turning the “sprayer” on and off…whatever.

    So, typically…in the face of facts and logic, you come back with ad hominem attacks that really do not further your argument in the least.

    Good luck with that.

    Gregg:

    Can’t help you with the “klingon” plane you saw. Please send a photo.

    Are you aware that some contrails persist and last for hours and days?? ….and that just because the do does not mean they are “chemtrails” ??

    How can you distinguish between the 2??

    So, I guess I am “braindead” since I prefer peer reviewed science to wild speculation. Oh well…guess its my cross to bear.

    BTW- the goverment shill comment was a joke. Just remember- do not believe everything you read on the internet!! 🙂

  25. Regarding the “klingon” plane, if you live near a military base, then it might be an “air launched” jet, something like the x-14, which was launched from a b-52, see:

    http://images.google.com/images?q=x-15+b-52

  26. the Gregger says:

    so basicly what this website is telling me is that everything i see in the sky is normal. tick tack toe grid patterns are normal and when the sky is covered from horizon to horizon with “Jet crap” i should just go outside and do some strenuous activities, breath deep and don’t worry? I’m sorry Shill. i don’t buy it. Where are the bees? why is there more statick electricity in the air (more now than i have ever noticed)? I know what HAARP is. i know what a cloud is. and i know what a shill is! …….over a thousand tornadoes this year in the midwest. A “freek” electrical storm in June in california.! Can’t wait for that sack of cement to come flying through my roof on the fourth of july when they’re trying to make a “Nice day” for us to view the fireworks. Oh hey and make sure you catch the olympics in china this year. Should be nice out. They’ve forcasted no rain for the duration of the games. Sweet! Hard hat and suntan lotion.! ……..as for the “suckerfish” on the tail of that plane? well i hate to say it but my little HP foto devise is a piece of poo. i’m in the market for a faster camera with a fat zoom so I can get those fotos my debunker friends need to see. ……time to go out and play. I see a little square of blue sky left out there. better go get in it before it becomes a concloud. breath deep SR#$%^.

  27. That depends on what you mean by “normal”. Clearly contrails are man-made, and not natural clouds. The weather also varies a lot, so on some days we can have very unusual weather. Some years the weather is different from other years, some years we have more tornadoes than other years. Some years we do have electrical storms in the summer (quite a lot of years actually, it’s not uncommon).

    Cloud seeding weather modification is not a secret. Everyone knows they are planning to do it at the Olympics – mostly to improve air quality.

    Tic-tac-toe grid patterns ARE normal, all you need for them is to be near a place where two busy flight corridors cross. The wind will then blow the trails into a grid pattern.

  28. Alex says:

    Interesting site. I really like how people find faults with your hobby, thats why its called a hobby, some people like to do things in their spare time. Also funny how they want you to post your life story for everyone on the internet. How about your social security number too?

    Lots of good info. Do i believe it 100%, no. I’m not a pilot, a meteoroligist, or a mechanical engineer who designs jet engines so any information/ science could be incorrect and i would never know. But you have put forth alot of good/ seemingly correct information. Until i get even more information from the other side, i am going to say i do not believe that chemtrails exist based on the information i have seen.

    Curious about spraying different substances in the air. If the governement wanted to gas its citizens undetected, coundn’t they study the atmospheric conditions and only spray on days of very low humidity so the chemtrails wouldn’t show up? Also does spraying liquids and gasses at high altitudes have different effects regarding contrails?

    Questions to all the people worried about spraying in the skies, do you use flouride toothpaste? Do you eat meat? Do you drink the water? Do you eat highly processed foods? Do you drive your car when you go to the corner store? Chances are your are taking in way more chemicals than just whats in the air.

  29. SR1419 says:

    so basicly what this website is telling me is that everything i see in the sky is normal. tick tack toe grid patterns are normal and when the sky is covered from horizon to horizon with “Jet crap” i should just go outside and do some strenuous activities, breath deep and don’t worry? I’m sorry Shill. i don’t buy it. Where are the bees? why is there more statick electricity in the air (more now than i have ever noticed)? I know what HAARP is. i know what a cloud is. and i know what a shill is! …….over a thousand tornadoes this year in the midwest. A “freek” electrical storm in June in california.! Can’t wait for that sack of cement to come flying through my roof on the fourth of july when they’re trying to make a “Nice day” for us to view the fireworks. Oh hey and make sure you catch the olympics in china this year. Should be nice out. They’ve forcasted no rain for the duration of the games. Sweet! Hard hat and suntan lotion.! ……..as for the “suckerfish” on the tail of that plane? well i hate to say it but my little HP foto devise is a piece of poo. i’m in the market for a faster camera with a fat zoom so I can get those fotos my debunker friends need to see. ……time to go out and play. I see a little square of blue sky left out there. better go get in it before it becomes a concloud. breath deep SR#$%^.

    Why is it that I must be a “shill” if I do not believe in “chemtrails” – Too often when faced with facts, the chemtrail crowd resorts to insults….I will not fall into that trap.

    That you base your beliefs on ignorance is not my fault…or problem.

    Perpendicular flight paths are “normal”. Persistent contrails are “normal”- man-made clouds to be sure…but a normal occurrence that has been documented for over 50 yrs and is not an indication of a nefarious “spraying” campaign of unknown origin and design.

    Combine the 2 – perpendicular flt paths and persistent contrails…and you will get a “grid” pattern…its not rocket science…just simple logic…

    Follow along here Gregg- …a plane leaves a persistent contrail…another plane crosses that flight path leaving another persistent contrail…now we have an “X”….Those trails persist and drift with the upper winds….2 more planes fly through the same paths leaving similar trails…et Voila! …a “grid” pattern…

    Wave the explanation away with curses and “shill” comments if you must…but it is what happens…

    As for breathing deep…again…if you really took the time to learn about the formation and behavior of contrails…the physical characteristics of the ice crystals therein…then you would know that what you see in the sky above you will not fall directly down on you…But that is for you to figure out.

    You should really be more concerned about the point source pollution of the factory next door…or…the factories in China that are spewing toxins toward you.

    That people want to control nature (weather mod, flood control etc) is not PROOF that there is a global campaign of nefarious intent involving the spraying of powdered aluminum. That is an illogical leap of faith that just doesn’t hold up to scrutiny…especially in light of the FACTS of contrail behavior and the absolute absence of any evidence of actual “chemtrails”.

    I understand that it upsets your sense of well being to see planes leaving long lasting trails…and they very well may be effecting the weather…but do not let your lack of knowledge, fear and paranoia devolve into a lack of critical thinking, research and logic based conculsions.

  30. bryansail33 says:

    Ross, SR1419, Uncinus and all,

    Lets take a much more critical look at what chaff is and just a few of it’s expanded capabilities beyond jamming radio signals
    since you genuinely seem interested.

    Now lets take a quick look at applications for aerosolized dispersement of metals, including the harmless chaff, desicated polymer gunk that is irradiated, heated and changing both form and electric properties as it drifts across lands far and near,

    In other words lets take a much more critical look at what chaff is and just a few of it’s expanded capabilities beyond jamming radio signals since you genuinely seem interested.

    The place to spend some time examining recent atmospheric research is here, if you spend less than an hour pouring over
    some of the abstracts to these current military processes then you’ve done yourselves and the subject matter a dis-service.
    The choice is yours (lol)
    http://www.stormingmedia.us/cat/sub/subcat31-35.html
    Tip use keywords to examine a specific subject closely, modify search from the top of pages as well;

    Only 1 example I can find of a barium atmospheric release -released to the public….
    http://www.stormingmedia.us/00/0000/A000042.html
    Lets see, what properties of barium might be useful
    for military superiority….. hmmm…..
    well, see above and think laterally… then
    try starting here for some examples –

    http://www.stormingmedia.us/keywords/barium.html

    Remember, Barium comes in a state suitable for mixing with fuel as we know available in patents allegedly deployed during
    Operation Desert Storm as part of the OVTHR communications (link forthcoming God willing)

    With regard to spending time researching military applications of atmospheric ducting, ionization (yes, metals are involved)
    and heating, you can come back to that and proceed with this excerpt.

    IS THIS an example of what that ol’ harmless, red herring chaff is ?

    see: http://www.stormingmedia.us/10/1059/D105910.html

    Method for Producing Variable Density/Electric Dipole Property Chaff Decoy Material
    Authors: John A. Eisele; Robert M. Mason; Francis J. Campbell; DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY WASHINGTON DC

    Abstract: This disclosure relates to dielectric chaff materials or fibers which are small in character for packing and expandable on release to produce clouds of great cross section. Polymer materials are treated chemically and/or irradiated with nuclear or electronic radiation which partially decomposes the polymer. Upon release, the polymer is heated to Create gas hubbies from within which expand the dielectric fibers to change the density and shape of the dielectric.

    Description: Patent, Filed 26 Mar 74, patented 4 May 99
    Pages: 5
    Report Date: 04 MAY 1999
    Report Number: D105910
    Report Unavailable
    This disclosure relates to dielectric chaff materials or fibers which are small in character for packing and expandable on release to produce clouds of great cross section.
    Keywords relating to this report:
    CHAFF
    DIELECTRICS
    FIBERS
    PATENTS
    POLYMERS
    RADAR CROSS SECTIONSZ
    RADAR CROSS SECTIONSZCHAFF
    RADAR DECEPTION

    … gentlemen, the HEATING of the polymer fibers and partial breaking down continues until these aluminum particles are eventually (may take some time on the ground-which will be kicked up) until they are micron sized.

    …Look around at some of the provided links and tell me that there ARE NOT expanded uses for ‘chaff’ or even improved dispersal systems. Heating is mentioned… amazing… enjoy chewing on your irradiated stew as these military operations “may be over your town”, I could not disprove it nor could Uncinus, nor anyone else here. Keep in mind that we are told this microwaved crap is benign. Enjoy your ‘theoretical’ as we don’t know at what level this spraying occurs nasty introduced goop that certainly disperses widely. Enjoy the sunset, … must be a lot of fires (actually there are in Ca. right now) the atmosphere sure looks dirty at sundown…
    Shine a flashlight at night after a really nasty air day and perhaps (we won’t know all the science on it is suspect with too many potential sources, inputs) examine some polymers with desicated material hatching on it… may as well imagine the military released nanobots also lol …

    Gentlemen I laugh because there is a strong theoretical theme since reports are not uniformly avail. for public munching, so alas
    ‘conspiracy’ theories are born. Sad but true that we can’t tell by looking at a planes exhaust if they are pumping metals for data
    crunching, defense shields, counter measures against other countries electronic interference etc. If you can’t think laterally and
    see the intense desire for these techs to be up and running then I would suggest that you are partially dead. We ain’t at the level
    of cloud seeding with regard to military operations. The quest for air space superiority is amazing fierce and vital to having advantage. Other countries can send energy OTHR into the United States. Metals in the air, AND coating the ground assist our military with communication and vision. … and you guys all can’t be bothered with seeing the intense desire to heat areas of
    air to create changes in propagation of frequency beams… allright have fun with discussing cloud seeding then… REALLY take
    a look through the topics of research AND development of these projects. …. just chaff, harmless … lol !

    – again look CLOSELY at the atmospheric studies listed, these are OLD projects, with the juicy bits (aerosols) blocked out YET mentioned in many reports available as ‘interference problems’ ‘algorithms to correct signals’ all these problems with atmospheric anomalies can be moderated with things (perhaps even incorrectly identified ‘chaff’ events) to provide BETTER images and better
    communications. Think laterally and go beyond cloud seeding for what the ‘monied’ guys are doing…

    Read page 8 of 9 the Entire Summary (2 paragraphs) directly above the References for where the author mentions terrain mapping in relation to electrical parameters, micro sized metals which are certain to disperse widely will assist in this, right? High levels of these metals are appearing in soil samples (again the science is always wrong here, so lets say we have some anecdotal evidence for lots of soil metals which uncinus can no doubt eloquently explain as being unreliable, from manufacturing etc. I’m not disagreeing with him for this as he’s right we probably can’t crunch the inputs accurately.
    Anyways, if yah all can think laterally, you will see a robust number of reasons to have the best damn military in the world, and it may include chaff and other metal and polymer programs …
    http://www.jhuapl.edu/techdigest/td1802/donohue.pdf

    For a more compelling look at the red herring chaff
    http://www.stormingmedia.us/keywords/radar_deception.html
    -p.s. the more time you spent researching Navy Radar mapping, communications
    the more meaningful the above link will be with regards to metal dispersal applications

    Oh and by the way (BTW) for you computer communications freaks
    yes, I wish I did have the report for barium, aluminum and other dispersals from the government but alas, I do not.
    Also, I haven’t a clue how widespread this atmospheric tampering is, just that we have a helluva strong military actively
    taking into account electromagnetic warfare and unfortunately these technologies are also a good defensive shield (public record
    spend some time, look HAARP etc.) So some metal relaying, protecting, probing, is very very very likely ongoing, just
    don’t know the level. Probably not anywhere close to what the wacky chemtrailers think but the nastiness to environment
    of these metals probably makes it prohibitive to disclose to the public.
    All we can do is speculate, COMBINED with connecting the dots we do have. … Good luck, or skip it entirely up to you, God blesses
    us still.

