Home » chemtrails » “Chemtrail” Aircraft Photos

“Chemtrail” Aircraft Photos

Several planes look a little odd, or have attachments that look odd, and so some people feel they must be part of a decades long conspiracy to spray stuff into the atmosphere to alter the weather or reduce the population. That’s obviously nonsense, but what are these strange planes?

[Update: there are many other photos like the “barrel” interior below, I’ve collected a lot of them on Metabunk]

Here’s one making the rounds, scary looking barrels, and a sign on the wall that possibly says “Hazmat inside”

chemtrail-inners3.jpg

What is it? It’s a Boeing 777-200LR Worldliner, specifically it’s WD001, a plane that was used for flight testing. The original photo can be found here – note the “Hazmat” text was added later. The barrels contain water, which is pumped around to shift the center of gravity to test various flight characteristics.

Here’s a description of a similar setup from the 2002 book, “Inside Boeing, Building the 777”, page 76., describing tests done in 1994.

From Boeing’s blog:

Remember, we test at the extremes of the weight/CG envelope. This requires us to control the CG during ground and flight conditions. We can move weight, in the form of water, forward or aft with the use of the water ballast system. This system is comprised of 48 barrels, each capable of carrying 460 pounds, connected by tubing to a pump. A computerized system tracks fuel placement, fuel burn, people placement, ballast, flap setting, landing gear position and water barrel quantity. The information is processed to display the airplane’s current CG. We move water or specify fuel tank usage to configure the CG within the specified test requirements.

Why are there overhead luggage compartments? It’s a test plane, and for FAA certification they have to demonstrate that everything works. That includes stuff like the emergency oxygen system, and more minor things like the luggage compartments. It’s a requirement that they don’t pop open in flight – so that needs to be tested. They are also handy for stowing the engineers’ stuff.

Here’s some pictures from Boeing:

wd001_group_interior_sm.jpgwdoo1_interior_sm.jpg

And a lot more photos can be found on Boeing’s site.

——————————————————————————————–

This one gets a lot of use in the “chemtrail” forums:

chemtrailplaneonground1forum.jpg

Particularly because of the unusual collections of pipes sticking out in various places. There’s those two at the front, and then there is a group over the wing. Here’s some close ups

chemtrailplaneonground2forum.jpg:

chemtrailplaneonground3forum.jpg

Very sinister looking tubes, but why are half of them facing the wrong way?

The plane is not for spraying the atmosphere, it’s for sampling the atmosphere. It’s a research aircraft, registration N701BN, operated by th e department of energy’s national labs. It’s pretty much one of a kind, so it’s hardly likely to be responsible for all the persistent contrails we see every day. The research is mostly on pollutants in the atmosphere, particularly from coal and oil burning power plants. But they also investigate the properties of clouds, which includes contrails.

————————————————————

Here’s another photo you see in “chemtrail” videos, with the implied suggestion that it’s some kind of evil spraying device:

nkc-135-attachment.jpg

Actually it IS a spraying device, but quite innocuous. It’s on an NKC-135A (55-3128) with the refueling boom modified to spray water. This used by the air force to test icing of planes in flight.

Here’s the original photo:

See also: https://www.safaq.hq.af.mil/news/march04/raptor.html

nkc-135-spays-water-test-icing-raptorbig.jpg

Here’s some more details:

nkc-135-icing-attachmentpv1983_2688.pdf

—————————————————————————————————

This plane is quite interesting:

e6-below-from-tacamoorg.jpg

It’s an E-6B “Tacamo”. This photo shows it dumping fuel (photo from tacamo.org). The E-6B is used by the United States Strategic Command as an airborne communication center. You can see the navy logo on the right wing. The E-6B is a modified version of the Boeing 707-320, and the fuel vents have been moved from the wing tips to between the fuselage and the engines in order to separate it from the communication equipment in the wing tips. This is what the wing-tip ESM/SATCOM pod looks like:

navy-e6-070403-03cr-6.jpg

It looks like this odd assemblage is also creating some wingtip vortex contrails as well. The plane is pretty much all white, which is something you hear mentioned from time to time in “chemtrail” conspiracy theories.

Here’s another photo of the same plane, taken from a “chemtrail” YouTube video:

e6b-tail-youtube.jpg

It shows the opening and drogue  for the ELF trailing wire antenna. This is a very long wire antenna that is extended behind the plane for several hundred feet and used for communications with submarines. The “drogue” is just a cone-shaped weight. Here’s a close-up

http://www.flickr.com/photos/coldwararchaeology/5180470207/in/photostream

————————————————————————————–

This plane also looks at first glance like it might be dumping fuel (click image for full sized photo):

But the trails are actually coming from six smoke generators. It was part of a NASA test to study wake vortices, you can read about it here:

http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/B-747/HTML/ECN-4242.html

Six smoke generators were installed under the wings of the 747 to provide a visual image of the trailing vortices. The object of the experiments was to test different configurations and mechanical devices on the747 that could be used to break up or lessen the strength of the vortices. The results of the tests could lead to shorter spacing between landings and takeoffs, which, in turn, could alleviate air-traffic congestion.

Here’s another image of the same plane:

—————————————————————————————————-

This plane also occasionally get brought up in chemtrail conspiracy groups:

This is obviously not a contrail, it’s far too low and the trail is dropping too rapidly.

It’s a Boeing 747-100 “Supertanker”, modified by Evergreen Aviation, the only one of its kind. Specifically designed for fire fighthing. That’s it dumping water.   Here’s some more recent photos.

Here’s a video of it in action, titled “B747 chemtrails”. It’s interesting reading the comments, as the first comment correctly identifies what it is, and then everyone else just ignores that and starts speculating.

———————————————————————

This one looks like a plane spraying stuff. But again it’s rather close to the ground. It’s actually taking off with the assistance of rockets. It’s not spraying, that’s just rocket exhaust.

762px-boeing_b-47b_rocket-assistedw.jpg

This particular plane is a Boeing B-47B, rocket assisted take off, April 15, 1954. An no, that’s not a contrail in the sky behind it – it’s rip in the photo. Click on it for a large version from Wikipedia.

————————————————————————

This one is used for cloud seeding. It does not actually spray anything but uses silver iodine flares that are either ejected, or burn in place.

sandylandwater-slide7.jpg

It’s operated by the Sandy land Underground Water Conservation district of Plains, Texas, as part of their SOAR program. They have some more photos of similar equipment on their site. They are all small aircraft not capable of getting to the above 30,000 feet where contrails normally form.

—————————————————————————

This next photo is also of silver iodine flares, fixed underneath at large plane.

weathermod-eject_rack1.jpg

These also show up in “chemtrail” literature. They are sold by Weather Modification Inc, they make a range of weather modification equipment. About this one they say:

WMI racks for ejectable flares are mounted on the belly of the aircraft fuselage. Each rack holds 102 cartridges. When fired, the pyrotechnic is ignited and ejected from the aircraft. In this configuration, the WMI Lear 35A is equipped with four 102-count racks for ejectable glaciogenic pyrotechnics, a total of 408 flares.

Here’s another, this time from North American Weather Consultants, Inc.

seedinggen_nawc.jpg

About which they say:

This aircraft-mounted cloud seeding generator is fixed in place, and can burn a silver iodide solution during flight.

————————————————————————–

This one is the “Mk.32 drogue-type underwing pod on the Armée de l’Air Boeing C-135FR Stratotanker” (“93-CC”- s/n 63-8472 of GRV 93). It’s an in-flight refueling system on a French Boeing C-135FR Stratotanker, photographed in Canada, Feb 2005.


See: http://www.baha.be/Webpages/Navigator/News/tanker_flight_240205.htm

The following is supposed to be a plane that has “chemtrail aerosol nozzles” over three of the engines.

In reality, this plane N707MQ is a Boeing 707-320B. The engines are Pratt & Whitney JT3D-3:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Omega-Tanker/Boeing-707-321B/1622886/M/

It should be perfectly obvious that the “nozzles” are facing the wrong way to be spraying anything. They are actually turbocompressors, which are driven by engine bleed air, and are used to pressurize the interior of the plane. There are only three, as that’s all you need. Here’s a discussion:

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/8225/

 

 

1,442 thoughts on ““Chemtrail” Aircraft Photos

  1. phasma says:

    Hi Uncinus – yes i have many video`s of spraying taking place! I have yet to identify a good place to post these though – any suggestions? I am not a conspiracy nut and yes i have better things to do but i believe this to be happening now and i am worried for my kids future. I am a scientist, i dont follow theories blindly – i have researched this thoughoughly and i find thinghs just don`t add up.
    You do not seem to grasp the simplicity of what i am saying. You argue that the trails we see in the sky are nothing more than water vapour / ice which of course may contain minute amounts of jet fuel contamianants and nothing more. I am saying that there is proof (supplied above and i have much much more all from declassified military / government documents) that they do in some cases add certain chemicals the above or to otherwise generated sprays (see patent above) which would make them not mere con (densation) trails but chem (ical laden) trails (chemtrails) by the very definition these are not ordinary contrails!
    Barium is a heavy metal that exsists in nature in many bound (compound) forms such as barium carbonate or Barium phosphate) These compounds are found in air at very low levels in picograms or femtograms per cubic meter (thats 0.000000000000 or 0.000000000000000g dispersed per cubic meter of air).Barium oxide should not exsist in the natural environment – it is formed by reacting pure reactive barium with oxygen in the absence of other more reactive compounds that are found in the places where Barium is usually found (mostly concentrated around certain mines or industrial sites).
    The presence of such high quantities of barium which is present in air in several locations which are not near a mine shaft or near an industrial complex would mean that the barium in these areas has been put there by some other means. The patents listed above mention several experiments which if you research them and read them will show that there has been several long running experiments by the military which aimed to determine wether or not heavy metals such as barium oxide could function as an ariel antenna which would mean that they could maintain communications in areas such a war zones where it might not be possible to set up a sigint post. They found that they actually could bounce signals off this layer and also that it had the second useful effect of knocking out the signals of nearby satelittes which could not penetrate the barium clouds and would have their signal bounced back up into space. The longevity of this barium striation layer was anything from 3 to 6 hours after one spraying – they deemed this a useful length of time. The Barium the disprsed into a “cirrus cloud like” formation that was almost undetectable. The Barium then slowly sinks earthward and settles over a wide area.
    These operations have been tried with numerous other metals and chemicals but they have found barium oxide to be the most useful.
    http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/BA/barium_oxide.html or http://www.espimetals.com/msds's/bariumoxide.pdf everything you need to know about barium oxide! here is the important stuff:
    V HEALTH HAZARD INFORMATION
    Effects of Exposure:
    May be fatal if sw allowed. M ay cause eye, skin, nose and thro at irritation. Con tact with eyes and mucous membranes will
    cause serious discomfort. Poison!
    or. . .
    Toxicology
    Ingestion is harmful, and chronic exposure may lead to damage of CNS, spleen, liver, kindey or bone marrow. Harmful if inhaled. Contact with skin or eyes may lead to severe irritation or burns. Respiratory irritant. Typical TLV/TWA 0.5 mg m-3.
    Toxicity data
    (The meaning of any abbreviations which appear in this section is given here.)
    SCU-MUS LD50 50 mg kg-1″ this LD50 50mg-kg means that this amount of barium oxide is required to kill 50% of test animals in a laboratory. This may seem high if we are talking about nanograms per cubic meter but, scarily barium oxide bioaccumulates (that means it can accumualte in certain target organs in your body until it reaches high enough doses to begin making you ill. . .
    from: http://www.sciencelab.com/xMSDS-Barium_oxide-9923002
    . . . Repeated or prolonged exposure to the substance can produce target organs damage. Repeated exposure of the
    eyes to a low level of dust can produce eye irritation. Repeated skin exposure can produce local skin destruction,
    or dermatitis. Repeated inhalation of dust can produce varying degree of respiratory irritation or lung damage.
    Repeated exposure to a highly toxic material may produce general deterioration of health by an accumulation in
    one or many human organs. Repeated or prolonged inhalation of dust may lead to chronic respiratory irritation. . . .
    Chronic Effects on Humans: Causes damage to the following organs: lungs, mucous membranes.
    Other Toxic Effects on Humans:
    Extremely hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of ingestion.
    Very hazardous in case of skin contact (corrosive), .
    Hazardous in case of eye contact (corrosive), of inhalation (lung corrosive).
    Special Remarks on Toxicity to Animals: Not available
    Special Remarks on Chronic Effects on Humans: Excreted in maternal milk in animal. Passes through the placental barrier in human . . . .
    That means if this stuff is bought down in the rain that it will make its way into your water supply (its also all over your fruit and veg don`t bother buying organic) it will accumulate in your body – if you are female and pregnant then the barium you inhale / ingest will pass through the placenta into your baby where it will also start to accumulate.
    The number of diseases classified as flu like but without any sign of an infectious agent has sky rocketed. Long term exposure to Barium oxide causes similar symptoms.
    I would urge anyone who still doubts this to go ahead and undertake their own measurements. Get a sterile container (from a pharmacist) cover the top with clean fine netting to stop any dust blowing in and collect rainwater. Then send this off to be tested. I myself am doing so at the moment. When i have enough samples to make a statistically accurate conclusion (Im a scientist i work on evidence) then i will post it here.
    Also i`m sure you guys have seen it but in case you think the government wouldn`t do something like this to its adoring public:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4398507,00.html
    i particularly like the last line. . .
    quote” Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: ‘It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research.’ ONGOING PEOPLE!!!

