Home » contrails » Contrail Season in Los Angeles

Contrail Season in Los Angeles

For a contrail enthusiast, I picked the wrong place to live. We hardly ever get persistent contrails here in the summer, but things have been picking up a bit as we go into fall, and today we had this:

A very nice triple set of contrails of three planes that, within about 10-15 minutes of each other flew north along the same flight path.  This was taken today, October 26th, 2009, at around 11:20AM in Santa Monica, California, looking east.

It’s actually a 180 degree panoramic shot, the trails are NOT curved, they were straight, and are just distorted because of the nature of the photo (it’s stitched together from about 10 individual images).  It looks a lot stranger in this photo than it did in real-life.

There’s a couple of interesting things about this photo.  Firstly the middle trail peters out on the right of the photo (the south).  This is probably to do with the jet changing altitude.

Secondly there’s a trail in the bottom right corner that crosses the other two at right angles.  This was from a jet that was flying in a westerly direction, probably towards Hawaii.

Note the large amount of Cirrus clouds,  that usually indicates a change in the weather due to a new weather system bringing in a moisture laden front at high altitude.  It’s often a precursor to rain.   Indeed the weather is set to change.  Today in Santa Monica, the high was 83F, tomorrow it drops suddenly to 63F.  Quite a dramatic change

Contrail season in Los Angeles is also the start of the local “Chemtrail” season, where people see these trails, and figure it’s part of some secret government spraying program – not realizing it’s only the weather.

246 thoughts on “Contrail Season in Los Angeles

  1. CTYForganization says:

    This information pertaining to rainfall doesnt necessarily have anything to do with “contrail persistence”.
    Actually to be honest, I look forward to counting the days where there are none….and without fail its the majority of the time. Very few, very very few are the days without a noticeable persistant contrail haze. Not clouds but haze. Not ice crystals…somehow the heat is intensified.
    Sit back and enjoy the kick ass graphics in this educational video:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6yj5q1cfc8

  2. JazzRoc says:

    ccty:

    Very few, very very few are the days without a noticeable persistant contrail haze. Not clouds but haze. Not ice crystals…somehow the heat is intensified.

    Ice crystals is all they can be. The trails fall to the tropopause and beneath it the air becomes warmer and they MUST evaporate.
    The “seed” particle is then liberated. This is normally soot, or an unburnt fuel molecule.
    These will continue to fall, imperceptibly, until they either function once more as a “seed” particle for a water droplet, and possibly rain out…
    Very few of these particles find their way into air samplers, where they almost NEVER find barium or aluminum particle “partners” at all.
    Why is that, do you think?

  3. CTYForganization says:

    No, thats not “all they can be”. No evaporation going on…total whiteout. Even in the summer.
    And yes, if you have a HEPA filter you might detect metal particulate easier. As far as I know there have been plenty of tests…and ongoing.
    What we’re talking about here is more than just “chemtrails” its the very real situation of experimental operations which can augment the earths ionosphere/atmosphere in unforseen ways.
    This is Los Angeles, there is little to any rainfail PERIOD and when the “spray days” are in effect (like the past few actually) there is a WHITE HAZE over everything. I’ve been IN CLOUDS before, I’ve hiked some of the tallest mountains in the US….
    What is going on here is not purely water nor ice crystals.
    If anything because the air quality in LA has gotten BETTER in the past 30 years that should make it so that there should be less and less frequent “persistant contrails”.
    Its not ice crystals.

  4. Contrails, and the contrail haze, form at above 30,000 feet. This has very little connection to the quality of air in Hollywood (400 feet), or even at the top of the highest mountain in the contiguous US (14,500).

    While you’ve been in clouds before, I doubt you’ve been in an ice fog, as that requires -40 degree temperature. Anyway, being in something at 30,000 feet is very different from observing it from 400 feet (six miles below)

    Do you have a link to the lab results of any of these tests? And how did they link them to contrails?