    All in all the hell with it, I’m going out to play on the water, enjoy life,
    God help us all with regards to our defense budget and it’s innumerable ‘black projects’ many without oversight
    I’m going to sail on the water while potentially chewing on some Polymer materials are treated chemically and/or irradiated with nuclear or electronic radiation which partially decomposes the polymer. Upon release, the polymer is heated to Create gas hubbies with their changed dielectric.

    Regards,
    Bryansail

  31. I’m sorry Bryan but all I got from your post was:

    1) the military released some barium in a test of something in 1980
    2) the military patented a method of packing chaff better, which they filed in 1974

    Are you saying that “chemtrails” are actually chaff? What constitutes a “chemtrail”? Do you have a photos of “chemtrails”, are there any photos of these chaff chemtrails on the internet you can point to?

    Or are you just saying that chaff is too poisonous to use? Is there any evidence to support this?

    And what’s all this about ducting? Is there any evidence that this is used? Why do they need to use it, when satellite and radio communication works perfectly well.

  32. SR1419 says:

    BrianSale:

    Chaff are not “nano” particles…Chaff is typically in the size range of .5 inch to 2 inches in length.

    Moreover, the delivery method is nothing like the supposed spraying method of chemtrails…and the visible result of chaff are also nothing like the persistent contrails that get confused for “chemtrails”….

    To ingest enough chaff to cause harm, one would literally have to ingest right from the source- which, being shot mechanically out of a plane, is not likely.

    So, I guess the question is…what is your point?

    Are you saying that “chemtrails” are really chaff?? Or that “chemtrails” do not really exist but we should all be concerned about indiscriminate use of chaff?

    Do you have any information regarding how much chaff is being deployed? It certainly isn’t daily, globally and causing a haze in the skies.

    Also- nothing in any of those abstracts says anything about chaff being delivered via jet exhaust…?? Can you expound?

  33. bryansail33 says:

    Uncinus,
    Did you read the pdf link summary even? Or spend some serious time ‘pouring’ over the voluminous report abstracts, Or HAARPs
    request for more funding (defense of airspace etc.) the reports direction of study link to the use of chaff and metals for many
    different purposes.

    BTW, the military has more recently released metals (above 60,000) which induced military made auroras for public digestion.

    The ability of that patent for creating ionization fields in the atmosphere through the heating of metals should not be
    overlooked Uncinus, nor the need for better ducting over land masses which becomes apparent if you actually look at atmospheric research and development in detail. Satellite and radio communications do not work perfectly well for one thing. We also need
    communications viability in the event of a pulsed explosion by an enemy which would cripple modern communications in the U.S.
    You really have to spend the time or you can condense and see nothing (as in your post above) there is a robust need for
    control of weather systems, improved communications, 3-D rendering, and weopon development which require atmospheric tinkering.
    If you don’t look at the thrust of the research of some of the keywords than you will see nothing as in your above post.

    Thanks for being so gracious in allowing me to turn the topic away from contrails. I think CT’ers have completely shot themselves in the foot since they have so completely screwed up how you can’t tell a contrail v. chemtrail by looking or bad sampling.

    My personal belief after a lot of study is that we do dispense aerosols for military purposes for many different gains, due to the deleterious nature of the chemicals and metals there is no release to the public of this activity. I don’t know the scope of their use, but evidence exists that we are working in arenas that benefit from introduction of metals into the atmosphere if you look at
    the areas of existing public research (again, it will only benefit if you search keywords from my prior post which I doubt many
    of us will bother to do)

    I can’t answer the questions you have about chaff Uncinus as I really don’t know how far reaching damage may be from using chaff.

    As for ducting there is evidence of a need to improve terrain mapping abilities over land due to heat reflection problems, weather system problems and SEVERAL other current limitations. You will only see the need if you CLOSELY at the reports on OTHR and other programs. The info. is out there but I can’t make you look at it.

    I think we just return to discussions of how the CT’ ers have it wrong by saying every damn trail is a chemtrail. They are more
    than likely very wrong since their determinations are false. I can’t tell you how often, how robust these programs are but the information as to their previous use (in limited studies from what I can detail) is out there. Go have a look as it’s very interesting
    but don’t expect me to have very many answers. The truth is a razors edge no doubt and we aren’t going to get admission of
    use of these defense shields ect.

    Regards,
    Bryansail

  34. Well, do you think that ANY trail is a “chemtrail” (or “chafftrail”)? What do these chemtrails you are worried about actually look like?

    I think your reading of the documents has a large degree of speculation in it. Do you have any actual evidence that something is happening? Evidence that the military is secretly releasing harmful amounts of chemicals into the air? Why has this NEVER shown up on any air quality tests?

    I’m sorry, but saying “read these 100 documents and apply some lateral thinking” is not very good evidence.

  35. bryansail says:

    SARS1409,

    The chaff is nothing like you describe, it is actually like this (posted again just for you)
    Your examination of chaff is very much what was used at one time and it is the one fed to the weather channel mouthpieces and
    your local weatherperson, but not very much like the improved delivery systems and ‘activated’ metals and polymers utilized now.

    Abstract: This disclosure relates to dielectric chaff materials or fibers which are small in character for packing and expandable on release to produce clouds of great cross section. Polymer materials are treated chemically and/or irradiated with nuclear or electronic radiation which partially decomposes the polymer. Upon release, the polymer is heated to Create gas hubbies from within which expand the dielectric fibers to change the density and shape of the dielectric.

    and it gets better (or worse actually) as these polymers d e c o m p o s e as they drift through the atmosphere. These dielectric fibers are anything but benign as they have been radio-activated. With regard to modern chaff, here is a hint, smaller is better. The research on this has been done and some of it is public record and some can be viewed from the links I posted above, but hey information overload and I’m sure you have many other things to do. The aluminum particles are much smaller than the model you
    cite, nearly nano sized while in the atmosphere, once on the ground they get much smaller still until they are nanosized. As you may be aware, that material can be lifted by weather and wind. As for dispersal methods, aluminum can and has been dispersed
    in a liquid state already. The evidence of that is out there and the one final link I will provide (soon) is evidence of chemtrails being used for OTHR in Desert Storm.
    Uncinus,
    You are right to want actual evidence of widespread spraying programs, some ACTUAL evidence has been provided but it is not evidence of any large scale on going program. Instead what can be found is evidence supporting testing of these metals in the atmosphere. There is much evidence supporting the use of these atmospheric lifters / modifiers and communication enhancers. There is at least that much evidence and if you don’t see it you still haven’t looked closely at the documents (actually 1000’s of documents that pertain to atmospheric intervention). Very very little evidence for the widespread use of these metals. Regarding air quality, pretty darn sure that there have been air quality tests that have shown metals and polymers but their origin is unclear, levels could be explained as coming from dust, manufacturing, etc. I don’t have the evidence that I would like but the evidence I have looked at and nudged you towards…(did it ‘smell’ funny or was it too laborious?) suggests strongly that our military perceives the need to use these metals. You’ll have an easier time finding evidence of cloud seeding since the military has moved way beyond this technique, it is inside the public domain because cloud seeding is more benign than chemically treated polymers and electrically activated metals. Dennis Kucinichs’ Bill HR 2977 was later changed with the word ‘chemtrails’ removed which is one of dozens of examples of how these programs aren’t up for public discussion so we don’t have direct evidence. Very unsatisfying, isn’t it? I don’t have answers as to how widespread the use of these aerosols is, but thanks in part to Uncinus at least I’m not as deluded about contrail characteristics as Will Thomas, Rosylnn Peterson, or Clifford Carnicom are. How is it that no one can get a damn petri dish out into the air at 35,000ft. or a fresh contrail sample?

    Oh and as for those ‘zany’ orbs I mentioned, keep looking up at fresh contrails (they are very small and brilliantly bright objects moving inside and very near contrails) When you do finally see one I will be very surprised if you still think that they are balloons, plastic bags, and birds. I’m rather certain you will be quite surprised. Google orbwars to see pictures of these stealthed crafts, or blurry pixels lol-not very satisfying until you see one yourself. To see how military aircraft can be made invisible hunt around at thelinks above. Heres a hint, plasma, ionized fields, electrically charged particles, aerosols ex; metals -the smaller the better) are involved. You don’t have to take my word that the military wants stealthy craft, take a good look at the evidence that they have attained it through atmospheric intervention if you’d like.

    -Bryansail

  36. Again you quote a patent filed in 1970, that’s chaff that is nearly 40 years old.

    So you think chaff is polluting the environment? Is that your problem? But you can’t produce any evidence other than “look closely at 1000’s of documents”?

    And orbs – if you can SEE an orb in a convincing manner then why can’t you PHOTOGRAPH an orb in a convincing manner?

  37. SR1419 says:

    Brainsail:

    This “abstract” you supply:

    “Abstract: This disclosure relates to dielectric chaff materials or fibers which are small in character for packing and expandable on release to produce clouds of great cross section. Polymer materials are treated chemically and/or irradiated with nuclear or electronic radiation which partially decomposes the polymer. Upon release, the polymer is heated to Create gas hubbies from within which expand the dielectric fibers to change the density and shape of the dielectric.”

    It says nothing of the size of chaff other than “small in character”- Thus, how do you know its size?? How do you know it is “nothing” like what I described??

    Moreover, it also says the chaff is EXPANDABLE upon release- gets bigger!!

    Were you to busy thinking laterally to read for comprehension?

    You say “The aluminum particles are much smaller than the model you cite”- Where is the documentation of this?? I did not see any information regarding the size of current chaff in those 100s of abstracts. Please provide documentation and source for your claim.

    That the military is devising new technologies and techniques for use in war should not be a surprise…that there might be some negative consequences is a very real possibility.

    but as you say- there is “Very very little evidence for the widespread use of these metals”I think you should take it a step further and be truthful about it- there is NO evidence of “widespread use” Periodic testing over 40years is not widespread. Which to me suggests that there are greater concerns about environmental issues elsewhere…I do not see how “pretty darn sure” can be taken as a valid cause of concern.

    You should be more worried about the pesticides they put on your food rather than the chaff they test occasionally.

    Thanks for the information. I definitely have learned more about chaff than I ever thought I would know.

    I also believe this tests have NOTHING to do with the persistent contrails that fill the sky on a daily basis globally and cause people to panic for fear of “chemtrails”.

  38. SR1419 says:

    BS33-

    To ease your fear that you so overwhelmed us with information and that we would would not look “(did it ’smell’ funny or was it too laborious?)”- I did look and found some very interesting papers for sure:

    You will probably dismiss this as it doesn’t befit your fear mongering but it is from the same stuff you wanted to enlighten us with:

    Abstract: This document reports the results from an investigation of the impact of aluminized glass chaff countermeasures on environmental aluminum levels in the Chesapeake Bay. This study was conducted by the Naval Health Research Detachment (Toxicology) in response to concerns expressed over the potential environmental hazards that might be associated with the release of aluminized glass chaff fibers during training exercises by Naval aviators. Chaff used to provide protection against radar based attack on aircraft and other military vehicles is composed of aluminum coated glass fibers. Concern has been expressed as to the environmental hazard and potential for human health risk associated with routine release of this material during training exercises. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of U.S. Navy flight training operations on aluminum content in the Chesapeake Beach region of the Chesapeake Bay, an area over which chaff countermeasure flight training operations have been conducted for nearly a quarter century. Exchangeable and monomeric aluminum content in sediment from the flight path within the Bay is not significantly different from nearby background levels within the Bay. Background residential exchangeable aluminum levels were not significantly different from soil samples obtained from a residential area adjacent to the NRL-CBD complex at Chesapeake Beach.

    http://www.stormingmedia.us/45/4546/A454683.html

    I know the government is highly capable of inadvertently poisoning its own people but I think they are “pretty darn sure” that chaff is not serious environmental threat.

  39. Smaller is not better for chaff. The size of chaff is determined by the wavelength of the radar you want to reflect, so if you make it any smaller than has been used so far, it will not work.

    And, as SR1419 pointed out, pollution from chaff has nothing to do with persistent contrails, so I’m still not really sure why you are bringing it up here.

  40. bryansail says:

    Uncinus,
    Uncinus, the reflection of radar is not necessarily based on the
    size of the chaff anymore. The radar signal in this application
    is reflected by the electromagnetic field generated by the metals
    used. An example of smaller is better.
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5619205.html

    In this application for improved chaff thinner is better (i.e. thinner = smaller)
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4100102.html
    Abstract:
    A composition for nullifying detection with infra-red equipment
    consisting essentially of a suspension of 30-40% by weight of aluminum
    particles in from 60 to 70% by weight of vaporizable hydrocarbon oil,
    said aluminum particles have diameters in range of 2 to 20 microns
    and thickness of less than 3/10 micron.