  2. Hi Uncinus – yes i have many video`s of spraying taking place! I have yet to identify a good place to post these though – any suggestions?

    Youtube works well. You can upload high definition videos now.

    These compounds are found in air at very low levels in picograms or femtograms per cubic meter (thats 0.000000000000 or 0.000000000000000g dispersed per cubic meter of air). Barium oxide should not exist in the natural environment – it is formed by reacting pure reactive barium with oxygen in the absence of other more reactive compounds that are found in the places where Barium is usually found (mostly concentrated around certain mines or industrial sites).

    Note the OSHA safe exposure limits for soluble barium compounds are 0.5 mg/m3, or 500,000,000 picograms per cubic meter. See:
    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts24.html

    And “The air that most people breathe contains about 0.0015 parts of barium per billion parts of air (ppb).” Since a cubic meter of air weighs about 1.2kg, then 1200/1000000000*0.0015 = 1.8 nanograms, (or 1,800 picograms, 1,800,000 femtograms). That’s 0.0018 mg/m3.

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/phs24.html

    I think it’s very important to get your units right. When you say something is normally found in femtograms, and it’s actually 2 million femtograms, then that’s giving rather the wrong impression.

    The presence of such high quantities of barium which is present in air in several locations which are not near a mine shaft or near an industrial complex would mean that the barium in these areas has been put there by some other means

    Have high quantities ever been found? Where, and how much? And which compound of barium were they?

    The patents listed above mention several experiments which if you research them and read them will show that there has been several long running experiments by the military which aimed to determine wether or not heavy metals such as barium oxide could function as an ariel antenna which would mean that they could maintain communications in areas such a war zones where it might not be possible to set up a sigint post. They found that they actually could bounce signals off this layer and also that it had the second useful effect of knocking out the signals of nearby satelittes which could not penetrate the barium clouds and would have their signal bounced back up into space. The longevity of this barium striation layer was anything from 3 to 6 hours after one spraying – they deemed this a useful length of time. The Barium then dispersed into a “cirrus cloud like” formation that was almost undetectable. The Barium then slowly sinks earthward and settles over a wide area.
    These operations have been tried with numerous other metals and chemicals but they have found barium oxide to be the most useful.

    Can you give verifiable quotes to demonstrate what you are claiming? Particularly: “The longevity of this barium striation layer was anything from 3 to 6 hours after one spraying – they deemed this a useful length of time. The Barium then dispersed into a “cirrus cloud like” formation that was almost undetectable.

    The number of diseases classified as flu like but without any sign of an infectious agent has sky rocketed.

    Evidence?

    I would urge anyone who still doubts this to go ahead and undertake their own measurements. Get a sterile container (from a pharmacist) cover the top with clean fine netting to stop any dust blowing in and collect rainwater. Then send this off to be tested. I myself am doing so at the moment. When i have enough samples to make a statistically accurate conclusion (Im a scientist i work on evidence) then i will post it here

    Could you give more detail on your methodology? How fine is the netting? How long do you leave the container out? Is there a control sample? Do you correlate this with observed trails?

  3. Cameron says:

    Although I don’t believe in chemtrails just as much as I don’t believe in the Easter Bunny, it does make me happy that people are smart enough to think like this and make such assumptions.

    When I heard about chemtrails I accepted the possibility that it could be true and I researched for a long time (believe me) to find that it is indeed false. But some people (lots of people that are posting here for example) will hear something like this and automaticly believe it. Not because chemtrails being sprayed is a fact but because they need it to be a fact for several personal reasons I believe. People need things like chemtrails to hold themselves up because they need fear and hate and deceit and lies and confusion to deal with otherwise they have nothing else to do, you dig? They need chemtrails to hold themselves up.

    Really though get real people. Do you honostly believe that OUR government is capable of pulling something so top secret like this off world wide every single day without much more people talking? People completely underestimate our government sometimes…

  4. Fineform says:

    I thought Cameron was going to say that our government is not smart enough to pull off a conspiracy, and then finish with….

    “People completely OVERestimate our government sometimes…”

    Since they flunk at everything else they meddle with, how could they suddenly succeed at a very well orchestrated cover-up?

    But big food and drug companies are another story altogether…

  5. Shill says:

    Easter Sunday today.
    Multiple planes emitting mutiple chemtrails..so many in fact, that the skies by now are white, foggy nasty white.

    Took pictures of 2 of the planes that were doing it.
    Maybe there are no pilots in those planes, what pilot would poison his own kids , or family?

  6. lowflyer says:

    it seems after heavy spraying my child tends to get a fever and trouble breathing. when weather is bad such as raining and heavy winds they do not spray. during these times my child does not have these ailments. usually 2-3 days after heavy spraying my child will show signs of fever. i hope and pray for windy days and rain.

  7. Does it not seem more likely that you child’s ailments are related to the weather? When it’s raining, the child is fine? Maybe it has allergies?

    Keep a journal of your observations, every day recording the weather, the trails, and your child health. Then draw a graph – that will make any correlation clearer.

  8. lowflyer says:

    i have been keeping a record for many years. and yes at times he can catch a cold without heavy spraying, but when they are doing heavy spraying i most always see a negative reaction. after heavy spraying even i can feel it.

  9. Could you post your record?

  10. Shill says:

    lowflyer,
    your observations are the same as mine, even my dogs wheeze after spraying.

  11. So other people can check your conclusions.

  12. lowflyer says:

    it looks to me as if there is only one person posting here and that would be uncinus….. it makes me wonder if this is a uncinus blog. it just gives me an idea of the ‘people’ who are here. also to me it looks as if uncinus has already made his conclusions about chemtrails or contrails. now just so we know my child is not an ‘it’ as uncinus has stated in his statement ‘maybe it has allergies?’ or was this a question???? the next thing is that my child does not have any allergies, i know uncinus wants me to post prove that my child does not have allergies. i have had my child and myself tested for allergies and both of us have come up clean, meaning we have no allergies. (sorry i am not going to post the doctors report) i do check pollen counts (it is on the weather channel no need to post it here) to see when pollen will become a factor. so in the middle of winter we can rule out pollen as being the cause of illness. i can see rain as doing 2 things… first it stops the planes from spraying and it cleans the air of heavy metals and bacteria. posting my conclusions in this blog would not prove anything to anyone and serve no purpose. i am not trying to change anyone’s mind to think chemtrails are real or not.

  13. Suntour says:

    By lowflyer:
    it looks to me as if there is only one person posting here and that would be uncinus….. it makes me wonder if this is a uncinus blog.

    Oh, there are people other than Uncinus posting. The thing is, it’s difficult for me to get passionate over something as simple as contrails. That’s why it’s refreshing to see Uncinus respond to chemtrail believers posts with such civility and intelligence. Uncinus answers the posts so promptly and with such clarity that any other replies would be redundant.

    By lowflyer:
    i can see rain as doing 2 things… first it stops the planes from spraying and it cleans the air of heavy metals and bacteria.

    Interesting, how do you know that there are no contrails/”chemtrails” in the sky when it’s raining? Aren’t there clouds obscuring your ability to see into/above them?

    Also, if rain “cleans the air of heavy metals and bacteria”, wouldn’t that defeat the purpose of “spraying” since it has been noted by many a chemtrail enthusiast that chemtrails turn into chemclouds which is usually then followed by rain?

  14. Suntour says:

    By Shill:
    Easter Sunday today.
    Multiple planes emitting mutiple chemtrails..so many in fact, that the skies by now are white, foggy nasty white.

    Took pictures of 2 of the planes that were doing it.
    Maybe there are no pilots in those planes, what pilot would poison his own kids , or family?

    How do you know these trails and the persisting white fog had chemicals in them? And by chemicals, I don’t mean normal jet exhaust, I mean the chemicals that chemtrailers say are used.

    Is it possible that these multiple “chemtrails” were simply multiple (persisting) contriails? How can you tell the difference between contrails and chemtrails?

  15. Shill says:

    Contrails don’t consistently come in from the West, they are everywhere and they vanish after a few minutes.
    The ones I am seeing though, come in from the West, in all shapes and patterns, including Xes and circles, then they spread out and dim the sun, sometimes, no sunshine at all, because they cover it.
    I saw a black one today, spanning the whole spectrum as far as the eye could see. Today again it’s no better, we are ” fogged” in.

  16. What do you mean they “come in from the West”? That the plane came from the West, or that the contrails moved from the west.

    Where do you live? You should check out the flights with flightaware – most places have planes flying over them from many different directions.

    Contrails do spread out if the weather is right. They always have. See:
    http://contrailscience.com/persisting-and-spreading-contrails/

  17. Shill says:

    All the ” contrails ” came in from the West, all at once.. and started coming til now.. and still more coming. No end in sight.
    Near Dana Point, CA, I am.

  18. Suntour says:

    Shill, it’s apparent that you have not taken one step towards researching any of the phenomena you’ve observed. Contrails can form circles (fighter jets or airliners circling in a holding pattern waiting to land at an airport), contrails can form X’s and grids (flights go north/south/east/west over the whole country), contrails can spread out and dim the sun (see Ucinus’ link), contrails can both cast shadows and be their own shadow.

    I don’t follow on the “come in from the West” statement either, perhaps you could elaborate on that a bit more?

    There are plenty of explainations for everything you’ve seen right here on this site. So, please for your own sanity, do some basic research on contrail behavior and sources.

  19. Suntour says:

    Shill,

    Also could you please answer the question I asked you a few posts up? Thanks

    By Suntour:
    How do you know these trails and the persisting white fog had chemicals in them? And by chemicals, I don’t mean normal jet exhaust, I mean the chemicals that chemtrailers say are used.

    Is it possible that these multiple “chemtrails” were simply multiple (persisting) contriails? How can you tell the difference between contrails and chemtrails?

  20. your mom says:

    it’s kind of interesting how everyone aposing chemtrails and are supporting this site (nice site btw lol ) all have the same perfect punctuality/grammer. did you all take the same english courses in highschool or are you all the same person posting under different handles? HMMMMMmm lol

  21. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    Is it any different to how those who support chemtrails struggle to spell or use capital letters?

    Are they all the same person, or just all thick?

  22. A Tip of the Hat says:

    I am amazed by you, Uncinus, for a patience and civility I will never possess.

    How you deal with people who think the fuel is on fire while it’s in the fuel tank, that vapour coalescing and “dripping” is somehow horrifying and sinister (what do they think when they ponder rain?), or espouse any of the various assumptions about weather and altitude written here is beyond my grasp. Your approach will enlighten people to seek plausible explanations when they find black soot on their feet rather than simplistic but wholly fanciful correlations to airplanes at FL360! But then again, my buddy bought a foam pillow and woke up with the flu. Guess what he now thinks is the cause of his influenza?

    Seriously, thank you. You are doing a huge service in return for which you get crap from people who literally cannot detect the difference between a rational thought and a fallacy of logic. For this, you are my new hero.