  5. SR1419 says:

    What is going on here is not purely water nor ice crystals.

    You say that…but how do you know?? really??

    60 years of accumulated scientific research from scientists around the world says you are wrong. 60 years of science, eyewitness accounts, and photographs says that contrails can behave exactly has you have filmed, exactly.

    They back it up with physics, innumerable tests, tests in the atmosphere and in the lab, peer review etc…

    And you? You look up at some trails- read on the internet that contrails shouldn’t persist, read some more dubious claims of “contrail samples” from the ground and buy into some fear mongering agenda of the NWO or some such…

    and then claim you “know”.

    How does that work?

  6. Albert A. says:

    To all the dis info agents running this website. You try too hard AND that is where you fail big time.
    To answer SR on his comment why we have pictures from 50 years ago that look like man made clouds. Hmmm maybe you are too young to recall or you do not want to recall this….
    The Ministry of Defence (UK) 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.
    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.
    zinc cadmium sulphide
    e.coli
    bacillus globigii , which mimics anthrax
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience#history-byline

    Thats why we have those pictures.
    Are you happy to hear that the governemt used its people as lab rats? Does that make you feel good? Do you enjoy being an experiment?
    Do you think we are being told the truth? If you think so… you are delusional.

    I am not inclined in calling people names but i will state that you are delusional in thinking you are right and that you have over 60years of research LOL. What research is that?
    Like this government project that i am talking about.. is that in your research?

  7. The biological weapon dispersion tests (which are now quite well known) were low level, very limited in number (only a handful of aerial tests) and looked nothing like these photos:

    http://contrailscience.com/wwii-contrails/

    The 60 years of research mentioned was research into contrails. Actually if you want to push the point it goes back to 1921 with the first discussions in Scientific American:

    http://contrailscience.com/pre-wwii-contrails/

    The end products of complete combustion of gasoline are water vapor
    and carbon dioxide, and it is found that if the water vapor were condensed,
    there would result a little more than 1 gallon of water per
    gallon of gasoline consumed. It was found by Wells and Thuras, in
    studying the fog off the Newfoundland coast (see U. S. Coast Guard ,
    Bull. 5, 1916) that there were 1,200 water droplets of diameter 0.01 mm.
    in a cubic centimeter of air in a dense fog. If we assume that an airplane
    travels 3 miles on a gallon of gasoline (approximately the figure
    given by the Aerial Mail Service) it is possible to show that if only a
    small part – a fourth or fifth – of the water vapor were condensed,
    there would be abundant cloud to produce the effect observed at the
    Argonne Battle. It should be stated, however, that this water vapor
    would have to be discharged into air which was very cold and nearly
    saturated. This seems to be the correct explanation, and is substantiated
    by scientists at the Bureau of Standards, who say that they have
    actually observed this cloud behind airplanes and automobiles. The
    Bureau of Standards is working on a device for condensing and using
    this water aboard dirigibles as ballast.

    So, 89 years of research.

    Also, have a look at some of the older research specifically mentioning persistent contrails:

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=&num=10&as_epq=persistent+contrails&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=1940&as_yhi=1990&as_sdt=1.&as_sdts=5&btnG=Search+Scholar&hl=en

  8. Grub says:

    “What evidence is available that the stratosphere is being injected with welsbach materials?”

    Ahhhhh but what evidence is there that this is not happening? Don’t get me wrong I trust that the science behind contrails is sound (so far). However sometimes you guys make statements in favor of your own argument and exhibit the exact same flaws that as those you argue against. This is just not a good statement. I would recomend that you stick to what you can and can not prove. This goes for both sides! If you can’t back it up then why even talk about the what if’s and the maybe’s?

  9. Suntour says:

    By Grub:
    “Ahhhhh but what evidence is there that this is not happening?”

    The onus is on the chemtrailer to provide proof counter to what science has already determined through 8 decades of observation, testing and studies.