    Re; pollution from chaff has nothing to do with persistent contrails. Many applications and
    discussions on ‘wet plumes’ of chaff dispersal exist. Chaff can be dispensed from fluids
    suitable for dispensing from jet fuels, this is why we are discussing chaff here as chaff can
    be a constituent of contrails. So it is very pertinent to examination of contrails right?

    Re; chaff delivery systems from a fluid;
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4167008.html
    Title:
    Fluid bed chaff dispenser
    Document Type and Number:
    United States Patent 4167008
    Abstract:
    The dispensing of the chaff fibers takes place in two distinct steps.
    Initially, a mixture of chaff and fluidization media is delivered to a
    fluidization chamber. Bleed air from the jet engines is caused to flow
    through the mixture of chaff and fluidization media to thereby cause
    the chaff fibers to churn and become separated in the fluidization
    chamber. Valves located at the ends of the fluidization chamber open
    in response to pilot or onboard ECM system activation to dispense the
    pre-separated chaff fibers.

    List of chaff patents
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/CCL-342-12.html

    This patent discusses putting the ‘chaff’ into the path of
    electromagnetic energy
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4638316.html

    This is a good read regarding how much thinner / smaller chaff
    can be;
    http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5212488/description.html
    improving chaff performance through making a thinner chaff
    (i.e. smaller diameters = improved performance through a wider
    spectrum and slow the fall rate over traditional chaff significantly.
    “We can conclude from the tests above that solid aluminum spheres of
    about 30 microns in diameter (an inexpensive powder) would have low
    fall rates, and would screen effectively all frequencies above about
    3000 GHz.”

    One portion of the patent mentions the benign nature of the chaff
    BEFORE it is coated with conductive material. The patent states that
    it must be coated with a conductive material.

    THIN = Small …
    as long as the chaff dipoles can continue to be made proportionately
    thinner as they are shorter (with increasing frequency), it is possible to
    gain increasing cross section/package as a function of frequency.
    Once a point of minimum practical thickness has been reached,
    however, the equivalent cross section/package decreases with
    frequency. The thinnest chaff possible produces the greatest equivalent radar
    cross section (RCS) for a given volume of chaff package. At some
    point, however, the coated glass fibers will reach some practical
    minimum thickness. When this point is reached, the effectiveness of the
    chaff will degrade with increasing frequency.

    Chaff degradation from oxidation. These very thin (apparently hollow
    in some applications) decay. So the small size very likely becomes
    smaller still as I have pointed out previously.

    for an example of this process and the linkage I mentioned to micron sized
    metals look here. So small is good ‘up to a point’ yet the chaff
    continues to become smaller beyond it’s use in military applications.
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6017628.html
    “…In the presence of atmospheric moisture, such evanescent chaff
    undergoes oxidization of the oxidizable metal coating so that the
    conductivity and radar absorbance/reflectance characteristics of the
    chaff transiently decays.”

    Here’s one on barium from airplanes that is extremely interesting;
    Originally Posted by NIH
    The high levels of Ba stemmed from local quarrying for Ba ores and/or
    use of Ba in paper/foundry/welding/textile/oil and gas well related
    industries, as well as from the use of Ba as an atmospheric aerosol
    spray for enhancing/refracting the signalling of radio/radar waves
    along military jet flight paths, missile test ranges, etc.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15082100?dopt=Abstract

    A barium / heated metals link to disease?
    http://www.markpurdey.com/pdf/metal_microcrystal_tse.pdf
    Please note that sources mentioned include mostly industrial /
    manufacturing but also mentions ‘atmospheric discharge’ or
    munitions explosions.

    Barium and partial list of patents pertaining to aerosols (i.e. contrails)
    http://www.luxefaire.com/devilvision/appxhtml/BappendixparticulatesB.html

    My contention is that we should be aware and concerned about the
    possibility of programs of aerosol disbursement which have untoward
    effects on bio-systems. I don’t think it’s fear mongering (as SR1419 mentioned
    for some reason) to see the use of barium, aluminum, titanium and
    polymers as a real concern since their use is confirmed.

    I am extremely careful to not say that there is a widespread use of them
    as I don’t have the evidence. I do see a multitude of reasons why
    the DOD would not admit to the widespread use of metals. I also
    see evidence of the military continually downplaying the dangers
    of chemical releases and atmospheric mitigation.

    A fun example of the government saying a chemical is o.k. would be
    their treatment of the jetfuel additive JP-8. There is a great deal of
    double speak and deflection seen with regards to its use.

    Regards,
    Bryansail

  41. Bryan, this site is not chaffscience.com, perhaps you should start that? Contrailscience is about contrails, and things that resemble them. Nothing you’ve discussed resembles contrails. It seems you simply think that the military is secretly and illegally using too much aerosolized metals in various capacities. I don’t think you’ve really shown much evidence of this, and I also think that general industry and transport releases far more pollution even than you are speculating – so I’m unsure why you are so focused on this one kind of rather speculative pollution.

    That said, you raise a lot of points, but they don’t really stand up to scrutiny:

    the reflection of radar is not necessarily based on the
    size of the chaff anymore. The radar signal in this application
    is reflected by the electromagnetic field generated by the metals
    used. An example of smaller is better.
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5619205.html

    Wrong, the (1985) patent states: “The overall size or physical dimensions of the chaff elements will be dependent upon the wave length of the primary radar or radio signal for which interference is sought. The length of the chaff should be the wave length of the primary signal or some multiple thereof. The width of the chaff element can be in the range of 1 mil to approximately 10 mils”

    In this application for improved chaff thinner is better (i.e. thinner = smaller)
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4100102.html

    Wrong, it’s not a patent for chaff. It’s essentially a “smoke screen”, used for ground based installations, and was invented in 1960

    Many applications and
    discussions on ‘wet plumes’ of chaff dispersal exist. Chaff can be dispensed from fluids
    suitable for dispensing from jet fuels, this is why we are discussing chaff here as chaff can
    be a constituent of contrails. So it is very pertinent to examination of contrails right?
    Re; chaff delivery systems from a fluid;
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4167008.html

    Wrong. You are confusing “fluid” and “liquid”. Gasses are fluids. The patent clear describes a DRY chaff system.


    This patent discusses putting the ‘chaff’ into the path of
    electromagnetic energy
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4638316.html

    Correct, however, since radar IS electromagnetic energy, it’s entirely meaningless.

    This is a good read regarding how much thinner / smaller chaff
    can be;
    http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5212488/description.html

    Alright, so this 1992 patent describes a type of chaff (aluminum dust) that can be used to complement traditional fiber chaff. But why exactly is this a cause for concern? Is the military deploying this chaff on a daily basis over American cities? Are there studies that say it is harmful? What exactly is the problem here?

    Consider what were are talking about here: Aluminum dust (or aluminum powder). This has several non-military uses. One is in the production of fireworks – millions of which will be fired into the air this forth of July – is this a concern? Aluminum powder is used for many other purposes, and many thousands of tons of aluminum powder are manufactured and used every year: see:
    http://en.hnyyly.com/newEbiz1/EbizPortalFG/portal/html/index.html

    Here’s one on barium from airplanes that is extremely interesting;
    Originally Posted by NIH
    The high levels of Ba stemmed from local quarrying for Ba ores and/or
    use of Ba in paper/foundry/welding/textile/oil and gas well related
    industries, as well as from the use of Ba as an atmospheric aerosol
    spray for enhancing/refracting the signalling of radio/radar waves
    along military jet flight paths, missile test ranges, etc.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15082100?dopt=Abstract

    I’m sorry, but Medical Hypotheses is not a reputable source. They publish “radical, speculative and non-mainstream scientific ideas” without peer review, so you can write pretty much anything you want in there. See:
    http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/623059/authorinstructions

    So I think you need a better source of “the use of Ba as an atmospheric aerosol
    spray for enhancing/refracting the signalling of radio/radar waves
    along military jet flight paths, missile test ranges,”

    Your next link is by the same author (Mark Purdy), so has the same problems.

    So, you seem to have mis-read a lot of (often very old) patents, and reading too much into some rumors of odd usages of Barium. You have no evidence to actually suggest something is going on, and even then – the things you suggest are problematic are actually vastly dwarfed by industrial pollution.

  42. the Gregger says:

    final entry. This website has no evedence that something is’nt going on. After what I saw yesterday in the sky, there is no doubt in my mind that there is abnormal airplane activity in the skys over head. All i read here is a bunch of garbage and ostrich head in the sand stuff. You guys are exactly what they want. Fat dumb and happy. this web site is a joke!

  43. The point of this website is not to provide evidence that something is not going on. That would be pointless, as you can’t prove that something does not exist. It’s like saying “There’s no proof that aliens does not exist, so they must exist”.

    No, the point is to show that the is no evidence that chemtrails DO exist. This is perhaps a subtle distinction, and I know a lot of people don’t seem to appreciate the difference. But I think what I’ve shown here is:

    A) There is no evidence to suggest chemtrails exist.
    B) Contrails explain the observed events, and have done since 1921.

    Gregger, I’ve explained the things you describe. So why do you still believe? What exactly is the evidence you think you have that I’ve not explained well enough to you? I’d be happy to explain further.

  44. SR1419 says:

    Gregger-

    what did you see in the sky??

    …and how is that different than supersaturated persistent contrails that spread out and cover the sky in haze of thin cirrus?

    What is “normal” airplane activity?

  45. Marcus says:

    So, maybe we should start calling chemtrails by their government/military name; aerosols. Does that help all the brain-deads out there? Weather modification is ADMITTED at this point. Universities have admitted it, NASA Scientists have admitted it, the government has admitted it, and just a couple of months ago, The Monterey Herald reported that there are over 60 weather modification tests taking place in the western united states currently. This is done by spraying nano-sized chemicals out of military airplanes in PATTERNS. No one has debunked The Atmospheric Science Program, ran by the Department of Energy, which is the indirect, and semi-direct aerosol campaign. Owning The Weather by 2025, from 1996, does talk about much more than cloud-seeding Uncinus-SR1419. That was over 12 years ago. Think how much better they are now. You both talk about how this is all cloud-seeding; like Project Popeye, or contrails. Well, it is much more than that. They can: flood areas (like they’re doing in the midwest currently), they can induce drought, remove fog and clouds, make fog and clouds, choose battlefield environments by storm modification, change space weather, shape weather patterns,steering weather, increase or decrease the severity of storms, etc. Take a look at page 11 of Owning the Weather by 2025; you’ll see step 4 says Employ weather modification tools-and there is a plane with a large tank for spraying chemicals. Then, step 5 shows cause-effect of the weather modification-with a picture for you there as well! Artificial weather creation is talked about on page 27 using nanotechnology (nanotechnology is currently in many consumer products, as well as aerosol compounds-and this science is developing rapidly). Take a look at page 34 of Owning the Weather by 2025, and you will see a graph. Remember, it is 2008 right now. But, in 1996 they show that they have Aerospace Delivery Vehicles that release chemicals, Directed Energy, Artificial Ionospheric Mirrors, and Smart Clouds (nanotechnology). NOW. You got that? And now is 1996. It is 2008 currently. Ben Livingston has point blank said that the government/military uses chemicals released from airplanes to manipulate the weather in many ways. His latest world-wide comments were that we can reduce or destroy hurricanes by spraying aerosols into them, and have been able to do so since the 1960’s. With regards to Hurricane Katrina, he stated that they refused to kill the hurricane because of political reasons, and probably made it worse., He is a retired military naval physicist. Not cloud-seeding. Not contrails. Don’t ask me who the head of
    the FAA is that I spoke to who said only military planes leave low-level lasting chemtrails.
    Find out yourself. Call the GLOBE Project at NASA. Call Universities. Do something other than convince these brain-dead idiots on your website that everything is a contrail.
    Lasting contrails are possible with HIGH humidity, and LOW temperatures. VERY RARE! The 33,000 foot minimum level for contrails was stated by the Airforce when I spoke to one of their aviation experts. Now, take a couple of pieces of this writing that you can say, “well, you can’t prove that,” and pretend everything is a contrail. We’ve presented plenty of information. You say things like, “well that plane you said that made a perfect chemtrail circle that lasted for hours was in a holding pattern.” A perfect circle, with no trail left before or after the perfect circle was made. Yeah right guys. I’m embarrassed to even be on this site, but my friend begged me to write another post to the brain-dead idiots. Spraying nano-sized chemicals out of military planes to manipulate the weather is ADMITTED. Conversation over. We are correct. You are incorrect.