    Keep the blue side up!
    -mm, ASEL

  23. Bob says:

    Uncinus,
    Brother, I don’t know how you do it. Time after time reiterating the same facts over and over again to debunk some conspiracy theorists who’s only evidence is “what they see” or “my friend had a hair sample taken”.
    My favorites are the people who had something negatively effect one individual that should have effected thousands. Or the guy who says that they’re are more “chemtrails” now than in the 1950’s. Really, that’s surprising that you would see more air traffic now than in the ’50’s.

    I too am glad that I found this site. Conspiracies in general are a pet peeve of mine. And, today a facebook “friend” who lives in Portland typed that a rainbow around the sun without precipitation was evidence of “chemtrails”. Thanks for giving me something to copy and paste.

    I hope my spelling and grammar was a little off in some places so as not to fuel more conspiracies.

  24. Suntour says:

    Bob…

    “I hope my spelling and grammar was a little off in some places so as not to fuel more conspiracies.”

    Made me laugh out loud.

  25. BlackIrishToung says:

    Uncinus,

    I just recently got in on this contrail (I mean) “Chem”trail subject.. I find it interesting in theory, and it can be quite humorous at times. I too have watched many youtube videos and visited many sites to see what the conspiracy people are talking about. The simple truth is, Contrails are Contrails.. YES there are many chemicals in Contrails all produced in engine exhaust. but that’s basically it.

    In order to produce a good conspiracy theory, you need a Plot, Material and Application. and they ALL have to work together or at least support each other. Most conspiracy theorists only concern themselves with the plot and sling coincidental evidence to support. Chemtrail conspiracy theorists are different, They concern themselves with the Application, assume the Material and then, well, just Make Up a plot. BTW, The NWO theory makes for interesting reading but is not something to use as a foundation for another theory.

    So, in order to become acquainted with the Plot, Material and Application.. you need to play Devil’s Advocate. “How Would I Do It?” should be the first question you have when trying to discover a conspiracy.

    Something I have not seen any of the theorists do.. because THERE is where the contrail/chemtrail argument ends. (might actually be WHY they don’t talk about it) Pathogens, Bacteria, Viri ect DIE very quickly in either extreme cold, low air pressure, daytime heat or almost always in direct sunlight. In proper conditions like shade, damp, wet or advantageous liquid environments they flourish.

    So, I am Dr. Evil and I’m going to place the order to the Acme Chemical Company for a chemical that meets the Chemtrail Theorists needs.

    I would like to order a few thousand gallons of a bioagent which:
    –will be sprayed from 30,000+ feet where the temperature is lower than -50F
    –it must survive a daylight drop which could take hours given the weight of the mist
    –it must multiply in this environment to cover a large footprint (cirrus)
    –it must arrive on the ground in such a microscopic, odorless form that can’t be seen or recognized
    –it must also survive contact with all pollutants and pollens in the air
    –survive the massive temperature change to from -50F to +70F
    –Yes it must be invincible!!
    –It can only offer effects to a certain race, gender or religion, but I won’t tell you which one
    –survive after ingestion in the human body for an indefinite period of time
    –The agent can in and when people eat my chemically tainted New World Order candy bar making the mixture lethal.
    –if it is discovered, it must look sometimes like a spiderweb, cotton or Poplar tree pollen, change its mollecular density or just disappear all together.

    Are you serious? I would probably be shot by Acme’s secretary for even assuming such a thing could be created. Theorists, Show me a potent Super-Goo that is proven to do all that, and I might listen a little closer. (please not the word Proven)

    The truth is.. Why would I BOTHER? not, why wouldn’t I do it but if I were Dr. Evil in this plot, but Why would I bother making it visible? there are hundreds of private planes and lower flying military aircraft to dispense my deadly brew, would cost less fuel, greater on-target success, and less visible because the stuff wont freeze.. not to mention the hundreds more effective ways to spread my brew without being airborne at all…

    How many of these conspiracy theorists have actually taken samples of contrail.. I mean Chemtrails.. no I don’t mean samples of something you found on the ground, I mean get a plane and grab some of that contrail.. Call Prince Yes Prince, I’m sure he.. Might have the money to fund the trip. Show me THAT Top Secret ‘Purple Rain’ and I will listen (but only a little)

    Oh, and I also have a “friend who’s a lawyer” and “a friend at NASA” as well as a few thousand brothers and sisters in the military who get insulted by conspiracy theorists who use them as pawns in someone else’s plot.

    I like the guy who only thought planes flew over his house to “spray” him, bit selfish aint it? here’s another link, http://www.flightaware.com there are a few hundred planes in the air at any given time of the day.. just a thought. And how is it that the spray planes only spray on certain days? but not cloudless hot days, pilots must enjoy the BBQ weather days off.

    Drive On Uncinus.

  26. JazzRoc says:

    Way to go, BlackIrishToung! 🙂 Brilliant!

  27. BlackIrishToung says:

    Oh, and one more thing that ALL conspiracy theoristshave in common. This is in ref to the first post in this comment series… Conspiracy Theorists all want the TRUTH revealed.

    Truth is indesputable, unwaivering reality. However given the reality of what a Theory is, the best you could ever hope to get is a Concept, not TRUTH.

    Claiming that the “Truth must be revealed” is really someone saying “I believe something and I wont stop protesting, e-mailing, bothering, interrupting, spamming, BIG TEXTING, make-an-ass-out-of-myself.. ing you untill you tell me I’m RIGHT”

    Contacting the Air Force or the FBI for an answer if futile. The FBI is the “Federal Bureau of Investigation” not the “Federal Bureau of Gonna answer your call and give you a wrong answer to something somebody made up and your dumbass bought it”

    Make your theories about the search for Truth (note the word ‘search’) but as with any search for an answer, don’t get all huffy and upset when the TRUTH turns out to differ from what you originally thought.

    I would LOVE to watch a conspiracy theory be cracked open, and peoples persistance justified, but that don’t mean its the case every time. ya’know?

    If I called NASA because I was CERTIAN that the Space Shuttle’s Orange ET was really a bomb.. I call ’em and they say “No it isn’t” It don’t mean they are BS’n me to hide the truth.. nope.. it means I was WRONG.. think about that..

  28. Tom says:

    I used to work on airplanes, there are a lot of mysterious maintenance things that mechanics don’t even understand, and are not supposed to interfere with.

    Chemtrails and contrails look the same, and always have, that is why this debunking site works so well, and is so believable. However most major airline’s contrails are laced with chemicals to cause fear in people. It is not just a US military conspiracy, but a worldwide conspiracy.
    I can’t safely post proof right now, but none of it matters, because things are going to be changing world wide very soon, (next couple months) and Them, They, the conspirators, will find that their efforts were a waist of time. As these debunking sites, that all are so similar in layout, were too a waist of time.

    Here is something interesting to read whether or not you believe the account:
    http://educate-yourself.org/cn/chemspewermechanics17apr05.shtml

    Those of you who are scared reading about these, don’t worry about whether or not chemtrails are contrails or are real or not. It doesn’t matter.
    Like I said things are going to change very soon, and in a very positive way.

    Namaste To all.

  29. Hehe says:

    Just thought I’d leave a comment. Funny to see all the people who say, “You have to see it for yourself to believe it.” or “Come to my house, they’re everywhere.” Well, your own word doesn’t amount to anything without visual evidence we all can look at.

    On a side note, all the people that believe in the chemtrail conspiracy (not saying you’re wrong) have really bad grammar. Especially that one guy who does HALO jumping and has a “level 5 top secret military clearance”.

    Not saying I’m any better, but just wanted to point that out.

    Cheers.

  30. Suntour says:

    By Tom:
    “I can’t safely post proof right now, but none of it matters, because things are going to be changing world wide very soon, (next couple months) and Them, They, the conspirators, will find that their efforts were a waist of time”

    You’re right, you can’t post proof, that’s why it’s so frustrating to watch people screaming “Don’t believe the science on this site, believe your eyes…LOOK UP LOOK UP! The sky is falling!”.

    By Hehe:
    “all the people that believe in the chemtrail conspiracy (not saying you’re wrong) have really bad grammar”

    I wouldn’t say ALL, but there does seem to be a pattern emerging.

  31. Josh says:

    Thank you for the great read. This past 30 minutes has been an excellent learning experience on the art of spin and disinformation.

    One can identify the use of the following as excellent tactical approaches, should mis- or disinformation be desirous:
    – A calm, cool exterior and polite manner no matter what (like Kissinger)
    – Responding to presented evidence with a dismissive, semi-related counter-question
    – Putting the obvious in plain view and repeatedly stating it is something other than the obvious (like Derren Brown, youtube it)
    – Selectively responding to evidence claims or comments based upon ability to refute or, counter-claim or spin on a micro-basis
    – When other methods fail, moving toward an “one of thooose people” or condescending/stereotyping position (note to students: Uncinus does not display this.)

    From http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL1760049120080617:

    REUTERS (17 June 2008) –

    MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russian air force planes dropped a 25-kg (55-lb) sack of cement on a suburban Moscow home last week while seeding clouds to prevent rain from spoiling a holiday, Russian media said on Tuesday.

    “A pack of cement used in creating … good weather in the capital region … failed to pulverize completely at high altitude and fell on the roof of a house, making a hole about 80-100 cm (2.5-3 ft),” police in Naro-Fominsk told agency RIA-Novosti.

    Ahead of major public holidays the Russian Air Force often dispatches up to 12 cargo planes carrying loads of silver iodide, liquid nitrogen and cement powder to seed clouds above Moscow and empty the skies of moisture.

    A spokesman for the Russian Air Force refused to comment.

    June 12 was Russia Day, a patriotic holiday celebrating the country’s independence after the break-up of the Soviet Union.

    Weather specialists said the cement’s failure to turn to powder was the first hiccup in 20 years.

    The homeowner was not injured, but refused an offer of 50,000 roubles ($2,100) from the air force, saying she would sue for damages and compensation for moral suffering, Interfax said.

    (Reporting by Chris Baldwin; Editing by Janet Lawrence)

    The above is what the mainstream media is telling us about sky operations. Riiight, like we are to believe their sole intention for massive campaigns to dump chemicals such as “silver oxide” and “pulverized cement” in the air is to create happy weather for the people. (Let alone suspending our belief that Reuters is giving us the full chemical lineup.)

    Some other interersting information, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience:

    THE GUARDIAN (UK) (21 April 2002) –

    Much of Britain was exposed to bacteria sprayed in secret trials

    The Ministry of Defence turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public.

    A government report just released provides for the first time a comprehensive official history of Britain’s biological weapons trials between 1940 and 1979.

    Many of these tests involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told.

    While details of some secret trials have emerged in recent years, the 60-page report reveals new information about more than 100 covert experiments.

    The report reveals that military personnel were briefed to tell any ‘inquisitive inquirer’ the trials were part of research projects into weather and air pollution.

    The tests, carried out by government scientists at Porton Down, were designed to help the MoD assess Britain’s vulnerability if the Russians were to have released clouds of deadly germs over the country.

    Ooohhhkay. Always the “oh, it’s coz we’re protecting you against the baddies” thing.

    In most cases, the trials did not use biological weapons but alternatives which scientists believed would mimic germ warfare and which the MoD claimed were harmless. But families in certain areas of the country who have children with birth defects are demanding a public inquiry.

    One chapter of the report, ‘The Fluorescent Particle Trials’, reveals how between 1955 and 1963 planes flew from north-east England to the tip of Cornwall along the south and west coasts, dropping huge amounts of zinc cadmium sulphide on the population. The chemical drifted miles inland, its fluorescence allowing the spread to be monitored. In another trial using zinc cadmium sulphide, a generator was towed along a road near Frome in Somerset where it spewed the chemical for an hour.

    While the Government has insisted the chemical is safe, cadmium is recognised as a cause of lung cancer and during the Second World War was considered by the Allies as a chemical weapon.

    In another chapter, ‘Large Area Coverage Trials’, the MoD describes how between 1961 and 1968 more than a million people along the south coast of England, from Torquay to the New Forest, were exposed to bacteria including e.coli and bacillus globigii , which mimics anthrax. These releases came from a military ship, the Icewhale, anchored off the Dorset coast, which sprayed the micro-organisms in a five to 10-mile radius.

    The report also reveals details of the DICE trials in south Dorset between 1971 and 1975. These involved US and UK military scientists spraying into the air massive quantities of serratia marcescens bacteria, with an anthrax simulant and phenol.