    “The argument from ignorance,[1] also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam (“appeal to ignorance”[1][2]), or negative evidence,[1] is a logical fallacy in which it is claimed that a premise is true only because it has not been proven false, or is false only because it has not been proven true.” – Wikipedia

    Chemtrailers claim that persistent contrails are NOT persistent contrails. They claim that these trails have an evil and sinister purpose, yet they cannot prove that “chemtrails” look, act or ARE any different than normal everyday contrails.

    Contrailers believe that everything is as it should be with respect to persistent contrails. What is their proof? All the science involved points to persistent contrails being the only solution.

  10. beavis says:

    Why bother discussing this with the chem-tards?

    It is not like their third-grade education is enough to grasp basic, established science.

    They are like the teabaggers, “intelligent” designers, flat-earth society, etc. Uneducated and damn proud of it.

    They don’t let things like facts and their lack of education to get in the way of trying to push their insanity.

    “Ahhhhh but what evidence is there that this is not happening?”

    Prove that life does not exist anywhere else in the universe.

    Prove that you are not an idiot.

    You can’t prove a negative.

  11. ctyforg says:

    Well, actually the biggest secret of all, covered up by major “religions” and economic/political powers IS the ancient and extra-terrestrial origins of Human Dna manipulation.

  12. moxaman says:

    The proof is in the pudding as they say. I’d like to know how you can explain away dangerously elevated leves of aluminum, barium, and other metals found in air, water, and soil around areas where persistent contrails have been reported. Take Mt. Shasta, CA for example.

    http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-7958-0-5-5–.html

    I’ve got some standing water on my property that I’m going to get tested, and another group has taken air samples around Los Angeles. Let’s see if these samples show any elevations. If we are being sprayed, they should show some increase in these materials, assuming that is what is being released.

  13. captfitch says:

    just because you post the same “article” three times does make said “article” any more factual.

  14. From the Story:

    Since that time, he has had aluminum tests escalate as high as 50,000 percent to 3,400ug/l. That is literally toxic rain.

    EPA aluminum limits FOR COLOR in drinking water are 200 ug/L – if it’s higher than that then the water would be discolored. You normally consume 5,000ug of aluminum per day, of which about 10ug are absorbed by the body. This is perfectly normal, and comes from the abundance of aluminum in the Earth’s crust.

    http://www.lenntech.com/periodic/water/aluminium/aluminum-and-water.htm

    remember:

    1 mg = 1000 ug
    mg/L = ppm
    ug/L = ppb

    Not understanding these units seems to be the source of confusion in the majority of water tests that people associate with “chemtrails”

  15. moxaman says:

    I posted the article because I wanted to get a response. The article is factual, perhaps my interpretation of it isn’t. Like I said, I’m going to get some standing water tested. I’ll post the results.

  16. You’ve got a response. The article has been explained. They tested groundwater and found exactly what you would expect, within the normal bounds of deviation.

    moxaman, do you understand the difference between milligrams and micrograms? do you know which one is a mg?

  17. captfitch says:

    Maybe the article is factual in that those events may have happened but it paints the views of those who were intereviewed as fact which therefore makes the article at the very least heavily biased. I feel that because it never provided an alternative viewpoint ar at least disclaimed the views of the interviewees the article is therefore useless.

  18. moxaman says:

    How can you say these finding are within “normal limits”. Either the normal limits are extremely dangerous or you are being disingenuous with your reply. A 50,000 % increase in aluminum along with dying insects, fish, and trees isn’t “normal”. What are you talking about??? SOMETHING IS KILLING THE ECOSYSTEM and alkalizing the soil. ALUMINUM WILL DO THIS.

    http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-7958-0-5-5–.html

    At the same time as finding decreased solar power, Wigington also began to witness dramatic changes on his property as the trees, grass, insects and wildlife started dying. This led him to get his first rain test just four years ago. The results were shocking as they found aluminum levels at 7 ug/l or 7 parts per billion. Although aluminum can be found around the world in smaller quantities, geo-hydrologists told him that this number was quite high. Since that time, he has had aluminum tests escalate as high as 50,000 percent to 3,400ug/l. That is literally toxic rain. These results prompted him to get additional pH tests from two USDA soil scientists which yielded more shocking results. The pH of the soil was 6.6 in one area and 7.4 in another. This is over 11 times the normal alkalinity of the soil which should be in the range of 5.0 to 5.5. It is important to note the tests were taken in the forest far removed from any highway or industry.