  46. How hard is it to tell me the name of the head of the FAA that you spoke to? I don’t know WHEN you spoke to him or her, so it could be anyone. But let’s say it was Marian Blakey. You are claiming that Marian Blakey told you that “NONE of their planes leave chemtrails, only military ones.” Is that correct? It just seems a little odd that everyone in the Government has been saying this is just a hoax, and then Blakey, the head of the FAA, goes and says it’s not, and then says it’s a military thing.

    Of course weather modification is admitted. Nobody has ever denied it. It’s been going on for decades, with no secrecy. What you fail to show though, is any evidence of what they are ACTUALLY DOING that is related to persistent contrails. Quoting obscure speculative documents is not evidence. Evidence would be photos, videos, chemical analyses, etc. So far all evidence suggested has been shown to be just normal contrails, and normal pollution.

    Lasting contrails are possible with HIGH humidity, and LOW temperatures. VERY RARE! The 33,000 foot minimum level for contrails was stated by the Airforce when I spoke to one of their aviation experts.

    Very rare? Now how exactly would you know these conditions are very rare? And how often is “very rare”? 5% of the time? 1%? 50%? Could you perhaps quote a science book? Could you quote ANYTHING that says that “normal” contrails don’t last very long? Because I’ve quoted a lot of books and articles that do not suggest these conditions are not rare at all, and that spreading contrails are actually a common sight.

    And this 33,000 foot thing from an aviation expert? Let’s look at that again: “The 33,000 foot minimum level for contrails”. It’s been well known that the criteria for contrail formation is not altitude, it’s temperature. Specifically -40 degrees. I’m sure you’ve heard this figure. So why 33,000 feet? It’s quite possible to have -40 at SEA LEVEL (in Alaska, in the winter, for example, where cars make persistent contrails), but a more common figure above the continental US is 26,000 feet. Indeed, right now, in the middle of Summer, in New York it’s -41F at 30,000 feet. Obviously the altitude is lower in winter.

    http://www.usairnet.com/cgi-bin/Winds/Aloft.cgi?location=JFK&Submit=Get+Forecast&hour=06&course=azimuth

    So you see the problem here. You make these statements that have no basis in science, or in evidence, such as the 33,000 feet. Then you say you were told this by a contact in the Air force, or the head of the FAA. But what you claim they told you is contradicted by ALL the science books, scientific papers, scientists and meteorologists.

    So why should anyone believe anything you say? I’m sorry, but until you get the basic science right, there’s no point moving on to the more esoteric things you claim. So if you want to discuss this further, then show me you understand the formation criteria for contrails and persistent contrails, and the prevalence of these conditions in the upper atmosphere.

  47. SR1419 says:

    Marcus-

    Weather modification- yes, lots of studies, experiments, desires and attempts at/for weather modification. It has been around for a very long time:

    http://www.weathermodification.org/

    Nobody- at least not I- ever claimed there were not weather mod attempts…nor did I ever say that “this is all cloud-seeding”- do not put words in my mouth.

    Does that mean there is a global, clandestine operation filling the skies with persistent contrails that spread out and cover the sky in a haze daily?

    No.

    Are most of the tests and experiments done by Universities, and gov’t agencies (NOAA, NASA) – and not done in “military” planes…Yes- see here for an example:

    http://www.asp.bnl.gov/Aerosol-Cumuliform.html

    Moroever- the tests do not result in persistent contrails- cloud seeding, hurricane abatement etc do not leave persistent trails that last for hours and days and spread out in a Cirrus sheet…which is what every “chemtrail” believer sees and thinks it’s a “chemtrail”.

    As for the Atmospheric Science Program?? What is there to debunk?? Looks like an interesting program:

    http://www.asp.bnl.gov/

    Its existence certainly does not mean there is a global, clandestine spraying operation leaving persistent contrails filled with barium that spread out and cover the sky in a haze.

    If you truly understood the projects they are working on- none of them require leaving persistent trails that spread out in cirrus sheets.

    When you say “They can: flood areas (like they’re doing in the midwest currently)”…

    Do you have any proof of that claim whatsoever?? What is the single most compelling piece of evidence that the flooding Iowa is a result of a clandestine military operation? Is there any chance that it could just be a vagary of normal weather patterns?? Did it ever flood in Iowa 100 yrs ago? 1000 years ago? Do you think every extreme weather event is some secret military operation?? You make bold statements but have nothing to actually back it up with. The desire for weather mod doesn’t mean that every weather event is a result of it.

    Why would they want Iowa to flood?

    As for Ben Livingston??? His activity in Weather Modification has been with cloud seeding and hurricane abatement…Nothing at all to do with persistent contrails that spread out and cover the sky in a thin cirrus sheet. Nothing.

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/october2005/141005weather_modification.htm

    What does his company specialize in?? Cloud Seeding. Ask him to use one of his planes to sample a persistent contrail and see if it is laced with barium.

    http://www.weathermod.com/

    So, yes- you are correct- lots of research and programs involving aerosols and weather modification…but you are utterly incorrect if you think that any persistent trail you see in the sky is a “chemtrail”- regardless of the plane that left the trail or the pattern it flew.

    The reality is that the vast majority- if not all- the “chemtrails” people think they see, post pictures of on the internet etc…are really supersaturated, persistent contrails. This is fact. Plain and simple fact. The vast majority of “chemtrail” believers are under the mis-guided impression that any trail that does not dissipate in a few minutes is a “chemtrail”. Their only “evidence” of “chemtrails” is that they persist, spread out and cover the sky in haze. Then they take a picture of it and post it on the internet and claim it’s a “chemtrail”. Speculation based on ignorance. Not a good recipe for truth.

    Given the SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACT that the behavior of some contrails is EXACTLY the same as those visible behaviors attributed to “chemtrails”, it is IMPOSSIBLE to know you are seeing a “chemtrail” just by looking at it. To claim you know for certain that what you see is a “chemtrail” is to expose your ignorance. Without testing the plume in situ- you know nothing. Regardless of the plane that left the trail or the pattern it flew. Why can’t a military test pilot fly a circle through some supersaturated air?? Why can’t any of the atmospheric studies involving the use of planes fly in a circle? Why can’t a amateur pilot fly a circle through some supersaturate air? How is the pattern a plane flew proof of anything?? Your logic abandoned you.

    I urge you to find one program, test, or “operation” of weather modification that results in long lasting contrails that spread out and cover the sky in a thin cirrus cloud.

    The conditions for persistent contrails (supersaturation with respect to ice) have been estimated to be prevalent a significant amount of the time in the Northern hemisphere:

    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/aviation/038.htm#341

    Close your mind if you must- wish that the conversation was over if you must…but your ignorance of the basic science of contrails makes your speculation and accusations highly dubious at best.

    Good luck with that.

  48. Marcus says:

    I guess you’re going to say Michael Castle doesn’t know what chemtrails (among other atmospheric deadly technologies) are, like you did about Dennis Kucinich, and the Space Preservation Act of 2001, 2002, 2005. Right? P.S. You still left the majority of my documented facts out of your response from my last post. Like you always do.

    Citizen Drafts Bill to Prohibit Chemtrail Poisonings & Inhumane Weaponry
    (Requires Urgent Delivery to Treasonous Weasels Occupying U.S. Congress)

    By R. Michael Castle-Republican Congressman from Delaware

    http://educate-yourself.org/cn/unifiedatmosphericpreservatrionact04mar08.shtml

    Good luck with your contrail crap Uncinus. Take care

  49. I explained why I was not going to address you speculation on weather modification. You first have to show that you understand the criteria for contrail formation and persistence before you can accurately speculate on what might be causing similar phenomena. So if you’d like to take back the 33,000 feet, and your quote from the “FAA Head”, then we can discuss.

    Of course, SR1419 has addressed most of your points, so feel free to take it up with him.

    No, I don’t think that Republican Congressman Mike Castle knows what chemtrails are. You are confusing him with Richard Michael Castle, a chemtrail theorist since 2000, who actually wrote the piece you attribute to the congressman.

    Rep Mike Castle:
    http://www.castle.house.gov/

    R. Mike Castle:
    http://www.rense.com/general76/castlebio.htm

  50. Marcus says:

    My bad Uncinus. You are correct, it is Dr. Castle who is way smarter than any politician ever could be. Sorry about that. Anyway, the point is, we can disagree on slight differences on the altitude needed for contrail formation, but I do agree that persistent contrails can occasionally form, and spread. However, the evidence associated with all of the technologies that I have listed regarding atmospheric manipulation is undeniable. Those technologies go hand in hand with aerial spraying of what we are calling chemtrails. Debunk all of that technology, and its association with released aerosol agents from military jets that form massively thick lines and differentiated patterns all over the world, and outside of known flight paths, and maybe I’ll write another post in the future.

    Take care

  51. What’s to debunk? There’s no secrecy about clouds seeding, or fog dispersal, or even hail mitigation. SR1419 answered a lot of your more general points above.

    On contrails though, you seem to be claiming that that are more persistent contrails than would be expected. I think that’s the central misunderstanding in the whole “chemtrail” saga. You started out saying that contrails only form above 33,000 feet, and that the right conditions are “very rare”. Now you seem to accept this is not true?

    And regarding: “released aerosol agents from military jets that form massively thick lines and differentiated patterns all over the world, and outside of known flight paths” – can you give any evidence that this is actually happening?

    Is there a photo that shows this that you can demonstrate is NOT just a photo of contrails?

    And what are these “known flight paths”? Can you name ONE SPOT in the US, outside of an MOA, that is not within wind blowing distance of a known flight path? Jets fly pretty much over every square mile of the US. Name ONE SPOT where these operations are going on.

    http://users.design.ucla.edu/~akoblin/work/faa/ss/5.jpg

  52. Dave says:

    There are two problems with “contrail science” explanations:

    1) Changes to our sky and clouds happened drastically and quickly. Our skies looked very different 10-15 years ago. It is not simply that there are more aircraft. They are higher, faster and in greater quantities than ever before. But even so, the patterns don’t seem to quite match up. It’s possible that there are also changes to the humidity and temperatures in the stratosphere over the last decade too. But a simple “condensation” explanation is simply not adequate because it does not address the phenomenon completely.

    In other words, there have been contrails for over fifty years, but they only recently began having a profound affect on our weather and sky, and of course our concern is over the potential health issues.

    2) People who have spouted contrail science from encyclopedic sources don’t seem to paying attention to the actual affects. (Looking at the screen instead of the sky?) Several times in my research I have seen meteorologists point to “contrails” AND “natural clouds” when it’s obvious to anyone who has been watching that ALL the clouds in the scene are from jets. If we can see that you are not understanding the picture, why should we believe your parroted analysis?

    How is it that people who learn from books always think books are right– even though books are constantly being updated and corrected? I assure you, the more research and observation you do, the less certain you will become.

    –Artificial Clouds

  53. Dave, when you say “They are higher, faster and in greater quantities than ever before”, do you have any actual evidence that this is greater than would be expected by the larger number of airplanes?

    I’m not really sure what your point is here? I freely admit that there are lots of contrails in the sky, and that they probably alter the weather slightly due to the increased cloud cover. But this is well known, and not a secret, nor a conspiracy. What on my site have I misstated? If I have any errors, I’d be very happy to correct the.

    On YOUR site, you have some photo with statements and questions that I’d like to address:

    http://artificialclouds.com/chemtrails_2.jpg
    “Much of the earth’s surface gets covered with jet clouds”

    That’s simply not true. For a start the jets only fly on an a limited fraction of the earth’s surface. But more to the point, the weather does not support persistent contrails every day. Have a look at these satellite photos of the Pacific Northwest:
    http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=AERONET_HJAndrews.2008184.terra.1km

    I’ve picked a day that actually HAS some persistent contrails, and possibly some cloud cover resultent from them. But click on “PREV”, and you’ll see there was none the previous day. Keep clicking on “PREV” and see how many days actually have persistent contrails. Very few.

    So to say “Much of the earth’s surface get covered with jet clouds” is a huge exaggeration, and more accurately would be “Some of the earth’s surface occasionally is partly covered with jet clouds”

    http://artificialclouds.com/chemtrails_3.jpg
    “what are jet contrails made of?”, “what is jet fuel made of?”

    Contrails are made of ice. Jet fuel is made of hydrocarbons, very similar to gasoline. You know this, yet are scaremongering for some reason.

    http://artificialclouds.com/contrail_4.jpg
    “How can jets cover the whole sky with clouds?”, “When did this start?”

    Jet leave a contrail which is a dense cirrus cloud. If they leave it in moist air, then it will spread out and possibly cover the sky, especially if there are several jets. This started at least in 1944, when it was observed:

    In Idaho I have seen contrails formed in a perfectly clear sky and four hours later a complete overcast resulted

    (See: http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/ for more quotes like that, with sources).

    http://artificialclouds.com/contrail_5.jpg
    “Is this a problem?”, “Where will it go from here”.

    It’s a bit of a problem, in that it’s visual pollution, and might possibly be contributing to Global Climate Change, although we don’t know what the net effect is. It will get worse if air traffic increases.