    Similar bacteria were released in ‘The Sabotage Trials’ between 1952 and 1964. These were tests to determine the vulnerability of large government buildings and public transport to attack. In 1956 bacteria were released on the London Underground at lunchtime along the Northern Line between Colliers Wood and Tooting Broadway. The results show that the organism dispersed about 10 miles. Similar tests were conducted in tunnels running under government buildings in Whitehall.

    Experiments conducted between 1964 and 1973 involved attaching germs to the threads of spiders’ webs in boxes to test how the germs would survive in different environments. These tests were carried out in a dozen locations across the country, including London’s West End, Southampton and Swindon. The report also gives details of more than a dozen smaller field trials between 1968 and 1977.

    In recent years, the MoD has commissioned two scientists to review the safety of these tests. Both reported that there was no risk to public health, although one suggested the elderly or people suffering from breathing illnesses may have been seriously harmed if they inhaled sufficient quantities of micro-organisms.

    However, some families in areas which bore the brunt of the secret tests are convinced the experiments have led to their children suffering birth defects, physical handicaps and learning difficulties.

    David Orman, an army officer from Bournemouth, is demanding a public inquiry. His wife, Janette, was born in East Lulworth in Dorset, close to where many of the trials took place. She had a miscarriage, then gave birth to a son with cerebral palsy. Janette’s three sisters, also born in the village while the tests were being carried out, have also given birth to children with unexplained problems, as have a number of their neighbours.

    The local health authority has denied there is a cluster, but Orman believes otherwise. He said: ‘I am convinced something terrible has happened. The village was a close-knit community and to have so many birth defects over such a short space of time has to be more than coincidence.’

    Successive governments have tried to keep details of the germ warfare tests secret. While reports of a number of the trials have emerged over the years through the Public Records Office, this latest MoD document – which was released to Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker – gives the fullest official version of the biological warfare trials yet.

    Baker said: ‘I welcome the fact that the Government has finally released this information, but question why it has taken so long. It is unacceptable that the public were treated as guinea pigs without their knowledge, and I want to be sure that the Ministry of Defence’s claims that these chemicals and bacteria used were safe is true.’

    The MoD report traces the history of the UK’s research into germ warfare since the Second World War when Porton Down produced five million cattle cakes filled with deadly anthrax spores which would have been dropped in Germany to kill their livestock. It also gives details of the infamous anthrax experiments on Gruinard on the Scottish coast which left the island so contaminated it could not be inhabited until the late 1980s.

    The report also confirms the use of anthrax and other deadly germs on tests aboard ships in the Caribbean and off the Scottish coast during the 1950s. The document states: ‘Tacit approval for simulant trials where the public might be exposed was strongly influenced by defence security considerations aimed obviously at restricting public knowledge. An important corollary to this was the need to avoid public alarm and disquiet about the vulnerability of the civil population to BW [biological warfare] attack.’

    Sue Ellison, spokeswoman for Porton Down, said: ‘Independent reports by eminent scientists have shown there was no danger to public health from these releases which were carried out to protect the public.

    ‘The results from these trials_ will save lives, should the country or our forces face an attack by chemical and biological weapons.’

    Asked whether such tests are still being carried out, she said: ‘It is not our policy to discuss ongoing research.’

    [email protected]

    But, since these ancient times of 30 years ago we are all pleased to know that governments of leading countries around the world like the United Kingdom have now successfully been rehabilitated. The world’s elite have now changed their ways after learning from these errant policies of yesteryear, from the MK-ULTRA campaign, from agent orange and depleted uranium proliferation, from the USS Liberty attack & attempted cover-up, from 9/11 (ohhp, sorry I wasn’t allowed to mention that one!)…

    I could go on, and I could subsequently respond to some tactful spin posited by the OP or similar, but I will likely choose not to. My feeling is that, though Uncinus et al are free to change their minds and open their hearts anytime they want to, this forum is likely not in the interest of truth. The pursuit of truth is not for everyone at all times.

    Any reasonable human being, with an ability for logic and a heart for truth, could do their own research and independently come to the conclusion that as far as chemtrails are concerned, there is something going on that is not for our best interests.

    The burden of proof is not on those that would speak truth. It stands up and is made known over time.

  32. Josh,

    One can identify the use of the following as excellent tactical approaches, should mis- or disinformation be desirous:
    […]
    – Selectively responding to evidence claims or comments based upon ability to refute or, counter-claim or spin on a micro-basis
    […]
    Any reasonable human being, with an ability for logic and a heart for truth, could do their own research and independently come to the conclusion that as far as chemtrails are concerned, there is something going on that is not for our best interests.

    I’d like to respond to evidence, or claims, but you don’t actually seem to be making any. The evidence you give is of cloud seeding and old germ warfare tests, which nobody denies. The only claim you make is the rather vague “there is something going on that is not for our best interests“, and you don’t seem to provide any linking of this to your evidence other than “I think the government must be up to no good”.

    Could you be more specific in what you think is going on, regarding contrails and “chemtrails”, and what the evidence is?

  33. JazzRoc says:

    Josh:

    This past 30 minutes has been an excellent learning experience on the art of spin and disinformation.

    As has the past minute been a “no-learning-at-all” experience about total misinformation.

    The pursuit of truth is not for everyone at all times. Any reasonable human being, with an ability for logic and a heart for truth, could do their own research and independently come to the conclusion that as far as chemtrails are concerned, there is something going on that is not for our best interests.

    I do not believe so, for the following reason. Fifty years have elapsed since those times, when they released i) a marker (ZCS, which, sadly, was discovered to be a carcinogen) ii) a sterilized (killed!) strain of a commonplace bacterium, and iii) water, in order to have some basis for their defense response plans in the event of biological attack.
    The people who planned and executed this are no longer alive. Nor is the Soviet Union. Nor is the Cold War. So, why is ther “something going on that is not for our best interests”?
    If you argue thus, then you mustn’t forget that the first known instigators of bacterial warfare were the British, with their gift of a plague blanket to an Indian Chief. And the reduction of the Native American population from at least twenty million (possibly sixty!) to five hundred thousand within a hundred years must count as the first practical (and on-going) instance of virtual genocide.
    So we practise genocide as we speak, do we? Everyone?

    The burden of proof is not on those that would speak truth.

    Those that handle “truth” know the opposite to be the case, and this person in particular is quite sure that you wouldn’t know “truth” if it slapped you in your face.
    Is that enough “spin and disinformation” for you?

  34. SR1419 says:

    Any reasonable human being, with an ability for logic and a heart for truth, could do their own research and independently come to the conclusion that as far as chemtrails are concerned, there is something going on that is not for our best interests.

    Indeed…logic and truth…

    …and thus when you use an examples of A) cloud seeding and B) Germ warfare tests…neither of which involve trails from planes that persist and spread in the troposphere… It seems illogical to insinuate that those events are somehow “proof” that the trails behind airplanes that persist and spread are not- as science has told us for over 40 years- simply persistent contrails but instead part of a global, clandestine, “spraying” operation of unknown origin and intent.

    Don’t you agree?

    Typical cloud seeding as practiced in this country and around the world does not take place in the troposphere…does not induce cirrus formation- and does not result in persistent contrails…nor does it take place from the exhaust of jets….and it DOES use silver iodide.

    See here for examples:

    Examples of typical cloud seeding:

    http://www.nawcinc.com/wmfaq.html

    http://www.weathermod.com/

    equipment used:

    http://www.nawcinc.com/photos.html

    http://www.iceflares.com

  35. JBanger says:

    What a crock! I love watching people attempt to protect the secrets and corporate agendas. I can’t even get through all of Uncinus’s comments without laughing.

    The temperature in the atmosphere determines whether contrails evaporate quickly or not, correct? Ok, then why do these “contrails” seem to defy gravity for 8 hours or so, even in the summer? Do they just stay in the upper atmosphere where it’s cold and they keep their forms all day? If that’s the case, then why are we putting satellites in sapce. why not just make them out of light weight aluminum and let them also defy gravity in the stratosphere like these ‘contrails’? Think about all that fuel cost money we’d save.

    U can’t defend the corporation lies forever Uncinus, eventually the truth u are so afraid of will slap u and your whole family in the face when it’s too late. Cowards defend popular beliefs and speech, it takes real courage to go against popularity and speak freely. I highly doubt all of us are delusional or mis-informed about what a real cloud is and what water vapor is. Ask the Morgellons sufferers what they believe in. Then go ask the crops what they think is in our skies, and the nutrient deficient soil.

  36. The temperature in the atmosphere determines whether contrails evaporate quickly or not, correct? Ok, then why do these “contrails” seem to defy gravity for 8 hours or so, even in the summer? Do they just stay in the upper atmosphere where it’s cold and they keep their forms all day?

    They do stay in the upper atmosphere where it is cold, but they generally tend to spread out. After eight hours they have either dissipated fully, or merged into a layer of cirrostratus.

    Why do you think they would fall to the ground? Why would any cloud fall to the ground? Would you expect this to fall to the ground?

  37. Suntour says:

    By JBanger:
    “…it takes real courage to go against popularity and speak freely”

    And here it is, the REAL reason that chemtrail theorists feel so strongly about their beliefs. If they didn’t believe in chemtrails, they would just be one of the sheeple wandering aimlessly through life, they wouldn’t feel that special tingle when they look up in the sky and see a persisting contrail.

    News flash! Believing in chemtrails doesn’t make a person a unique snowflake, it only serves to show just how ignorant some people can be when faced with a plethora of meterological facts and scientific studies. This desire to be ‘different’ seems to cloud the thinking enough to overlook the most obvious scientific explanations.

    Chemtrailers believe that persistent contrails ARE chemtrails, they take that as fact when no chemtrail theorist has EVER presented solid evidence proving that contrails are chemtrails. Doesn’t that sound just a little odd?

    JBanger, will you be the first person to post solid evidence for chemtrails?

  38. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    Ok, then why do these “contrails” seem to defy gravity for 8 hours or so, even in the summer?

    I’m intrigued as to what you think is in these trails that enable them to defy gravity?

    I’m not sure I follow your logic. Although that’s hardly surprising, tbh.

  39. JazzRoc says:

    Jbanger:

    “attempt to protect the secrets and corporate agendas” – attempt to counter the lies and slanders of the ignorant?

    “The temperature in the atmosphere determines whether contrails evaporate quickly or not, correct?” – INCORRECT. The ambient water vapor pressure controls the sublimation (in this case). Try making a cup of hot tea near the top of Mt. Everest.

    “why do these “contrails” seem to defy gravity for 8 hours or so” – if they fall at 0.1m/sec, then in eight hours they will have fallen about 3Km, and they will STILL be in the stratosphere.

    “even in the summer?” – Summer or winter, it’s always around -40 or colder at cruise altitude.

    “Do they just stay in the upper atmosphere where it’s cold and they keep their forms all day?” – If you REALLY watch them carefully, you will see they NEVER “keep their form”. They expand widthwise due to wave vortex energy or layer boundary shear, and/or downwards due to ice accretion in supersaturated conditions. A single trail has been known to expand to 10Km wide by 2Km deep.

    “U can’t defend the corporation lies” – Ignorant people are often slanderous.

    “Cowards defend popular beliefs and speech” – Cowards are people who, afraid of their insignificance in the wider world, will clutch at the straws of conspiracy theories, to bolster their self-image, their ignorance preventing them from seeing the lack of substance in their claims.

    “It takes real courage to go against popularity and speak freely” – It takes more courage to learn science properly at school, when the topic is difficult to understand in the first place, and the application of effort is exhausting, and your classmates might consider you to be a nerd. But you haven’t risked that, have you?

    “I highly doubt all of us are delusional or mis-informed about what a real cloud is and what water vapor is.” – I believe the majority of us are NOT. Some of us KNOW what these things are, and the rest understand that they don’t know, but expect that the experts do know, and take their word for it. You are outside these camps, in some sort of “underworld”.

    “Ask the Morgellons sufferers what they believe in.” – Morgellons has a 300-year-old history. Strange…

    “Then go ask the crops what they think is in our skies, and the nutrient deficient soil.” – NO. We use analytical equipment!