    You know, your site seems quite reasonable, but is tinged with the rather inexplicable insistence that there is some kind of conspiracy going on. Yet you give no actual evidence of any conspiracy, and most of of your argument is how amazing it is that people don’t notice that on some days a lot of the cloud cover is artificial.

  54. Maxxewell says:

    Uncinus,

    Thank you for ATTEMPTING to help those out there who are easily led, yet can’t seem to find the time to read a book on meteorology. As a former private pilot I was horrified recently to find out that there are people out there that believe in “chemtrails”. I remember as a child laying on my back on the picnic table and watching the trails for hours. It’s what got me interested in flying in the first place! There is NOTHING about the trails of today that differ from the trails of those days as a kid. I’m talking mid 70’s here! Those who say they didn’t see long lasting trails when they were kids weren’t watching what I saw! I live in a direct path from Logan airport to all points west. I have lived here all my life (purchased the house from my folks) and there isn’t a doubt in my mind that these chemtrail people are wrong! I’ve recently been trying to help some of the poor unfortunate souls on youtube and they refuse to believe me. They accuse me of being some government shill and suggest that my education in meteorology doesn’t apply.

    Oh well, all we can do is try to help, right?

    Thank you so much for trying to help these poor unfortunate people.

    Good luck to you!

  55. SR1419 says:

    Dave,

    When you say “but they only recently began having a profound affect on our weather”….

    Can you expound? What is the “profound affect” ??

    …and isn’t there a positive correlation between the increase in air traffic over the last 20yrs and the increased contrails??

    Did it, in fact, happen “drastically and quickly” ?? Or was that just your perception?? Did you, in fact, notice it prior to anyone else telling you to notice??

    What exactly are the “patterns that don’t match up”??

    You need to be precise when you say there have been “contrails for 50 years” – There have been contrails that persisted and spread into sheets of man-made cirrus clouds for over 50 years.

    I do not see any difference in the behavior of contrails between then and now…there are just more of them now.

    Persistent contrails and contrail cirrus are quite possibly effecting the weather- and there are and have been and will be many studies to accurately gauge this- see here this paper from 1970:

    http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/098/mwr-098-10-0745.pdf.

    Clearly, it was very much a concern back then.

    …and this paper from 1980:

    http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&issn=1520-0450&volume=020&issue=05&page=0496

    or this paper from 1985:

    http://www.earthscape.org/r2/ams/vol78_97/bams_78_09_1885.pdf.

    The reflective nature of the ice crystals in the contrail may be different than “natural” clouds and there is a lot of concern about that.

    So, again, I encourage you to clearly delineate how the contrails of today are in any way different than what has been observed before….other than quantity.

    This statement: “it’s obvious to anyone who has been watching that ALL the clouds in the scene are from jets. If we can see that you are not understanding the picture, why should we believe your parroted analysis?”

    How is this any different than what has been observed?? If you go back and look at all the contrail research that has been done over the last 50 years, you will see that what you described is often described in the literature…Contrails can form clouds where there were none before…Contrails can spread into sky-filling sheets of cirrus clouds…None of this is “parroted analysis” but empirical data that has been observed again and again.

    …its funny, the more research and observation I do, the more I become certain that what people think they see when they cry “chemtrail!” is really a persistent contrail…

  56. bryansail says:

    Uncinus,

    You are very capable when discussing contrail characteristics but seem to have a severe disconnect or huge mental block when it comes to the multitude of reasons the U.S. Military is modifying the atmosphere.

    A good example of that is your ability to discuss cloud seeding technology while turning away from the thousands of papers detailing work on lifting the atmosphere, creating plasma fields, solving ducting issues over land (hint; metals are involved) and charging the atmosphere for many different purposes. Information on creating a ‘shield’ over the United States to interfere with other countries intelligence gathering, making objects ‘stealthy’ -these topics are far more involved than cloud seeding and appear to take you far outside of your comfort zone but that doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. These projects extend back decades and got a huge boost during the star wars push of the Reagan era. If you think that project was stopped you are very mistaken, it was simply removed from the public domain. One of the many hundreds of examples that you could research is HAARP (not the only array of it’s kind, possibly not even the most powerful) but you have repeatedly ignored how HAARP works in unison with aerosols from aircraft.

    Another example of the disconnect I mention is how you say existing communications and mapping systems work perfectly. They
    do not work perfectly and many papers detail this but you can’t be bothered since it doesn’t appear in any terribly outdated
    book on contrails. Unfortunately these projects do relate to aerosols from aircraft and thus are very relevent to contrail science.

    Another example of how you are choosing ignorance is this
    Unicus wrote;
    “That said, you raise a lot of points, but they don’t really stand up to scrutiny:

    the reflection of radar is not necessarily based on the
    size of the chaff anymore. The radar signal in this application
    is reflected by the electromagnetic field generated by the metals
    used. An example of smaller is better.
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5619205.html

    Here is the actual detail regarding how the radar return is affected by the micro arc allowing a lighter and smaller chaff;
    The point I made DOES stand up to scrutiny. So why did you choose to mis-represent my comment so severely?
    …The chaff of claim 9 wherein the width of the chaff is less than ten mils so as to allow the chaff to exhibit good airfoil properties and extend the time the chaff remains airborne.
    …The invention in this case comprises an improved radar chaff in which a plurality of metallic coated foils of electroconductive materials that are responsive to radio frequency energy are joined as chain links. By joining the chaff elements in this manner, as the joined chaff elements are dispersed and fall, an intermittent make and break contact is caused between the conductive surfaces of the chaff elements thereby creating microarcs of current when subjected to an electromagnetic field. The bandwidth of the microarc current spikes thus generated should be adequate to generate-out-of-band jamming and register as a false reading upon an enemy radar screen. The false radar screen reading caused by the microarc current spikes would make the chaff appear as a moving object on the enemy radar screen.

    The last sentence of the above is the key. It is the microarc and not the size of the chaff.

    These are but a couple of examples of why I am exiting here (you provide dozen of others btw) since my goal is to learn what is happening above our heads. Your website is an important piece of the puzzle, contrails and chemtrails can’t be easily discerned by looking and indirect sampling. They perhaps can’t be discerned at all but I have questions regarding that as the brightness of the aerosols I see is often so exceedingly brilliant. Thanks for being a good starting point in finding out the truth Uncinus, now it’s time for me to expand beyond meteorology textbooks and cloud formation. Normal contrails AND aerosol programs are both a concern. I won’t be hanging around to read your opinion of how harmless nuclear activated metals and JP-8 are. No reason to stay exists since topics beyond normal contrail formation appear to be far outside of your comfort zone. I don’t have proof that our military has advanced aircraft beyond what is in the public domain, this certainly does not mean that that advanced aircraft do not exist. I for one am certain that they do. I am also certain that aerosol deployment is a reality. Whether or not those programs (note, there are more than one) are far reaching is not known despite what SR1419 claims. I don’t have time for you contrail-ers’ faulty logic and limited capabilities to only discuss ancient public domain programs like cloud seeding.

    Remember, absence of proof does NOT equal proof of absence.

    If you want to fully understand aerosols, please feel free to examine the thousands of papers detailing current atmospheric intervention as metals play a key role in hundreds of applications. Unfortunately these programs are not ‘thought’ experiments’
    as uncinus would for some reason like us to believe. (Really, uncinus, that was a very unfortunate example of your feet being
    firmly stuck in the mud)

    Keep looking for orbs, as these craft appear to interact closely with aircraft plumes that likely contain more than normal contrail exhaust. This website is but a very small piece of a much larger puzzle.
    God bless,
    -Bryansail

  57. Bryan, as I said before this site is about discussing contrails, and things that look like contrails. Chaff does not look anything like a contrail, regardless of how big it is.

    The 1985 patent for microarc chaff is about chains of links of 10 mil chaff wire – it’s normal chaff, just linked into chains. Microarc chaff is not by any stretch of the imagination an “aerosol”. It also does not seem to exist outside of the patent, so how do you know it’s ever been in the air? Lots of stuff gets patented, but is never actually made or used.

    Again, you are insisting that SOMETHING is going on, but to see what it is, I’ve got to “examine the thousands of papers detailing current atmospheric intervention”. Why can’t you just point me at one?

    Point me at ONE “aerosol program” that is large enough to be a health concern.

    Just one. Any one.

    There are none. You’ve just got a load of speculation.

  58. bryansail says:

    Ok,
    JP-8 and EDP,

    Chaff can be deployed from jet fuel as we both know.

    Aluminum and barium from fireworks are (as we both know) a public health concern as well,
    although it is obvious their effects are minor, changes in fireworks chemical make up are
    already underway.

    Another excellent example of deflection and your limited ability to reason or respond to
    some of the current atmospheric modifications which (as we both know) extend beyond
    ‘thought experiments’
    Regards and keep looking up (into the fouled air)
    -Bryansail

  59. bryansail says:

    Uncinus,
    atmospheric intervention is not speculation and I’m quite certain that you know this
    Fair well,
    -Bryansail

  60. bryansail says:

    Ok, here’s one
    JP-8, and no I am not optimistic that your opinion of it as a health concern will be relevent based on your
    dismissal of HAARP and chaff as health concerns. This stuff is just too involved in comparison with looking
    at contrail science. According to you the only weather modification is cloud seeding, pretty hilarious really
    as SR1419 is so fond of saying, ‘good luck with that’
    Regards,
    Bryansail

  61. JP-8 is not an aerosol program, it’s a fuel additive used by the military. My position on JP-8 is basically the same as the CDC:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts121.html

    Do you disagree with anything in the CDC document above? If not, then what is your point? You don’t think that JP-8 should be used, or that JP-8 is being used to stop global warming? What?

    Okay, I’ve got “limited ability to reason or respond”, but you are not giving me anything to respond to. JP8 is not a “current atmospheric modifications”. It’s a fuel additive. Give me ONE “aerosol program” or ONE “current atmospheric modification”, or, heck, even ONE “weather modification”

    Just one. One thing that is large enough to be a health concern.

    You’ve just got speculation. No actual programs.

  62. SR1419 says:

    BS33 wrote:

    “No reason to stay exists since topics beyond normal contrail formation appear to be far outside of your comfort zone. I don’t have proof that our military has advanced aircraft beyond what is in the public domain, this certainly does not mean that that advanced aircraft do not exist. I for one am certain that they do. I am also certain that aerosol deployment is a reality. Whether or not those programs (note, there are more than one) are far reaching is not known despite what SR1419 claims. I don’t have time for you contrail-ers’ faulty logic and limited capabilities to only discuss ancient public domain programs like cloud seeding.”

    I love the holier-than-thou attitude…all bluster with absolutely nothing to back it up…when doubt – insult- that is the usual logic of losing arguments on the anonymous internet.

    BS33- can you show any empirical evidence…any evidence at all…that these supposed aerosol programs are in any way effecting the atmosphere??

    Anything?

    Your understanding of logic and the scientific process fail you.

    You were so concerned about the health effects of aluminum in chaff…I showed you several studies that addressed that very concern…and you seemingly disregard the facts.

    When you speculate as you do…the burden of proof IS ON YOU. Reading patents doesn’t cut it. Just saying it is so doesn’t cut it. Where is the Info on the contrails in the Gulf?

    Speculate all you want on the intentions of the US Military…but how does that translate into a clandestine, global spraying operation that fills the skies with persistent contrails on a daily basis?

    It doesn’t.

    Chaff doesn’t spread out into sheets of cirrus clouds that last for days.

    HAARP doesn’t produce persistent contrails.

    “absence of proof does NOT equal proof of absence” – That is exactly what fundamentalist Christians say when trying to covert.

    Run away if you must…I wouldn’t expect anything else.

  63. CSK33 says:

    Dearest Bryansail-

    I appreciate your concern about the health effects of chaff- You are not alone in that…

    …But what does that have to do with persistent contrails??

    Surely you know that the dispersal of chaff does not result in persistent contrails.

    Can you please show where Chaff is added to jet fuel?? I can’t seem to find any info regarding that and I am curious to know how jet-engines can work with 1-2 centimeter long fibers in the fuel.

    There have been numerous studies of the potential effects of chaff…do they assuage your fear at all?? Or do you dismiss the studies because they do not tell you what you want to hear?

    For Example:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/hac/PHA/fallon/nas_p2.html

    “Community members have voiced concern about possible public health risks associated with the Navy’s use of chaff at NASF. Chaff is a metallic material consisting of aluminum-coated glass fibers. Chaff fibers typically are 25 microns (m) thick and between 1 and 2 centimeters long (Naval Research Laboratory 1999). The primary elements in chaff are aluminum and silicon–two of the most abundant naturally occurring elements in the earth’s crust. It is used by the military to confuse radar signals, which allows aircraft to operate without easily being detected.

    Part of NASF’s mission is to conduct training operations that accurately simulate wartime conditions. Air crews at NASF complete chaff deployment training missions and other training exercises which result in the release of approximately 50,000 chaff canisters or bundles per year. At NASF, most of the chaff is released at 15,000 to 20,000 feet above ground level over an area covering approximately 10,000 square miles. Each canister of chaff contains approximately 2.1 million fibers and weighs about 1.5 ounces. This is equivalent to approximately 2 ½ tons of chaff fibers released annually. Once released into the atmosphere, the dispersion of chaff and its ground concentrations depend on such conditions as temperature, humidity, wind directions and speed, release altitude, aircraft speed, and topographic features (Tetra Tech, Inc. 1998; Naval Research Laboratory 1999) In general, chaff is released at high altitudes, drifts over very large areas, and is greatly dispersed before falling to the Earth’s surface.

    Based on the site-specific information presented above, 2 ½ tons of chaff fibers released each year over 10,000 square miles would result in an annual average PM10 or PM2.5 concentration of 0.018 µg/m3. This is far below the NAAQS of 50 µg/m3 for PM10 and 15 µg/m3 for PM2.5. To provide some perspective, annual average background PM10 concentrations range from 6.4 µg/m3 in northern California and Western Nevada to 20 µg/m3 along the east coast. The lowest background PM2.5 concentrations, which are typically found in Nevada, Utah, Wyoming, and northern Arizona, are around 3 µg/m3. The PM10 or PM2.5 concentrations that would result from chaff at NASF would be much lower than average background concentrations found across the U.S.

    A Chaff Survey was conducted by the Navy between December 1994 and January 1995. The survey area covered approximately 107 acres at the Electronic Warfare Range, which is approximately 25 miles east-southeast of NASF. The survey did not find any observable effects of chaff debris in vegetation, wildlife, soils, or water within the survey area (Tetra Tech 1998). Although the Navy survey did not evaluate human health impacts associated with the inhalation of chaff fibers, a recent report issued by the U.S. Air Force did not identify any studies that found chaff to contribute significantly to particulate matter or any EPA criteria pollutants in the atmosphere (USAF 1997). In addition, a panel of independent experts from academic and research institutes concluded that chaff fibers are too large to be inhaled into the lungs and are, therefore, not of health concern for inhalation exposure (Naval Research Laboratory 1999). Based on a review of the scientific literature and recent evaluations at other sites, ATSDR concludes that the usage of chaff at NASF does not pose a public health hazard.”

  64. Jake says:

    Uncinus

    I was looking for a website that could debunk the chemtrails theory and I have found it. I had looked into this subject and found that the believers in this theory didn’t have any good evidence that it was true. I was like, thats it?, thats your proof? You must be able to do better than that!

    I don’t know how people can believe something with such flimsy and wishy washy evidence for it. These people do not understand scientific methodology at all. They don’t understand that you need hard evidence, not just anecdotal or plausible evidence. The worst part however is when confronted with facts that are not really debatable, like contrails can persist for quite awhile, they go into denial mode. In other words, they can’t handle the truth, because it is too psychologically painful for them to admit that maybe, just maybe, the other person has a valid point and they might be wrong about something. They make reality what they wish it to be.

    Keep up the good work! You are smart to focus the debate on the evidence and not get caught up with semantics or name calling.

    To any good scientist this would be a funny website to watch, because with hundreds of posts and you constantly asking for evidence, they have basically given NO GOOD EVIDENCE as far as I can see that this chemtrail conspiracy exists. While many conspiracy theories are true, like 9/11 being an inside job, or the NWO wanting to control the world, this one is not only not true, but has an amazing lack evidence to support it.

    Check out my youtube channel at http://www.youtube.com/user/jackson32 to see a lot of genuine scams, conspiracies and other hidden truths.

  65. Adam says:

    Uncinus i really sympathise with you, and with what you are trying to do – its so very very hard to try to convince people that nothing is going on, and that a secret government is NOT trying to spray chemicals on you / take over the world.

    Sometimes i just think people like to believe something is wrong with their society, maybe it makes them feel better?

    Do contrails spread out depending on air pressure? Or wind movement? Does the atmosphere at the time of aircraft flying overhead have anything to do with how Contrails are dispursed or, how fast they disappear?

    All i know about them is that they are NOT anything sprayed on us by evil people.

  66. Armed Sceptic says:

    Whoever went to the lengths to create this website is a complete fool. You say you live in the willamette valley and you don’t think anything is out of the ordinary. These persistent contrails were not around the 30 years of my life and I will not believe your drivel about how oh, sometimes the weather is just conducive to contrails. Complete disinfo. Right in you own backyard is the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory which plays a huge roll in this. The mere fact that they admit to it yet will not release the ingredient list is in and of itself quite telling.

    The fact of the matter is simple, these weather modification contrails are admitted by government agencies. The evidence of cloud manipulation is everywhere. So to deny that it exists is idiotic. More so, to not question these people and bring it into public debate where it belongs is foolhardy. Yes your government loves you. Trust it totally. IDIOTS.

    The program is called Indirect and Semi-Indirect Aerosol Campaign. Look at the ASP website. I live in the NW and they are spraying practically daily. You can see as many as a dozen LOW(3KM) persistent contrails on any given day. And no they are NOT in any flight plan coordinates. Look at this paper here. There are dozens more out there just look for them and then tell me that they are not spraying population. http://lasp.colorado.edu/glory/meetings/2006/presentations/Day2/03-Ginoux.pdf

    Currently there is no oversight and any company or person for that matter with enough money can pay these companies to spray an area. The ultimate goal of these studies is to control the weather. Samples from around the planet show large amounts of heavy metals including barium and fiberglass coated aluminum from these persistent weather modification contrails. Since the program is admitted to and spraying(polluting) or testing on American citizens is a felony then YES the people responsible for these crimes need to be brought into a courtroom of their peers. Just because the government say it is so, doesn’t make it that way. I really find it hard to believe how many people trust their government. Or better yet the fascist scientific dictatorship that has taken over our Republic.

  67. Armed Sceptic says:

    Real quick, the burden of proof does not lie with the citizens of this nation. Our elected officials are here to do our bidding. Unfortunately these people are now considered our masters and how dare we question them. Not that it matters anyway, they will just deny it or bring up the words “conspiracy” or “nutjob”. These programs and the true contents of the spraying should be held in public view. We the People will decide, eventually.

  68. I live in Los Angeles. I’ve been in the Willamette valley, around Medford, and I know persistent contrails are more common there. Usually on a North-South flight path, as would be expected.

    You said:

    The fact of the matter is simple, these weather modification contrails are admitted by government agencies.

    But, that’s wrong. They have not been admitted. In fact they have been specifically denied. WHERE has this been admitted?

    And can you tell me how you measure the height of contrails? You say they are 3KM, but how exactly do you know this? Do you have any evidence, or is this just all based on your personal estimates?

    Why don’t you believe “sometimes the weather is just conducive to contrails”? That’s been scientific consensus in hundred of papers for over fifty years – back from 1921 in fact. Can you find science that says otherwise?

  69. Armed Sceptic says:

    I’ve met many people such as yourself who create straw man arguments. There was much more content in my statements than what you chose to respond to. For you to say, “But, that’s wrong” does not make it so. There is an every growing body of evidence that is in plain sight. Have you done your research on the topic of indirect and indirect aerosol programs being conducted by DOE and HAARP.

    Try this, go to the DOE website, main page, in the search engine at the top. Type in “indirect aerosol” 1st hit, Atmospheric Science Program, 6th hit, Notice 07-26 deals with atmospheric aerosols in radiative forcing of the Earth’s climate. Basically they are forcing earth to do their bidding. Making clouds more dense is a very foohardy thing to do. The planet decides these things, and as I’m sure you know, NASA released a report recently that the persistent aerosol program is exacerbating the whole “Global Warming” sham. A very narrow minded approach to earth’s climate. These are just 2 instances. If you were the “researcher” and psuedo-expert you claim to be you would already be on top of these things. Unfortunately you are a “narrow bander” as call them.

    As for the altitude of planes dispensing these aerosols myself and others have documented readings and high res closeup photos of these aircraft. Evidence is also being mounted that the same plane will fly crosshatch patterns. *All normal air traffic activity* PLEASE

    You see the hokum science of “climatology” does not give anyone the right to spray our atmosphere perpetually with compounds such as heavy metals. This cannot continue and it is my sincere hope that anybody who reads this will drop the “chem trail” moniker and expose these programs as persistent contrails produced by the indirect aerosol programs that are public knowledge for they are:

    1) illegal-
    2) detrimental to the health of every living organism on this planet

    Here is one of hundereds like it

    http://www.science.doe.gov/ober/berac/lunn04_05.ppt

    Not to mention this is a global operation. So wake up already.

    It’s not my job to convince you, if feel they pose no threat, but only a disinfo agent or someone who is truly asleep would say these don’t exist and that heavy metals and fiberglass coated aluminum raining down on the population non-stop are a good thing.

  70. I think you misunderstand where these aerosols are coming from. The papers you link to talk about aerosols from pollution – mostly from industrial and transportation sources, but there are also many more natural sources of aerosols, such as volcanoes and forest fires.

    “Radiative forcing” is a scientific term you seem to misunderstand. Here’s a definition:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiative_forcing

    But basically it’s the “greenhouse effect” – more heat is coming in that is going out, so the earth is warming up. Nobody is “forcing the earth to do their bidding”.

    And where they talk about an “Aerosol Program”, if you read the papers you’d see it’s not a program to spray aerosols into the atmosphere – it’s a program to measure and study the billions of tons of aerosols that are already there.

    Here’s a nice simple explanation of this:

    http://www.rap.ucar.edu/staff/tardif/Documents/CUprojects/ATOC5600/aerosol_properties.htm

    Aerosols are small (sub-micron to several microns) particles in suspension in the atmosphere. They can be in the solid phase or in the liquid phase. Aerosols originate both from natural and man-made (anthropogenic) sources. They can be directly emitted as particles (primary aerosols) into the atmosphere by volcanoes, through the effect of wind lifting dust particles in arid regions, from combustion during biomass burning, from sea spray, from vegetation etc. They can also be the result of chemical reactions (gas-to-particle conversion) (secondary aerosols). Table I summarizes the main sources of aerosols. It is estimated that 10% to 20% of the aerosols can be characterized as anthropogenic on the global scale.

    See that? 10-20% are man made, and most of those are from “Industrial dust, Soot and Biomass burning” – the aerosols from jet engines have only a very small effect. If you were really concerned about this problem, you would focus on industrial dust and soot.

  71. SR1419 says:

    AS-

    Uncinus already pointed it out…but I am so dumbfounded that I had to reply…

    You said:

    “Look at this paper here. There are dozens more out there just look for them and then tell me that they are not spraying population. http://lasp.colorado.edu/glory/meetings/2006/presentations/Day2/03-Ginoux.pdf

    That is proof?? The level of reading comprehension is a sincere indictment of our education system…This paper you provided says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about spraying anything. NOTHING. It deals with the “aerosols”- particulate matter already in the atmosphere…How is that in any way “proof” of a global, clandestine spraying operation of unknown origin and purpose??? How??

    You said: “These persistent contrails were not around the 30 years of my life”-

    This is simply untrue. Have you even researched contrail behavior?? Do the 100s of scientific papers dating back 50 years or more that clearly identify persistent contrails that spread out and cover the sky in haze mean nothing?? Were they creating disinfo 50 years ago?? Were all the scientists who peer-reviewed the papers and did further research on the topic in on it?

    Why does this paper from 1970 refer to a single contrail that persists and spreads out eventually cover the entire sky??

    http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/098/mwr-098-10-0745.pdf

    How can you still claim that persistent contrails didn’t exist 30 years ago??

    …and you want to talk about fools. wow.

  72. Armed Sceptic says:

    Hmmm…..yes, foolish. They weren’t spraying every day like they are now. Weather manipulation has been ongoing since the ’20’s. But the toys and compounds are much more complex these days. These programs have intensified over the years and it is quite possible that multiple programs could be ran simultaneously over a given area. So let’s not forget the facts. These programs are admitted. You can argue whether or not they are for our good and exactly what is going on but the fact is these programs exist. I’m gathering my own body of evidence, I suggest you do the same. The purpose of the link was so that people would look at it and realize a starting point. You fools would obviously know all this if you were into finding the truth. When NASA reports that certain weather warming campaigns are actually heating up the atmosphere then yes, these are indicators of real events.

    For your review, Please, show me the proof that it doesn’t exist, fools.