  40. purewater? says:

    Can someone please tell me what I am seeing in the skies? I don’t care if you call it “contrails”, “chemtrails”, or “your mama”. These emissions from planes do not look to me like the behavior of ice/water. They take on chemical reflections and weep, but not like a cloud when it is raining where it streaks. This material spreads out like it has a structure independent of the atmospheric conditions (meaning it doesn’t seem to melt away) but seem to have a solid nature to it, as it spreads both out and up and down.

    What chemicals are in the emissions of the planes? If it was massive amounts of moisture alone, then you would expect it to dissolve as it spreads. Whatever is being released from planes is creating massive pollution! (it is not pure, flitered spring water and completely benign!) Whataver you call this, “normal” or “conspiracy”, all of us who have to breathe this air and live in this atmosphere, deserve to know!

  41. You know, purewater, it’s actually very, very, easy to find out what chemicals are in the emissions of planes. It’s also very easy to find out why contrails sometimes behave in the way you describe. Just look it up. Here’s a good place to start:

    http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_sr/?src=/climate/ipcc/aviation/088.htm

  42. Suntour says:

    These emissions from planes do not look to me like the behavior of ice/water.

    This material spreads out like it has a structure independent of the atmospheric conditions (meaning it doesn’t seem to melt away)

    If it was massive amounts of moisture alone, then you would expect it to dissolve as it spreads.

    It’s plain to see by your statements above that you are not a meteorologist, and if you are, you’re a poor one. What you’re describing is exactly how persisting contrails look, and have looked for decades. The main difference between then and now is the internet…and the spread of these conspiracy theories. “LOOK UP!” Yes, look up indeed, because most of the chemtrailers have never really paid attention to the sky before the internet sensation of chemtrail theories.

    My god read a meteorology book and get some education. You’ll soon realize that the sky isn’t falling and you can do something more important, like actually enjoy your day without wearing a breathing apparatus.

  43. JBanger says:

    Well, I’m convinced. That was all I needed to hear, if corporate mainstream doctors, scientists, and magazines said everything is just dandy, then it must be. They would never lie for money or political favors, that doesn’t exist. In fact, I don’t exist, neither do any of you, and the sky is a figment of our imaginations. The gov’t has never lied to get a war started, they’ve never lied to get what they wanted, and they care what Bob down at the hardware store thinks about going to war with Iran.

    Don’t call them chamtrails, they are Nutrition trails! The fact that I can’t see the sun on a cloudy day anymore is normal, even when the clouds aren’t producing rain and aren’t that dark, just thick. Thick enough to block the light of that giant star 2 planets away from us. I also do not remember what skies looked like before I had the internet, soon as I saw “chemtrails” I just decided to believe in them, because it’s fun to be different and shunned by everyone for talking about them, and/or 9/11. We can’t and shouldn’t talk about these things, because that makes us terrorist threats. I never question anything wealthy corporations claim or promise, because they’ve never lied, neither have pharmaceutical companies. It’s all for our benefit, there’s nothing going on at all folks. Go back to sleep and play Xbox and look at porn and work 80hrs a week to be poor, everything is fine because “experts” who are affiliated with corporations and governments said so.

    Hey, you have fun with that. You can’t help but to defend the logical I understand, linear thinking will solve the problems of the world I’m sure. Where’s our water engines and free energy that was invented decades ago? That must be a conspiracy theory too, the gov’t isn’t hoarding any technology, they LOVE to share that stuff with us.

  44. JBanger says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIYKU8WfOAA

    Some of these are somewhat normal activity, others are obvious human influence.

  45. Which ones do you think are due to human influence? They all look like natural (but rare) cloud formations. They all have names.

  46. everything is fine because “experts” who are affiliated with corporations and governments said so.

    Nobody is saying that people in power never lie. Nor is anyone saying that corporations do not engage in shady practices from time to time.

    But really? ALL of the science books? EVERY paper on contrails? Even things written back in 1972? Or 1944? Or 1921? ALL of it?

    Sure, think for yourself, that’s great. But really, are you suggesting that all the science books in all the libraries in the world have been retroactively modified?

  47. JBanger says:

    are you suggesting that all the science books in all the libraries in the world have been retroactively modified?

    What I believe, as do many critical thinkers out there, is that you and I for the most part only know what they let us know. Anything else that is leaked out or from whistle blowers is discredited, and the words “conspiracy theory” are immediately attached to the information and any questioning going on.
    – 17 arabs with boxcutters “conspiring”, hijacked 4 planes successfully on 9/11, hit 3 of their 4 perspective targets, made NORAD stand down, got past Pentagon auto missile air defenses with an hour plus forewarning, and brought America to it’s knees in fear of terrorism. That’s the Gov’t official story. You know what THAT is called? ….”A CONSPIRACY THEORY.” How is that any more ridiculous sounding than a small group of Bilderberg elites “conspiring” to start a conflict and blame middle eastern terrorists to start a war for oil and profit? That’s how we got into Vietnam. I don’t know about anyone else, but I tend to not believe admitted liars, nevermind the ones who are caught and continue lying to cover up the previous lies… they admitted the Gulf of Tonkin event that led us into Vietnam was a false flag lie.

    History and the books that tell it are written by the winners. It’s usually their perception and version of events too. What is happening right now in our skies is not normal cloud or weather activity. Whether it’s caused by something happening and space, from planes spraying, the sun, whatever…. the point is something is not normal and people are noticing and asking ?s about it, as they are with 9/11. The books aren’t being modified retroactively, they were written with the intention of only being about 4% truthful. Once the typical human being learns brand new information, the brain is designed to defend that information when contested because that information has formed a belief system in the brain. Our brains naturally want to defend what we have always believed in, ask galileo and Socrates, and JESUS. No one wants to believe or even hear anything that goes against their beliefs or what they think they know. The more you learn and “educate yourself”, not sit in a class and get spoon fed what they want to feed u, then you’ll realise the more you know, the more you really don’t know.

  48. What is happening right now in our skies is not normal cloud or weather activity.

    Yet you consistently fail to produce any evidence for this, and claim that all the considerable evidence to the contrary is fabricated.

    Critical thinking is great. But it means that you ideas need to be justified by evidence, and not prejudiced by beliefs.

    Consider the book “Cloud Studies”, by Arthur Clayden, written in 1905, before the advent of powered flight. It contains many photographs of unusual cloud structures that resemble those that some today say are man-made. I have a copy of this book.

    Does this not give you pause for thought? Does looking at this 104 year-old book not contribute to your dictum of “educate yourself”? Or is every written word, every photo, suspect? Do you automatically throw out everything that does not correspond with your beliefs?

  49. See there’s an example. You give a link to BariumBlues.com, which on the home page has a photo of ripple clouds, exactly the same as from the 1905 photos, and claims this is “Electromagnetic Anomalies”

    So, why should we take heed of these sites when they make such simple mistakes and do not correct them?

  50. JBanger says:

    Nikola Tesla (10 July 1856 – 7 January 1943)
    I shouldn’t need to post information about the things he discovered, or stole, during his lifetime. The gov’t admittedly confiscated his equipment and have the patents on his work. He did many experiments back then, I do not know if those old cloud photos, which seemed to be very rare back then, are from Tesla or some other natural phenomenon that caused those patterns in the clouds. make no mistake though that human kind had technology at that time period no one would’ve imagined. The gov’t tests their equipment for many years before the public is told about it. Research Eugenics and what went on with the Nazis and our own American gov’t testing on the populations via plane spraying and various other means of dissemination ofchemicals. This was considered “legal” for many decades, legal to test on the public and NOT tell them. That is the same group of people you guys are defending now with chemtrails. Maybe they were evil back then, but now, they are all better, yes?

    Why should I post anything here? Scroll up, so many have posted very good links on this page, but none seem to satisfy some of you unless it’s blatently G.Bush saying, “yes we are doing a population reduction agenda right now.” Who would come out and say such a thing? Do the wealthy elites have a severe hatred and distaste for the commoner? I’m not talking about rags to riches, I’m talking about the people that Bill Gates hopes to be a part of some day. There’s more than enough “evidence” to at least open an investigation publicly into this atmospheric manipulation and the effects barrium is having on our immune systems. 500 doctors saying the levels of barrium in the water and air are bad and 2 doctors from the Bush administration and a Popular Mechanics bs articles saying it’s fine, doesn’t convince anybody except the willing ignorant.
    There’s plenty to research on your own online, HAARP, Monsanto, Bilderberg, Eugenics, Gulf of Tonkin, Tesla, etc.

    I will post 1 link that I find to be sickening because this is the prime example of what is wrong in this world right now. Seeing how this has been invented a long time ago and exists, and the fact that Obama, Bush, Clinton, none of them would even acknowledge this technology existing PROVES they don’t have our best interests in mind or at heart, PERIOD. Or… maybe I know about this stuff and our president doesn’t, right? Time to wake up folks, the bad guys aren’t going to tell you they’re the bad guys, they never have and never will.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdujAIsNLBY

  51. JBanger says:

    Today is June 10, 2009 and it is 50 degrees here in NH. We have a clear sky maybe once a month, but it’s mostly cloudy to completely covered in thick dark grey clouds everyday.
    The “contrails” once in the sky here, are immediately followed by a closing in of the surrounding clouds and the day of sunlight is over soon afterwards. I’m not making theories here, this is not how it’s suppose to be. It’s unusually cold and the lack of sunlight is getting very ridiculous. There’s almost permanent clouds over New England year round.
    Tell me this is normal and I’m exaggerating, just so I know I’m wasting my time here.

  52. JBanger,

    500 doctors saying the levels of barrium in the water and air are bad and 2 doctors from the Bush administration and a Popular Mechanics bs articles saying it’s fine, doesn’t convince anybody except the willing ignorant.

    And where are these 500 doctors? I’ve seen ZERO evidence that shows unusual levels of barium in the water or air. Could you link to just one that shows an actual lab test showing unusually high levels of barium in the water or air.

    And it’s not just two doctors and popular mechanics that oppose this. It’s every single municipal water company in the United States. That’s literally thousands of independent tests that are made of different water supplies, every year. They all show low or normal levels or Barium. Some examples:

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=municipal+water+quality+report

    So if barium is being sprayed, then why is it not being detected in the water supply?

  53. Tell me this is normal and I’m exaggerating, just so I know I’m wasting my time here.

    Why don’t you look at the weather records for the last 100 years and see if the current weather is unusual?

  54. JBanger says:

    Why don’t you look at the weather records for the last 100 years and see if the current weather is unusual?

    I have, the hottest day on record for here yesterday was in 2008, a 40 degree difference from this year. I have lived in New England for 35 years. I don’t drink tap water, consume fluoride, eat aspartame or high fructose corn syrup, so my memory is still intact and I remember what the sky use to look like, and what the weather patterns here are.

    Local news station confirms barium in chemtrails – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okB-489l6MI

    local news weatherman talking about the military spraying – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tfcXUYL04s

    Just one of many independent research on chemtrail activity. Watch the whole thing before you respond if possible. – http://thebigagenda.com/channel.php?id=17&rid=45

    Are the news reporters and meteorologists lying? “Military is spraying”, their words on TV and in their own documents.

    Google search – chemtrails barium doctors, start with the 1st link and work your way down.

  55. JBanger says:

    Here ya go, read till your heart is content.

    http://www.healthfreedom.info/HR%202977.htm

  56. I have, the hottest day on record for here yesterday was in 2008, a 40 degree difference from this year. I have lived in New England for 35 years. I don’t drink tap water, consume fluoride, eat aspartame or high fructose corn syrup, so my memory is still intact and I remember what the sky use to look like, and what the weather patterns here are.

    Then you should remember that NH has a VERY variable climate, with massive changes in temperature from year to year. See:

    http://nhclimateaudit.org/monthlytrends.html

    Local news station confirms barium in chemtrails – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okB-489l6MI

    He quite clearly shows barium levels of 68.8 ug/L, a normal level, below EPA limits for drinking water, and actually LESS than I would expect based on the collection methods. For full details on this test, including the retraction of the reporter, see:

    http://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/

    local news weatherman talking about the military spraying – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tfcXUYL04s

    He’s discussing normal chaff, which disrupts weather radar. He’s explaining why you see those images on the weather radar. Contrails do not show up on weather radar. It’s a totally different thing. Chaff is invisible to the naked eye when ejected from a plane.