    [EDIT: large blocks of text were clipped from the following forum posts:]

    http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=21301.0
    http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=21301.5;wap2
    http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=21301.10;wap2
    http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=21301.15;wap2
    http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=21301.20;wap2

    If you haven’t noticed, it’s the perfect racket, keep the population down and ill, then the pharma will make the billions. Control the weather which in turn controls the food. The US Military has said it will control the weather by 2015. So what, you don’t believe them or their minion of “criminals” who are conducting experiments on the population of this country. Oh, don’t forget the Russian’s releasing multiple statements for the US to stop the weather control experiments due to it’s disruptive behavior in their country. Research Eugenics, there is something to be said for 1000’s of admitted documents describing their Utopian world. In closing, there is also an admitted campaign to censor google searches of the above topics. Not to mention this:

    http://www.tdlr.state.tx.us/weather/weathermod.htm

    So type your bullshit, somebody might believe you fools.
    Don’t forget to address the facts. Oh and as far as I’m concerned, you schucks are part of the problem.

    Dissent is the greatest form of patriotism don’t forget it. It is your duty as an American citizen to question your government, so get busy.

  73. r says:

    Well, I just spent an hour reading this battlefield between Uncinus and the people of this planet. My mind is made up; the people have the victory. It comes down to feeling at the end of the day – the peoples messages are always truthful, Uncinus, too many times you have slyly dodged points and clung to claims of science. And now you know – you can never convince someone who relies on his heart for the truth. Goodnight, stop the experiment. Conintelpro over and out.

  74. “r”, you can use science too.

  75. Truth Spreader says:

    So post my original comments, by Armed Sceptic, oh that’s right you can’t debunk it so just erase it. Weaksauce

  76. I’m sorry, were you posting as Armed Sceptic? There’s several comments up above that were answered. Was something missing?

    Feel free to post it again. Sometime things get eaten by the spam filter. Feel free to email me if you continue to have problems.

    I’d appreciate it if you just use one user name, as it makes the discussions easier to follow.

  77. Never mind, I found it in the spam can. It should show up above now. It got marked as spam as it’s so big and has so many links. Maybe try to break things down in future.

    Here it is:

    http://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-myths/#comment-3895

    Also, no long cut and paste please – makes things very hard to read. I’m going to trim it down a little before I answer (just trimming pasted blocks of text).

  78. Okay, your spammed post consisted simply of large blocks of text copied from prisonplanet.com. So I reduced it to links to the relevant posts.

    My whole interest in the “chemtrail” theory is based around the fact that supposed “chemtrails” look and behave exactly like contrails. But all you’ve given me is some huge complicated conspiracy theory.

    Do you actually have ANY EVIDENCE that “chemtrails” behave differently to contrails?

    Because if you don’t, then that’s pretty much “proof that they don’t exist”.

    And what makes you think that: “there is also an admitted campaign to censor google searches of the above topics. ”

    Who admitted it?

    And what’s with the link to the weather modification in Texas? Did anyone EVER suggest that there was no weather modification? Cloud seeding has been going on for decades, with no secrecy. Look, here’s a link to public articles written about it before 1970 – over a thousand results. So where’s the conspiracy?

    Here’s another 1000 pre-1970 articles on weather modification

  79. Armed Sceptic says:

    Lets rewind, You stated no proof existed of admitted Aerosol programs. Well the edited text I posted clearly showed that evidence many times over with the accompanying sources where the original documents can be found. HR517 (I believe) addressed this very thing, weather modification programs. Now I’m sorry if this whole “chemtrail” topic is so complicated to you. What I find fascinating is the majority of people when confronted with factual and documented information that goes outside their belief system are so quick to either deny or label that information as a “conspiracy theory”. I would refer to the above information as “conspiracy fact”. Yes it is happening and no, they will not allow it to be brought out into public debate. So admitting that weather modification exists basically blows your whole premise for this site. It’s obvious that they have been modifying the weather, no secret right, well how do you think they do that? With specific heavy metal compounds dispersed in an aerosol form. This is a documented fact. The only conspiracy here is that this info isn’t being discussed by “We the People”

    10’s of millions of people around the globe are waking up to the fact their weather is being manipulated and these non-commercial planes are flying out of and below known flight paths exuding a chemical compound that NO GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE WILLING TO DISCUSS IN THE OPEN. Except to tell you that, yes, we are modifying the weather but no, you cannot have the details. Is it a group of nutjob scientists playing god with the weather or something more sinister? I don’t know, but I do know what I see on a daily basis.

    As for my evidence that “chemtrails” behave differently than contrails, I have my own 2 eyes. If you would have spent 10 minutes reading my previously edited post you would have garnered many sources to further investigate. But then you also have the assertation that true contrails only form above 30,000 feet as they are ice crystals. Not at 6-15,000 foot mark as being documented in the Portland Metro Area. If you watch the skies around the PDX area you will see planes at low altitudes spewing huge trails that disperse over time slowing drop to the ground in armlike wisps. And you will also notice planes at the same altitude at the same time emitting NO trails whatsoever. JP4 is JP4. I will post pics I’ve gathered from just stepping outside last night at a random moment. I can tell you this. I am no expert on the science of it, but I am no idiot and I can completely believe in my own eyes and soul. But alas, this is not my opinion it is fact.

  80. You stated no proof existed of admitted Aerosol programs.

    No I didn’t. You posted lots of links to actual aerosol programs, but you misunderstood what they were. They were all programs for measuring aerosols, 80% of which comes from natural sources, and the rest comes from industrial and transport pollution, and burning biomass.

    Now, if you think there is a program to DELIBERATELY ADD aerosols to the atmosphere, then I’d like to see your evidence.

    So admitting that weather modification exists basically blows your whole premise for this site. It’s obvious that they have been modifying the weather, no secret right, well how do you think they do that? With specific heavy metal compounds dispersed in an aerosol form. This is a documented fact.

    .

    This sites premise, regarding chemtrails, is that they look and behave exactly like contrails. You’ve still not shown me any evidence otherwise.

    Contails form in fairly clear skies, at above 26,000 feet.

    Cloud seeding happens in, or below, existing rain clouds. It’s most often from the ground.

    These are two totally different things.

    Cloud seeding is done with silver iodine. There are several posts here that discuss cloud seeding.

    I look forward to seeing your evidence of flights leaving trails below 15,000 feet. I’m especially interested in how you measured the altitude.

    I’m still interested in this Google censorship – any details there?

    If you want to post photos, email them to me ([email protected]), or put them somewhere and post a link (keep the number of links in a post small though, to avoid spam detection).

  81. Armed Sceptic says:

    Your a total contradiction. Your opening paragraph at the top of your home page here states:

    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.

    So in regards to this: Now, there is no real evidence that “chemtrails” are real, but there are several myths on the internet about “chemtrails” and this”All these myths can very easily be shown to be false”

    Your backpeddling is amusing. Your statement that no real evidence that chemtrails are real is completely shattered by millions of eyewitness acounts and the above posted info. Not to mention the links below taken right over head of my house at an altitude below 10,000 ft. By my and neighbors estimates, abound 7500 ft. Scoped with various intruments with an average of 6800ft that was verified with a Newcon 7X50 LRB 4000CI. This happens 5-6 days a week and by your own assertion, it is not a normal ice contrail which, according to you, would occur above 26,000 ft. A huge body of evidence is already gathered and will continue to be gathered. You migh also be interested to know that these planes are not commercial flights and are not on any know flight paths. But consistently fly a grid like pattern over the Portland Metro area. Your denial and steadfast refusal to engage logic and facts defies all forms of reason. Unfortunately the majority of the public are in the exact same mindset as yourself or even to greater degree completely oblivious. Very detrimental to the useless eaters of this planet wouldn’t you say.

    http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/6070/dsc01514gz4.jpg

    http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/566/dsc01516tk3.jpg

    http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/9476/dsc01519uo4.jpg

    http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/7697/dsc01515ab2.jpg

    And let’s not forget your closing paragraph above:

    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.

    As for something I’d like to have investigated, why don’t you check into the airport workers who have been interviewed about planes with aerosol jets being loaded on their watch.

    And if you don’t believe me, why not check into some other peoples observations. Like this one:

    http://www.youtube.com//watch?v=uqKNkagvSHU

    Definitely not at your 26,000 ft mark is it?

  82. Zret says:

    If this science i’m Napoleone Bonaparte.

    This is not serious.

  83. I’m sorry, but if you think I’m back-peddling, I must have miscommunicated something. Can you point to where I said something different to what you quoted? If you are referring to “You stated no proof existed of admitted Aerosol programs”, then I suggest you read what I wrote again. There are lots of aerosol programs – that measure aerosols.

    Actually, yes the contrail in the video is probably well above 26,000 feet. It’s just spread out by the wind shear. Your other photos all show the same kind of thing – contrails that have spread out.

    Where are these interviews with airport workers?

    I’m impressed you’ve got a Newcon LRB 400 CI, but unfortunately it’s impossible to measure the height of clouds with a laser rangefinder, as clouds will not reflect the beam, and instead will just scatter the light. In the trails you show, the beam will just go straight through. You might have some luck with a plane, but then the maximum range is 13,000 feet, so you’d get spurious results for anything higher.

    Can you describe the other instruments you used? And the technique you use to estimate the heights of trails.

    It seems like your fundamental problem here is in estimating the height of contrails. There is NOTHING in any of your photos or videos that suggests that the trails are below contrail altitude. I suggest instead you try something like taking photos of the trails AS THEY FORM, and at the same time take a photo of the PDX area map in FlightAware:

    http://flightaware.com/live/airport/KPDX
    (Click the small map for the large updating version)

    The green planes are the ones that will leave contrails, as they are overflying PDX (blue planes are landing or taking off from PDX). The first line shows the flight number and aircraft type (like, ASA456 B738), and the second line shows the altitude in 100s of feet and the speed in knots. So 390 492 is 39,000 feet at 492 knots. The last line shows the originating and destination airport (KSEA KLAX).

    You can try to use this to find the altitude of the planes flying overhead. You can then find which leave trails, and how high they were when they left a trail. Of course, no all planes info shows up on flightware, and sometimes the planes are too close to tell. But at least when you can tell, you are sure of the altitude.

  84. Zret, feel free to weigh in with some science of your own if you feel something is lacking here.

  85. SR1419 says:

    ArmedSkeptic-

    You still have not addressed the issue that the supposed “evidence” you provided- links to Aerosol study programs are all research programs to study particulate matter already in the atmosphere…and have absolutely nothing to do with spraying annything.

    Can you address this gap in your logic, please.

  86. Armed Sceptic says:

    Final reply to this. Your denial and doublespeak runs deep. So be it. The altitudes listed were of the actual planes dispersing these. Normal contrails do not visibly fall to earth. So quit acting stupid. And it doesn’t take science to know the difference between 7000ft and 26000ft. I truly feel sorry for you.

  87. Well, if it’s so easy to do, then why can’t you demonstrate it? Why don’t you want to provide evidence to the world? You make claims, but you don’t actually provide any evidence.

    Simply saying you measured the height is not enough. You could have made a mistake. You need to actually demonstrate this measurement.

    At least demonstrate that you have the capability of measuring them. If you say you used the Newcon, then you can prove you’ve got one by posting a photo of the Newcon on a current newspaper. That would remove some doubt, and lend credence to your story.

    Then maybe post a video of you measuring the height of planes, and correlate it with FlightAware – to demonstrate you can measure the height of planes. This again would reinforce your case.

    Then post a video of you measuring the height a plane that leaves a trail that spreads out at a low altitude.

  88. rudedog says:

    Uncinus,
    Do you even have a clue how utterly rediculous you have become? I told you on the Barium Chemtrails thread that I was not going to waste any more of my time on this disinfo website, but I decided to drop back in and have a looksee.
    Armed Sceptic has made some very valid arguments as have I in the past. You continue to do the same thing over and over. You call people liars, tell them that they are not seeing what they report, and provide nothing but a bunch of doubletalk in your responses. The theme of your contrail ‘theory’ website is: ‘I am uncinus, I am always right, you are always wrong no matter what the circumstances are. My links are valid evidence and yours are not’ etc… etc… etc…

    The fact remains as it always has-
    You never have and never will provide any evidence that proves that all of the eyewittness accounts are not what the people say they are. What you do is provide information on contrails and tell people that this is what they are seeing. You have been provided with plenty of evidence that backs up what millions of concerned people from around the globe are reporting but you always reply by saying “It looks like a normal contrail to me”. Why do people have to provide it for you anyway? If you are actually looking you would find plenty of it yourself. It does not matter how much evidence is provided, you will always say that it is not evidence. On the other hand, anything that YOU provide is always evidence. Of course it is uncinus, it’s YOUR website that YOU moderate. Therefore, you can say anything you want and edit out what you dont want.
    It’s just a matter of time before it all blows up in your face and then all you have to do is ‘click’ to disapear so that you wont have to own up to your evil doing against humanity and face all of the people that you have pledged to deceive. Which brings me to my final question that I have asked so many times, but have never received a valid response to:

    Why does a man who claims to be just an ordinary person that just happens to like clouds because he is an ameteur aviator, have such a compelling need to make sure that anyone who claims they have wittnessed the sprayings, is not to be believed? Even though you know nothing about these people, nor were you there with them at the time of the incident to acutally see for yourself that what they are reporting is anything other than the truth? Why have you made it your personal mission to make sure that no one believes what these concerned people of sound mind have to say?

    Just answer the question. No doubletalk. No sidestepping. Just simply answer the question uncinus. I’ll bet you cant do it. Humor me anyway.

  89. Why have you made it your personal mission to make sure that no one believes what these concerned people of sound mind have to say?

    I have not made that my personal mission. This is just an interesting subject that I write about.

    You never have and never will provide any evidence that proves that all of the eyewittness accounts are not what the people say they are. What you do is provide information on contrails and tell people that this is what they are seeing.

    Exactly, I provide scientific references and old photos that explain what people are seeing.

    Photos of things that look like contrails are NOT evidence of things that are not contrails. It’s quite simple really. You need to provided a photo of something that does not look like a contrail. It’s like you are showing me photos of bears and claiming it is evidence of Bigfoot. Show me a photo of something that does not look like a bear.

  90. Armed Sceptic says:

    Uncinus, nice of you to throw the bigfoot analogy in there. Way to keep it scientific. If you think the pics I posted look like contrails you are truly delusional. Have fun being sprayed with barium salts, sulphur dioxide, aluminum coated fiberglass and who knows what the hell else.

    Why don’t you research what Ken Caldeira has been babbling about for some time now. Or the current programs being carried out by the DOE’s Savannah River National Laboratory. It as to do with porous-walled glass micropsheres. Or Nobel prize winner Paul Crutzens proposal to send 747’s to dump huge quantities of sulfur dioxide particles into the stratosphere to cool down the atmosphere. Or the experiments conducted by John Gorman.

    To put it lightly, you’re an epic failure.

  91. What’s wrong with the Bigfoot analogy? People keep describing things, and scientists keep saying they are contrails.

    What with all the references to geo-engineering proposals? They are PROPOSALS, and usually by individuals. There is no evidence that A) they are doing them, or B) that they would look anything like chemtrails/contrails.

    Bottom line, scientists agree that what people describe as “Chemtrails” sound like contrails. Decades of science and history back this up.

  92. SR1419 says:

    Rudedog indeed-

    “The fact remains as it always has”…..

    …that people are completely ignorant of contrail behavior and atmospheric science….

    …that people think that any contrail that doesn’t dissipate within minutes is a “chemtrail”

    …that some contrails can and do persist and spread out into a haze of cirrus clouds.

    …and that due to atmospheric conditions these often happen in clusters.

    …and often happen before weather fronts…

    …and happen as much as 40% of the time….

    These are facts…observed, tested, proven, undeniable facts.

    Thus, the main premise of “chemtrails” – that they persist and spread out and cover the sky in a haze…for unknown purpose…is highly suspect given the FACTS that they supposedly behave identically to the known behavior of contrails.

    You can choose to ignore them if you must- but you will never be taken seriously if you do.

    You can choose to attack those who disagree with you- attacking their character and questioning their motives…but that is beside the point and weakens your case.

    You and ArmedSkeptic have provide not a single piece of evidence that would support your claim.

    Claiming that you see unmarked planes leaving persistent trails is not evidence.

    Claiming you see patterned flight paths is not evidence.

    Claiming people around you are getting sick from contrails is not evidence.

    Posting a picture on the internet of a contrail and claiming it is a “chemtrail” is not proof- especially when it is a known fact that contrails look identical to what is in the photo.

    All of the above are at best anecdotal evidence that could be explained in a variety of ways…or at worst is pure speculative conjecture with no basis in logic or fact.

    You have to do better than that if you want to be taken seriously.

    ArmedSkeptic sent a bunch of links regarding Aerosol programs of the US gov’t- claiming they are proof of “chemtrails”- when, in fact, they are programs designed to study particulate matter already in the atmosphere- and of course, he had no reply to that fact.

    He claimed persistent trails didn’t exist 30 years ago…when in fact they did- and the proof was provided…of course, he simply ignored it….

    You- RudeDog- put so much faith in what people see- “eyewittness accounts”- when that is a notoriously weak form of evidence…eyewitness accounts are so utterly subjective – – two people see a persistent trail- one claims it is a “chemtrail”, one claims it is a persistent contrail…who is right??

    When so much science is involved in any given trail- the atmospheric variable, the plane variable, the ice crystal variables….the condensation nuclei variable…so many variables that the average person is just not informed enough to make an accurate assessment of what they see….rendering their “eyewittness accounts” very suspect…

    …especially when these accounts are based on pre-determined bias of the existence of “chemtrails” and viewed from several miles away…They see a plane leaving a trail and can say for certain that it is “spraying”.

    …given the nature of supersaturated persistent contrails…and contrail cirrus…that is a highly dubious claim.

    …especially, when it is supposedly a clandestine, global operation of unknown origin and purpose that would necessarily involved 1000s of planes and 1000s of people…with out a single word from an insider or shred of evidence….other than people on the internet claiming it is so.

    Can you see why I am skeptical??

    How can you read this report from 1995 and not wonder if what you are seeing in the sky perhaps not might be a persistent contrail? Are you so closed minded that you are just blind to facts, logic and rationality?

    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/aviation/038.htm

    …I doubt you will reply….but hopefully you will try to put your emotions aside and think a bit more about this….I do not know you and do not judge you for your beliefs…I understand that you are truly concerned…but do not let fear and ignorance get in the way of understanding.

  93. SR1419 says:

    Hey Armskeptic-

    you say:

    If you watch the skies around the PDX area you will see planes at low altitudes spewing huge trails that disperse over time slowing drop to the ground in armlike wisps. And you will also notice planes at the same altitude at the same time emitting NO trails whatsoever

    Ever heard of a Mare’s tail? Its what the cloud formation you describe (official name Cirrus Uncinus- coincidence??) has been called that for years and years…particularly by sailors- see here: (complete with sundog).

    http://www.birdwatchersdigest.com/blog/uploaded_images/SunDogMaresTail-700987.JPG

    Your ignorance of this is another example of fear based paranoia clouding the ability to think rationally.

    If you were truly educated on the processes of contrail formation and persistence then you would know that given all the variables involved- between the plane and the atmosphere- it is completely possible for 2 planes to fly through the same space and one leave a contrail and one leave nothing.

    This is not “disinfo” – this is fact.

    here are some more Mare’s tails.

    http://www.apoec.org.nz/gallery/mares%20tail%20clouds.jpg

    “Mares tail clouds. These are often a sign that bad weather is coming!

    A cloud is formed when rising air carrying moisture droplets evaporated from the sea, is cooled. The water droplets condense in the colder temperatures found at higher altitudes, and form clouds. Different cloud types are partly the result of the wind pushing the clouds around into heaps (Cumulus) or layers (Stratus), or strange exciting shapes (for example birds and dragons).

    The wind is always stronger at higher altitudes. High altitude clouds are so cold that they are made of ice crystals. They are called cirrus. Often these high altitude clouds leave a trail of ice crystals which the wind twists and turns into strange wispy forms. These are called Mare’s Tails. A halo round the sun is also made up of ice crystals high in the sky. When you see a lot of this high cirrus cloud it indicates strong winds high in the sky and often means a storm is on the way. These clouds are often followed by waves of hogsback clouds (spaceship clouds) which are accompanied by strong winds, and usually soon after the rain will come.”

    http://flickr.com/photos/timstone/1410113893/

    or here:

    http://www.sky-chaser.com/schcloud.htm

    Your anecdotal “evidence” just doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

  94. Cirrus Uncinus are my favorite clouds. There’s some photos of them from 100 years ago, here:

    http://picasaweb.google.com/Uncinus/CloudStudies1905And1925#

  95. SR1419 says:

    Armedskeptic-

    how are those photos you posted any different than the photos of contrails from 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago??

    Such as these:

    http://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/1991-day-p46-2.jpg

    http://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/1991-day-p47-1.jpg

    or any of the photos from this page:

    http://tinyurl.com/5vtoqe

    Please explain.

  96. Armed Sceptic says:

    Well for one SR1419, no snow formed. And two, they were at 8,000ft directly over my house. So no, I’m not buying your, “you have no evidence routine”. As for ignoring your proof, well like I said 8,000ft. not 30K.

    These are your facts?

    “The fact remains as it always has”…..

    …that people are completely ignorant of contrail behavior and atmospheric science….

    oh yeah, were ignorant and your a supragenius…please

    …that people think that any contrail that doesn’t dissipate within minutes is a “chemtrail”

    it is admitted that weather modification contrails do not react like normal contrails

    …that some contrails can and do persist and spread out into a haze of cirrus clouds.

    granted, natural

    …and that due to atmospheric conditions these often happen in clusters.

    again, so what

    …and often happen before weather fronts…

    so…

    …and happen as much as 40% of the time….

    Where’s the proof for that stat? hmm..

    These are facts…observed, tested, proven, undeniable facts.

    You don’t really have any facts there. You have a belief that chemtrails do not exist.

    “Ever heard of a Mare’s tail? Its what the cloud formation you describe (official name Cirrus Uncinus- coincidence??) has been called that for years and years…particularly by sailors- see here: (complete with sundog).”

    Only problem with that is it came directly from a plane moments before.

    Your cloud formation lesson was nice actually. It proves that you have no facts. Just assertions that other people have no clue about the weather. And your statement about all this being anecdotal goes beyond stupidity. Millions of people are activating around the world to bring this to light.

    Some local “VERIFIABLE” documentation:
    http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2007/03/355437.shtml

    So you already admitted that cloud seeding is occurring. And we already have the data on what is being used to seed clouds. It is quite harmful to the life on this planet. For you to say it has no impact is ludicrous. We also have admittance of other ops currently in progress since 1990. Not to mention current bills directly address the topic of this website.

    I find it dreadful that you 2 are blind to the fact that few families control the planet and are the ones who funded Hitler and the fact that our government has been taken over by the refugees from Germany. It’s called a shadow government and it does exist. They also happen to be the founders of eugenics and social darwinism. The practice lucifarianism. This is nothing new and is the same age old battle of good versus evil. As for me I’m not tripping. Our family has decided to make a stand in the country we love. Come what may. I still stand by my statement that you 2 potato heads are disinfo agents. The amount of evidence is compelling to say the least. I’ll post back when my undeniable research is done.

  97. Silver Iodine is what it used to seed clouds. It does not look like the contrail photos you’ve linked to.

    Your article makes a huge series of claims, but again offers no evidence of actual spraying.

    I look forward to seeing your “undeniable research”

  98. SR1419 says:

    Armed Skeptic-

    I said:

    “…and happen as much as 40% of the time…”

    To which you replied:

    “Where’s the proof for that stat? hmm..”

    the proof is here:

    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/aviation/038.htm

    and here:

    http://tinyurl.co.uk/e7a4

    and here:

    http://tinyurl.co.uk/fmlb

    and here:

    http://tinyurl.co.uk/aafw

    Enjoy!

    Also- you said “it is admitted that weather modification contrails do not react like normal contrails”

    Please, do tell us how a “normal” contrail should react.

    …also, you still haven’t addressed the fact that the supposed “evidence” of “spraying” in the Aerosol programs you listed were really studies of aerosols already in the atmosphere and have nothing to do with spraying anything??

    …and so, now you jump from persistent contrails to the Illuminati….

    Good luck with that.

  99. SR1419 says:

    ArmedSkeptic-

    that “verifiable” information in that article you provided is entirely based on a false premise:

    “However, at witnessing jet emissions and the difference they represent, it is easy to separate the chemical spray “clouds” from contrails. Chemical aerosol trails last for hours and may actually create overcast skies, or layer dense coverage and introduce entire storm systems, depending on the program witnessed, the amount of spraying, and any other involved technology or project plans. Remember, as one will learn in high school, that regular jet emissions are simply compressed water vapor and air swirling about, and that even if it is a cold day on which that vapor can crystallize and linger, it will not do so for hours, and, these regular emissions will not disperse into the typically-seen aerosol-caused fake cirrus cloud or uniform gray layer coverage. If regular air traffic did this, it would have been a national environmental emergency against health regulations a long time ago, and, it would require literally hundreds of normal jets to be creating regular water trails in viewable sky at any moment. ”

    This is simply wrong…utterly false…and the entire article is based on this false premise.

    “normal” contrails can and do persist for hours and days even….and spread out into sheets of cirrus clouds…as has been observed, studied and proven for over 50 years….

    refute that.

  100. Anonymous says:

    “normal” contrails can and do persist for hours and days even….and spread out into sheets of cirrus clouds…as has been observed, studied and proven for over 50 years….

    Well since the chemtrail programs reportedly started in the 50’s, that would make sense. You guys really take the cake. There is obviously something about CURRENTLY ADMITTED PROGRAMS that you do not understand. For anyone who reads this, do your own research because ding and dong here are obviously on the payroll.

    I love the denial, it suits you twits well.

Comments are closed.