    Watch the whole thing before you respond if possible. – http://thebigagenda.com/channel.php?id=17&rid=45

    I started to watch it, but immediately it began saying that contrails normally dissipate quickly. Since they start out with such an obvious falsehood, I’m not sure it’s a good source. But I’m willing to give it another chance – can you tell me the time in the video where they show test results?

    Here ya go, read till your heart is content.

    http://www.healthfreedom.info/HR%202977.htm

    I’ve read it, and responded, 2977 was written by UFO enthusiasts, see:

    http://contrailscience.com/kucinich-chemtrails-and-hr-2977/

    Now please, quid pro quo, where are these test results?

  57. SR1419 says:

    JB-

    Let me get this straight….

    You will disregard 40+ years of accumulated atmospheric science…peer-reviewed, testable, repeatable science that follows the Laws of Nature…from scientists from around the World…that detail exactly what you are seeing the sky….

    …and yet will look to places such as ChemtrailCentral, Barium Blues, random Youtube videos et al….as sources of fact??

    That is extremely problematic…

    The websites you refer to are filled with fear based speculation based on ignorance…no scholarship, no fact checking, no sources, no science….nothing but pure fear mongering speculation…

    Is every atmospheric scientist – everywhere in the World- a paid shill?

    Can you point to one atmospheric scientist who says that the trails you see in the sky are NOT persistent contrails?? Any one??

    no. You can’t. why is that?

    Everything you just posted in your last post has already been discussed by Uncinus and shown to NOT be the “evidence” implied by you and so many others who are so quick to judge and yet so devoid of logic, fact and substance.

    The TV report completely MISreported the results…see here for details:

    http://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/

    The weather man was referring to chaff- which the application of does not result in persistent contrails nor does it emanate from the exhaust of jets…

    So…LAST year broke records….but this year the weather is unusual?? Please explain.

  58. JBanger says:

    There’s so many articles and reports online, here’s a good chunk – http://www.chemtrails911.com/lab_tests_and_effects.htm

    I don’t care what “normal” chaff does, it’s about what is in it that should be what matters! What’s next? Normal Anthrax spraying? Normal Mercury in foods and vaccines? Come on man, stop debating just to debate and acknowledge the proof that exists, not the lack of enough proof for you.

    68.8 ug/L is not a “normal level”. The EPA are the same people who told 9/11 rescue workers that the air was fit to breath right after the attack. Go research the Hell they’ve been through because of the EPA’s disinformation and the lack of gov’t assistence. If you want to believe the EPA standards after that alone, good luck with that.

    You looks seem to start out with propaganda attacks on those questioning anything against the corporate interests. Some start out with the usual, “Some conspiracy theorists actually believe the government is spraying chemicals…” Come on, that’s stereotyping and influencing the reader’s impressions before looking at the information. Yet when one of us says “corporate lies”, we are slandering. Double standards.

    Who cares if someone is a UFO enthusiast? Does that cancel the validity of all information? I believe in UFOs because I have seen them far and up close. They are unidentified objects, some more extravagant than others, but they do exist. If you deny their existence as well, then there’s no winning any debate about any topic with you. Bill Clinton lied to the world staring right into the camera on national TV about Lewinski, yet everything else he says and has said has been taken as the 100% truth without question. That’s just how things work in politics and corporations, they’re always right until they admit they aren’t.

    I’ve posted enough evidence here which is only a fraction of what exists online, there’s also 1000s of sponsored propaganda to validate political agendas. It’s their word against our word type of argument, but who stands to gain the most from making their argument validated, the corporations or the independent researchers?

  59. JBanger says:

    I don’t “disregard” any information presented to me, I actually read between the lines and watch from beginning to end both sides of the argument in posted documentaries and videos.
    I also watch weather patterns with my own eyes, not just what is written on paper or computer document. A graph is nice, but personal experience is another thing.

    I don’t want any of this to be true! I don’t want to believe what Alex Jones reports on! I don’t want to believe in chemtrails or pharmaceutical testing on the public, and I definitely don’t want to believe in the possible risks GMO foods are having on us in America. I have worked in the health care field for over a decade and I know what has been going on. I have cured myself and helped those close to me work around the corporate takeover of America as best they can. All we can do as patriots is help each other and live as happy and healthy as we can while we’re here. Willful ignorance of any evidence or even a “possible” existences of any health hazards to the eco-system, environment, or our health should NOT be immediately ridiculed, slandered, stereotyped, or prejudged, yet that is what the mainstream media does. I’m concerned for all of us and it’s why I don’t overlook anything, no matter how insignificant.

  60. 68.8 ug/L is not a “normal level”.

    Yes it is. It’s actually a very low level. The EPA limits are 2000 ug/L

    You keep claiming that high levels of barium have been found. Barium, as you know, occurs naturally in the ground. So you’d expect to find a certain level everywhere (especially in Arkansas, where they used to mine it). So given that, where are these tests showing high levels?

    And if you want to set your own definition of what level of barium should be found, then could you tell me what it is (in ug/L), and how you arrived at this figure.

  61. JBanger says:

    The average concentration of barium in USA drinking water is 28.6 ug/l (1977 data).
    The EPA has set a limit of 2.0 milligrams of barium per liter of drinking water (2.0 mg/L), which is the same as 2 ppm.

    If the EPA or large corporation told you smoking was healthy, would you believe them?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAExoSozc2c&feature=player_embedded

    A report about EPA and air quality standards after 9/11 – http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com/2007/09/epa-911-and-bush-administration.html

    EPA’s report on mercury and it’s effects on human health – http://www.epa.gov/hg/effects.htm
    They inject mercury into infants via vaccinations. Does this sound sane to you? If it does, then there is no point in debating about the EPA standards and chemtrails in this forum.

  62. JBanger says:

    I forgot to add this classic piece of propaganda about smoking – http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_1pINz6H54Ys/Scr-TavvX8I/AAAAAAAABC4/tEFcM_f8hDI/s400/viceroys.png

    Times change, so do the standards and laws. It’s like a slow boil. What was safe 50 years ago is now considered unsafe, and I bet the argument back then about what was safe vs unsafe is similar to what we are doing today. They keep us busy with mindless entertainments and arguing back and forth amung ourselves, while they build their infrastructure of world gov’t all around us, and nobody seems to notice or care.
    The apathy in America is frightening.

  63. The average concentration of barium in USA drinking water is 28.6 ug/l (1977 data).
    The EPA has set a limit of 2.0 milligrams of barium per liter of drinking water (2.0 mg/L), which is the same as 2 ppm.

    2.0 mg/L is 2000 ug/L (since 1mg = 1ug)

    So where are these reports of high barium levels? Sure, ignore the EPA, but just tell me what you would consider a high level, and why, and then show me reports that show this high level.

    Also, I’m interested, if there were NO spraying of barium, then how much barium would you expect to find in the drinking water?

  64. JBanger says:

    If there were no spraying, then I suppose the standard levels would be all natural levels. It’s been proven that test results can and have been doctored towards the best interests of the corporations for many decades, this is a moot argument.
    I said that level was high considering the average levels as of 1977 data.

    When the unnatural is added to the mix, the EPA has to step in and make what “they think” is safe standards. Though their standards seem to change by the year and decade sometimes, so that must mean they’ve revised their standards as time passes. If their standards are faulty, it can takes decades to change them because of beaurocratic legal red tape. Many have to DIE before a drug company recalls anything.

    If mercury at ANY levels are proven to be toxic to us, why is it in foods, water suppiles, vaccines, and medications? Because the EPA said low levels are ok? They can just hire a few doctors to say on camera that it’s safe so everyone just accepts that as the word of God and don’t do any research of their own about it. In 10 years from now, the EPA will probably have a new set of numbers and guidelines after years of circular “no definitive evidence” bs studies released in journals.

    Sunshine = good
    No sunlight = bad
    Contaminated water supplies = bad
    mercury = bad
    arsenic = bad
    lead = bad
    wars = bad

    I see things for what they are, not what I’m told they are. If you want to believe people’s words instead of their actions, have fun with that.

  65. Let’s stick to barium. This blog is to discuss contrails, and the chemtrail theory. I try to keep focused on that. I discuss barium because people claim there is evidence it is found in contrails.

    So, a guy leaves a bowl on the hood of a pickup in his yard for a month, the water that collects in it has a barium content of 68.8 ug/L, but in 1977 the average barium in drinking water was 28.6 ug/L

    Now, first of all, let me point out a contradiction in the way you approach things. On the one hand you dispute all evidence from science books, the EPA and local water companies as being part of the conspiracy. And yet you are happy to quote the EPA as a source of science to back up your claims.

    How do you know what science is good and what is bad? Is everything that agrees with your theory correct, and everything that disagrees with it is “disinformation”. How do YOU know what the level of barium should be?

    Now, you quote the EPA : “The average concentration of barium in USA drinking water is 28.6 ug/l”, but you failed to quote the whole thing:

    http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/dwh/t-ioc/barium.html

    Barium is found in waste streams from a large number of manufacturing plants in quantities that seldom exceed the normal levels found in soil. Background levels for soil range from 100-3000 ppm barium. Occurs naturally in almost all (99.4%) surface waters examined, in concentration of 2 to 340 ug/l, with an average of 43 ug/l. The drainage basins with low mean concentration of barium (15 ug/l) occur in the western Great Lakes, & the highest mean concentration of 90 ug/l is in the southwestern drainage basins of the lower Mississippi Valley. In stream water & most groundwater, only traces of the element are present.

    There are limited survey data on the occurrence of barium in drinking water. Most supplies contain less than 200 ug/l of barium. The average concentration of barium in USA drinking water is 28.6 ug/l (1977 data). The drinking water of many communities in Illinois, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, & New Mexico contains concentrations of barium that may be 10 times higher than the drinking water standard. The source of these supplies is usually well water. Currently 60 ground water supplies and 1 surface water supply exceeds 1000 ug/l.

    While it falls above the average, 66.8 is hardly an unusually high amount. ESPECIALLY if you consider the collection methods.

    So, again, where are the results showing high levels of barium?

  66. JBanger says:

    I used EPA’s information to prove a point. They themselves claim a compound is toxic to humans, yet they approve it in vaccines and food supplies. I was showing their logic from their own research and the hypocrisy of their actions, establishing the validity of the source that states these levels are “safe” for humans.

    Phoenix air quality test results – http://www.rense.com/general82/chemit.htm

    A & L Canadian Laboratories East – http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/soiltest.html

    I’m sure u have probably seen most of these results, I have seen your name a lot going back to 2007 claiming chemtrails don’t exist. If after at least 2 years of researching this subject, u are still not convinced anything unusual is going on in our skies or with our gov’t, then u are either working for them, or u are just waiting for one particular thing out of 10,000 to convince u otherwise.

    This is all most people need to know to form a real opinion of who is NOT looking out for the general populations best interests…

    PUBLIC LAW 95-79 [P.L. 95-79] TITLE 50, CHAPTER 32, SECTION 1520 “CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAM” “The use of human subjects will be allowed for the testing of chemical and biological agents by the U.S. Department of Defense, accounting to Congressional committees with respect to the experiments and studies.” “The Secretary of Defense [may] conduct tests and experiments involving the use of chemical and biological [warfare] agents on civilian populations [within the United States].” -SOURCE- Public Law 95-79, Title VIII, Sec. 808, July 30, 1977, 91 Stat. 334. In U.S. Statutes-at-Large, Vol. 91, page 334, you will find Public Law 95-79. Public Law 97-375, title II, Sec. 203(a)(1), Dec. 21, 1982, 96 Stat. 1882. In U.S. Statutes-at-Large, Vol. 96, page 1882, you will find Public Law 97-375

  67. JBanger says:

    What disturbs me more than barium levels above or below safety standards, is the effects this “chaff”, chemtrails, whatever is ‘blocking sunlight’ is having on crops. The Canadian studies I read were similar to my own personal research I conducted with plants and fruit baring trees.
    The lack of sunlight, dramatic changes in weather, and the lack of vitamin D we’re not getting from the sun are all binary parts of a possible severe crisis we could be facing very soon.

  68. I used EPA’s information to prove a point. They themselves claim a compound is toxic to humans, yet they approve it in vaccines and food supplies. I was showing their logic from their own research and the hypocrisy of their actions, establishing the validity of the source that states these levels are “safe” for humans.

    All substances are toxic at a certain level. Take common table salt – it’s highly toxic if you take more than a few spoonfuls, yet at low levels it’s actually vital to life. Some substances exist in the environment, and you can’t avoid them. Hence it’s highly important to establish safe levels.

    Take Aluminum, it’s used in soda cans and cooking pans. It’s the most abundant element in the Earth’s crust. It’s in the soil, and in the air you are breathing right now. It’s impossible to avoid.

    Phoenix air quality test results – http://www.rense.com/general82/chemit.htm

    I analyzed that in some depth here:
    http://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-non-science/
    Bottom line: they measured it wrong – confusing concentration in air with concentration in dirt. If their figures were correct then we would all be dead.

    A & L Canadian Laboratories East – http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/soiltest.html

    Shows barium levels of “0.006 milligrams/litre”, or 6 ug/L, which is far less than the last test you showed me (68.8 ug/L)

    PUBLIC LAW 95-79 [P.L. 95-79] TITLE 50, CHAPTER 32, SECTION 1520 “CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAM” “The use of human subjects will be allowed for the testing of chemical and biological agents

    That law was repealed in 1998, see:

    http://www.usvetinfo.com/dod_test.htm

  69. What disturbs me more than barium levels above or below safety standards, is the effects this “chaff”, chemtrails, whatever is ‘blocking sunlight’ is having on crops.

    That’s a valid concern. “Global Dimming” is very real. There is less energy from the sun reaching the ground. But contrails are thought to only account for a small fraction of that (although there is some debate, and much uncertainty – it’s difficult to test). The majority of global dimming is probably from particulates in the atmosphere, the human part of which which come mostly from industrial emissions and burning wood. Volcanoes (El Chichon and Pinatubo) play a huge role here. See:

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

  70. Suntour says:

    By JBanger,
    “I will post 1 link that I find to be sickening because this is the prime example of what is wrong in this world right now. Seeing how this has been invented a long time ago and exists, and the fact that Obama, Bush, Clinton, none of them would even acknowledge this technology existing PROVES they don’t have our best interests in mind or at heart, PERIOD. Or… maybe I know about this stuff and our president doesn’t, right? Time to wake up folks, the bad guys aren’t going to tell you they’re the bad guys, they never have and never will.”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdujAIsNLBY

    How much energy/electricity does it take for the radio frequency generator to actually release the Oxygen and Hydrogen in the water? If it’s more than is produced by the flame, then it’s a big failure as far as a fuel source goes. Bad example imo.

  71. JBanger says:

    All substances are toxic at a certain level. Take common table salt – it’s highly toxic if you take more than a few spoonfuls, yet at low levels it’s actually vital to life. Some substances exist in the environment, and you can’t avoid them. Hence it’s highly important to establish safe levels.

    To be accurate, no, not ALL substances are toxic at certain levels. Too much water? Too much fresh air? Too much vitamins and minerals? Too much alcohol, yes, too much oxygen or CO2, yes, those elements can be bad at higher levels.
    Common table salt is toxic at higher levels because it’s iodized salt. Sea salt or Himalayan blue salt is the best salt to use, it contains more elements than the 2 or 3 elements common iodized table salt has. We NEED salt, we sweat salt, our bodies require salt, but iodized table salt is very bad for us at almost any level IMHO.

    Bottom line: they measured it wrong – confusing concentration in air with concentration in dirt. If their figures were correct then we would all be dead.

    Would we seriously be “dead”, or could the effects just be illness or side effects of various types? I don’t claim to know for sure and you shouldn’t be able to be sure either, it’s speculation. I don’t claim to know if they are accurate or not, I don’t know, it’s a pretty strong claim to make though that their levels are that far off I think. To publish a report with readings so high that only death could be assumed if those figures are accurate is quite a claim I don’t care to challenge myself. Maybe you are right, maybe they aren’t wrong, I don’t know.

    That law was repealed in 1998, see:

    http://www.usvetinfo.com/dod_test.htm

    Ok. Stop for a moment and think about the law that was active for such a long time period. Why was it repealed? Because they just decided all of a sudden to repeal it, or because they felt they had to? Why was that even legal to begin with considering the effects it could have? Doesn’t it sound unethical somewhat? Does that even matter anymore?

    That’s a valid concern. “Global Dimming” is very real. There is less energy from the sun reaching the ground. But contrails are thought to only account for a small fraction of that (although there is some debate, and much uncertainty – it’s difficult to test). The majority of global dimming is probably from particulates in the atmosphere, the human part of which which come mostly from industrial emissions and burning wood.

    Finally we agree on something. Now don’t get all “cow farts and automobiles” are causing this problem, that’s nonsense and I’m sure you know it. Global dimming has been attributed as a “side effect” of a retaliation against “Global warming” which is for the most part has been proven to be a false propaganda campaign. There is debate on what is causing it, this “chaff” they speak of seems to be a prime suspect, aluminum and magnetic particles sprayed in the air for “warfare” purposes? Are we at global war right now that we have to cover the United States in radar confusing particles over our own soil? I wasn’t aware the crisis was THAT bad with foreign nations, were you? Do we know all the side effects of this chaff? Logic states that if you have shiny aluminum and other various reflective particles in the upper atmosphere, the sunlight will logical reflect off of that layer of reflective metal and bounce back into space. They claim that is them countering the effects of global warming. What are the effects on crops, vitamin D, photosynthesis in plants, etc? Do they seem to care or are they justifying their actions in the name of national security? What are the after effects when this warfare tactic is completed, if it ever is anytime soon? Plants aren’t doing well, neither are we, the sun is too important to be “blocking out” for ANY reason I think. I think we can take care of ourselves without this radar blocking technology, if we aren’t, then we need to restructure our military defense systems.

  72. To be accurate, no, not ALL substances are toxic at certain levels. Too much water? Too much fresh air? Too much vitamins and minerals? Too much alcohol, yes, too much oxygen or CO2, yes, those elements can be bad at higher levels.

    What’s the difference between too much fresh air, and too much oxygen? Fresh air contains oxygen, too much is toxic:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity

    Too much water is certainly toxic. It disturbs the balance of electrolytes in the body and disrupts brain functioning, and can be fatal. See:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication

    Vitamins and minerals – where to begin? Pick a vitamin, and it has a toxic level. Start with A
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervitaminosis_A

    The point here is that there are safe levels and dangerous levels, and a range in between. Barium can be highly toxic in sufficient quantities. However barium is found naturally in the environment, and humans will naturally excrete the barium they ingest, without any harm. Many parts of the world have vastly higher levels of barium in the water – Italy, for example, has regions with levels of around 1000 ppb. (where the reports you provide show 68.8 ppb, or lower). The EPA limit is 2000 ppb. Studies of people drinking water with barium levels 70,000 ppb found slight increased mortality aged over 65. See:
    http://rais.ornl.gov/tox/profiles/barium_f_V1.shtml

    So two conclusions should arise from these facts and figures:

    1) The levels of barium found are well within normal levels, and are not an indication of spraying barium from airplanes.
    2) The levels of barium found are as safe as they have always been.

  73. Black Eagle says:

    Here’s another website debunking chemtrails, with additional pictures and arguments on the subject. A nice photo of WW-II bombers with heavy contrails…. so, guys, does this mean the conspiracy got started back in WW-II?

    http://www.orgonelab.org/chemtrails.htm

  74. Interesting site. It starts out quite reasonably, explaining “chemtrails”, but the degenerates into Orgone cloud-busting.

  75. SAM004 says:

    Thanks for your clear refutation of “chemtrails.” How you can be so patient with these conspiracy idiots is a mystery to me.

    But be careful about your dismissal of cloudbusting and your use of the word “degenerates.” Most discussion on the Internet about cloudbusting and orgone energy is by crazies, but the orgonelab is the real deal.

  76. J says:

    Uncinus,
    You keep telling people to give extra references, but all you used is an ancient book.
    — “Consider the book “Cloud Studies”, by Arthur Clayden, written in 1905” —
    Do you have anything else to back up what that book claims?
    Or is that your only reference?

  77. I’m not sure what you are asking. What does “Cloud Studies” claim that you think needs extra references? There are lots of books on clouds, they all say the same thing. Just pick any of them.

  78. Suntour says:

    By J

    Uncinus,
    You keep telling people to give extra references, but all you used is an ancient book.
    – “Consider the book “Cloud Studies”, by Arthur Clayden, written in 1905″ –
    Do you have anything else to back up what that book claims?
    Or is that your only reference?

    What types of references are you referring to when you say “Or is that your only reference?”. Do you need to see Renaissance paintings of cloud streets and ripple clouds or maybe Paleolithic cave paintings of unusual cirrus cloud formations?

    Anything Uncinus presents be it images or data, the chemtrailers attempt to shoot down, which ultimately degenerates into them claiming “I know what I see”, “I trust my eyes” or some other nonsense.

    Uncinus offers images from a 1905 book that counter the “chemcloud” theory, but you don’t feel that this is enough evidence? Feel free to present evidence of the “chemclouds” pictured above (on the “bariumblues” opening page) being anything different than normal cloud formations. Please, just once I hope someone will present some sort of evidence.

  79. Joe says:

    I was a Customs officer for 8 years. The Chem planes are real and always had a special area of the tarmac for fueling and loading up on whatever? Never gave it much thought really but ya the planes are real. Uncinus i admire how you have kept this forum going with as cool as you have been with everyones opinion. We need to keep an open mind always, conspiracy or not these things have to be talked about and I know the infinity of what a cojntrail looks like and some of is not normal jet poo or the like. Keep mup the good work Uncinus you are a great moderator and i have alot of respect for you and your opinions.

  80. Wombat says:

    Great pictures! That 747 water bomber was frickin amazing!!!!
    *Sigh*…so many idiots who have no idea what a contrail looks like, and why sometimes contrails form, and sometimes they don’t…
    the amazing part is that they honestly think that something supposedly “sprayed” from a plane over 10,000 meters up is going to somehow ignore all the intervening weather and winds and drop straight onto thier precious little (but empty) heads…the damn stuff would land over a hundred kilometers away.

  81. JazzRoc says:

    Joe:

    The Chem planes are real and always had a special area of the tarmac for fueling and loading up

    You were a customs officer for eight years and took no pictures? What were you thinking?
    They were fuelling up planes with poisonous materials to spray your family and you “Never gave it much thought really”?
    Yah, boo, sucks.

  82. JazzRoc says:

    JBanger:

    I will post 1 link that I find to be sickening because this is the prime example of what is wrong in this world right now. Seeing how this has been invented a long time ago and exists, and the fact that Obama, Bush, Clinton, none of them would even acknowledge this technology existing PROVES they don’t have our best interests in mind or at heart, PERIOD. Or… maybe I know about this stuff and our president doesn’t, right? Time to wake up folks, the bad guys aren’t going to tell you they’re the bad guys, they never have and never will.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdujAIsNLBY

    I, too, agree that this is a sickening link.

    It sickens me because it is TOTAL DROSS. It shows that you haven’t a clue about science, and that you don’t care that you are clueless.

    In all such “systems”, the total energy output is LESS than the total energy input by a factor which includes the energy loss due to heating the apparatus up. People “working” on such devices always find a means to confuse and dissemble this plain fact – otherwise they would surely stop wasting their time. No-one has EVER “beaten” the laws of thermodynamics, which boil down to “there’s NO free lunch”. Even the (almost infinite) Universe doesn’t beat them, anywhere!

    Your miserable argument goes something like this: “THEY have conspired to prevent the loss of their business by buying off/assassinating inventors”.

    But the truth of it is that there are MANY places on Earth which THEY can’t reach, and if it could have happened, it would have happened.

    Stop disappointing yourself (and the rest of us) and learn Science, for without such scientific understanding we’ll NEVER fix our upcoming problems.

  83. Wombat says:

    All the Chemtrail idiots seem to miss one vital point: if you wanted to drug the population at large, there are much easier and more efficient and targeted ways of doing it than spraying it from an airliner 35,000 feet up, where the wind would take it hundreds of kilometers away before it drifited to the ground. One guy on a trail bike with a package of canisters could travel the back roads and hidden country trails dropping it in the water supply…
    If it was such a “mindblowingly secret black-ops” operation, why the hell would they spray it all over the sky where everyone can see it happening?

  84. Mac says:

    Boy, what a bunch of nuts. Wildwelder AZ just wouldn’t believe anything anyone said except those who agreed with him. I wonder what happened that made him quit posting? It’s incredible the way conspiracy theorists pick and choose what they want to believe. Uncinus, you have the patience of Job, I really appreciate your efforts and willingness to try to show these uneducated NUTS (I am now old enough to be VERY cranky and outspoken) how little they know about the state of the world. I had some engineering and science courses in college, and was an air traffic controller and experienced pilot; everybody, believe Uncinus- he (and the rest of the science community) is not covering up anything.

  85. billybob says:

    Hey Wombat,

    We’re not saying chemtrails is the 1 all be all, ever hear of flouride in your water? Preservatives in your food? Apartame? vaccines with mercury? Chemtrails is only one facet in a multititude of pre-designed programs that been going on for years and years. Think about it. They couldn’t come out full throttle at the beginning other wise the public would retaliate. Little increments at a time…throw the frog in a pot a cold water and turn on the fire, by the time they realise what’s happening it’s too late.

    BTW- NICE JOB JBANGER 😉

  86. SciGuy2012 says:

    Here’s the latest report about the EPA covering up information that goes against their interests. Covering up real science.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL9FkkDhOwg&feature=player_embedded

    What else have they covered up?

  87. It’s not real science, the author (Alan Carlin) was not even a scientist, he’s an economist, and his “paper” was simply a collection of climate-change denialist talking points. EPA simply chose not to include them in an EPA report it because they are nothing new. It seems that Fox news, Michelle Malkin, etc, then spun this to further their position of supporters of the corporations that don’t want CO2 regulation.

    Nothing was covered up, because nothing new was said. You can read Carlin’s comments:

    http://cei.org/news-release/2009/06/25/cei-releases-global-warming-study-censored-epa

    And the full emails:

    http://cei.org/news-release/2009/06/25/cei-releases-global-warming-study-censored-epa

    But you should also read these rebuttals:

    http://mediamatters.org/research/200906300040
    http://mediamatters.org/research/200906290049

    There is a healthy debate over the causes of climate change. There are lots of papers published on all aspects, and from many points of view. The EPA cannot “cover up” such debate. What seems to have happened here is that one writer was pushing his personal viewpoint (which contians many thing that were actually demonstrably wrong), and his superiors did not think that it was suitable for the report.

    Now, compare that to “chemtrails”. There are NO scientific papers claiming there are chemtrails. It’s a totally different situation.

  88. And funnily enough, Alan Carlin is a strong proponent of Geoengineering for climate change:

    http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs/Climate%20change/Geo-politics/CarlinSustainableDevelopment.pdf

    So he’d actually be in favor of “chemtrails”

  89. billybob says:

    Uncinus,

    Of course there are no scientific papers reporting on chemtrails…Read through some docs from the gov on weather modification and you will understand why it is and has been kept secret…Because there would be a major outcry from the public. It’s no more difficult to understand than that???
    Although i would have great debate with you about what you consider *scientific* papers???

    Gotta go, got some tea boiling sweetened with Aspartame and flouride from the tap ;(

    billybob

  90. A scientific paper is something that other scientists have check to see if it’s more of less correct.

    Come now, there’s no censorship of rense.com,abovetopsecret.com, carnicom.com, or chemtrailcentral.com – so why can’t they get a scientific paper at the very least on those sites? Could it be that when other scientists look at their work they find errors? Can’t they get three scientists to agree?

    Or do you think those sites are censored too?

    Then where do you get your science?

  91. R says:

    Fair play to uncinus for the balanced view. you seem open to discussion if not entirely open minded. Could i ask your opinion on the Gulf of Tonkin incident which effectively paved the way for the Vietnam War please? Seems to me that your position is fairly trusting of the authorities and their message to the people: ‘trust us’. I don’t, just so you know, and this one incident is an example of why – intentional fabrication. I could name at least one more. The more you investigate, the more you realise you have been lied to…

    I certainly agree people get carried away with Chemtrails, and that they can get confused about what is real / normal and what isn’t. But, I have seen and still have in my possession a PDF from the council on foreign relations specifically talking about aerosol spraying of particulates into the atmosphere to help combat climate change. This is pretty concrete evidence that this apparent mistaken phenomena is, at least, being discussed by authorities. I would also name Porton Down in the UK as another admission by government to knowledge of / participation in aerial spraying.

    Now, if people are simply misguided/mistaken all over the world at the same time (more or less) in noticing these things exisiting (as I did one peaceful day on the beach as the sky became gridded with lines and then subsequently a huge halo appeared around the sun), then effectively what we are talking about is the biggest, unrelated mass misunderstanding humanity has ever realised. Would you agree with that? I mean it is a world wide misunderstood ‘phenomena’, is it not?

    I have seen people looking and pointing at these contrails where they are gridded or spraying on and off ( which as I understand it from your perspective is an atmospheric variation), surely the fact that hundreds of thousands of people in the world noticing this apparently normal phenomena (from your perspective) is indicative of something? There is nothing to be gained from people noticing something new when they are genuinely (and this does appear to be genuine from the people I have discussed it with) intrigued as to a new phenomena they are just discovering. There is no motivation, no money and no respect to be had from at least being intrigued and then disagreeing with those who would tell you that you are mistaken.

    There are times when it pays dividends to stick to your inner belief of something even when an authority figure or established opinion contradicts you, whilst remaining open to the idea that, at the same time, you could also be wrong.

    Anyway apologies if you have answered the points I have made above and again if you sigh inwardly at yet another misguided opinion. I don’t expect a response and can’t guarantee i’ll remember to come back to this site as it was a random visit. My heart tells me that you as a man of science are perhaps missing something which is right in front of your nose. Regards. Richard.

  92. Fair play to uncinus for the balanced view. you seem open to discussion if not entirely open minded. Could i ask your opinion on the Gulf of Tonkin incident which effectively paved the way for the Vietnam War please? Seems to me that your position is fairly trusting of the authorities and their message to the people: ‘trust us’. I don’t, just so you know, and this one incident is an example of why – intentional fabrication. I could name at least one more. The more you investigate, the more you realise you have been lied to…

    My opinion on the Gulf of Tonkin is pretty much what you would get from reading the Wikipedia article and the articles it references:

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

    It was faulty intelligence that was deliberately spun to create a pretext for war.

    Of course the government is not always honest with the people.

    I certainly agree people get carried away with Chemtrails, and that they can get confused about what is real / normal and what isn’t. But, I have seen and still have in my possession a PDF from the council on foreign relations specifically talking about aerosol spraying of particulates into the atmosphere to help combat climate change. This is pretty concrete evidence that this apparent mistaken phenomena is, at least, being discussed by authorities. I would also name Porton Down in the UK as another admission by government to knowledge of / participation in aerial spraying.

    Evidence that people are thinking about something is entirely different from evidence that they are doing it. People SHOULD think about climate modification. But is there any evidence that anyone is actually doing it? Is there any evidence that they are NOT doing it?

    Think about this. If the government were modifying the weather, don’t you think some other government would have noticed, and said something?

    Now, if people are simply misguided/mistaken all over the world at the same time (more or less) in noticing these things exisiting (as I did one peaceful day on the beach as the sky became gridded with lines and then subsequently a huge halo appeared around the sun), then effectively what we are talking about is the biggest, unrelated mass misunderstanding humanity has ever realised. Would you agree with that? I mean it is a world wide misunderstood ‘phenomena’, is it not?

    Take UFOs. Why did people “start noticing” them in the 1950s? Before that when people saw a bird, or a plane, or a weather balloon, did they just not notice it? Was there actually an increase in UFOs in the 1950s? Someone sees something odd in the sky, they normally think little of it, and soon forget it. But if they then hear about this theory as to what made it (aliens for UFOs, secret conspiracy for contrails), then they remember, and looks some more.

    There are perfectly reasonable explanations for the grids and halos you have seen. But for some reason, aliens and conspiracies stick in the brain more than science and common sense. So when the alien UFO theory became popular in the 1950s, then lots of people started seeming them.

    I have seen people looking and pointing at these contrails where they are gridded or spraying on and off ( which as I understand it from your perspective is an atmospheric variation), surely the fact that hundreds of thousands of people in the world noticing this apparently normal phenomena (from your perspective) is indicative of something? There is nothing to be gained from people noticing something new when they are genuinely (and this does appear to be genuine from the people I have discussed it with) intrigued as to a new phenomena they are just discovering. There is no motivation, no money and no respect to be had from at least being intrigued and then disagreeing with those who would tell you that you are mistaken.

    I’ve seen people looking and pointing at unusual clouds. It’s the same thing.

    There are times when it pays dividends to stick to your inner belief of something even when an authority figure or established opinion contradicts you, whilst remaining open to the idea that, at the same time, you could also be wrong.

    “inner belief” sounds a bit like blind faith. Question everything, question authority, question science – but base it on evidence.

  93. SR1419 says:

    There is nothing to be gained from people noticing something new when they are genuinely (and this does appear to be genuine from the people I have discussed it with) intrigued as to a new phenomena they are just discovering

    …except “it” is not new….it has been happening for as long as airplanes have flown high enough….that some people are now noticing it does not make it a “new phenomena”.

    Some people noticed it 30 years ago (and wrote papers about it and took photos)….some people noticed it 10 years ago…and some are just now noticing it….

    …and how many people did not notice it at all until they read it on the internet…or were told to “look up”….I believe the internet plays a large role in the “hyping” of the hysteria, the congregation of like minded people resulting in the validation of beliefs without the encumbering reality of scholarship, evidence or facts.

    “R”- How come You did not notice it until that day at the beach? was that the first day it had ever happened?

  94. stars15k says:

    But, I have seen and still have in my possession a PDF from the council on foreign relations specifically talking about aerosol spraying of particulates into the atmosphere to help combat climate change. This is pretty concrete evidence that this apparent mistaken phenomena is, at least, being discussed by authorities.

    And I have now and have had for the past 5 years a program to create and edit ALL pdfs seamlessly. So I, and anyone else with about $100USD and an Office Depot nearby could take your pdf and make it say anything they wanted. Paper without source, without provenance is absolutely useless.

  95. I think that’s a real CFR paper though – they do think-tank stuff like that.

    http://www.cfr.org/project/1364/geoengineering.html

  96. billybob says:

    Uncinus,

    At least i can be reassured by the fact that it’s obvious most people who post here know you are a disinformation site. I find it very amusing that you reposted a post i made about 3 months ago to something that had nothing to do with the discussion at hand, but i wouldn’t expect anything less from a good disinformation agent. I also find it funny that i have had at least 3 posts that you never posted, and i know why this is, because you had NO answer for my questions at your disposal. I wish you were for real and i wish chemtrails were not real but that is not the reality of the situation.
    And before you say * Which posts of yours did i not post* Gimme a break, like you will ever own up to them..Sheeesh. I’ll keep posting here even if you don’t post my posts if for no other reason than to maybe…(big maybe) that it may jog your conscience enough that you actually regain some kind of conscience and you realise what kind of monsters you are actually working for.

    Billybob

  97. This is not a “disinformation” site. I sincerely believe in everything I write. Nobody pays me, nor can I imagine WHY anyone would. I just find this topic interesting, so I write about it.

    billybob, I understand you have a very different world view to the average person. But I’d appreciate it if you could keep on topic. If you have issues with this site, then please just point them out, with references, and I’ll address them – just keep it to contrails and the “chemtrail” theory. Otherwise it’s not going to be very productive, is it?

  98. SciGuy2012 says:

    -Some people are disinformation agents both solo and employed to do so. Most people will protect the old reality and beliefs to the very end of their being, until official leaders and/or governments say the words “official”, it will always be a conspiracy theory to them, it’s very sad I think. So many of us have forgotten how to think and feel for ourselves, some need to touch something to make it real to themselves, but can u touch love, hate, ego, these things are all real, and can’t necessarily be proven through conventional scientific means.
    When you are being lied to, sometimes u just know it, when someone loves u, sometimes u just know it. Official documents and hard evidence limits us to only one standard of evidence, and anything can be argued practically. U guys would argue the sky being blue or the grass being green if the president said otherwise.
    -SG2012

Comments are closed.