  19. JazzRoc says:

    Moxaman,

    One of the first thing that acid rain does is leach out ALL metals which form soluble sulphate compounds out of rock and soil. Because you haven’t presented usable figures within all your “astroturf”, it isn’t possible to discern whether you are covering the consequences of acid rain, or not.

    Acid rain results from the sulfur dioxide gas byproducts of ALL fossil fuel combustion, in addition to aviation fuel.

    Seeing as the ratio by weight between the two is around 20 to 1, I hope you are spending twenty times as much effort contacting motor manufacturers and energy suppliers, for what you report certainly appears to be the consequence of acid rain to me..

  20. captfitch says:

    I think you’re totally confused in regards to sampling and measuring.

    I have to hand it to you- you have presented supplimental evidence to support your claims. That’s a large step in the right direction.

    I challenge you to take the next step and find at least two more articles from independent sources that show a definitive change in soil makeup as a result of increased aluminum or Barium. To be acurate the articles should ideally cite locations that are seperated by several states, however, I will accept any articles as long as they don;t originate from the same organization.

  21. I have to hand it to you- you have presented supplimental evidence to support your claims. That’s a large step in the right direction.

    No, he’s just repeatedly posted large chunks of the same article. I’ve deleted the repetition, and replaced with a link.

    The major objection here is that there is nothing at all to link any of these test to contrails. If there was contamination, and it came for contrails, then it would be the same everywhere. There’s nothing special about the Shasta region. So if anything, localized high readings are basically PROOF that that contaminent is not being spread by contrails.

    His article however makes zero sense. It says:

    The results were shocking as they found aluminum levels at 7 ug/l or 7 parts per billion. Although aluminum can be found around the world in smaller quantities, geo-hydrologists told him that this number was quite high.

    Which is nonsense, as 7 ug/L is an incredibly LOW level of aluminum for drinking water. Water only visibly start to be discolored at 200 ug/L. It’s not toxic. How exactly is this “shocking”.

    And then:

    Since that time, he has had aluminum tests escalate as high as 50,000 percent to 3,400ug/l.

    So it went from hardly any, to somewhat above cosmetic standards for drinking water, but not really toxic. The big question here, however, is HOW WAS THIS WATER SAMPLED? And why not publish the lab results? Was it ground water, river water, or rain water? What was the collection procedure? Without that info the results are (even more) meaningless.

    Then:

    The pH of the soil was 6.6 in one area and 7.4 in another. This is over 11 times the normal alkalinity of the soil which should be in the range of 5.0 to 5.5.

    7 is neutral, like for distilled water. Rain ranges from 5 to 6.5, stream water ranges from about 6 to 8. So it kind of depends on where you took the sample, and if it was near a stream, or if it rained recently. But then, the article also says normal alkalinity of the soil which should be in the range of 5.0 to 5.5

    But 5.0 is ACID, not alkaline, and a range of 6.6 to 7.4 is basically neutral. In fact, wikipedia says:

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

    A pH level of around 6.3-6.8 is also the optimum range preferred by most soil bacteria, although fungi, moulds, and anaerobic bacteria have a broader tolerance and tend to multiply at lower pH values. Therefore, more acidic soils tend to be susceptible to souring and putrefaction, rather than undergoing the sweet decay processes associated with the decay of organic matter, which immeasurably benefit the soil. These processes also prefer near-neutral conditions.

    Examples of plant preferences

    Acid soil of pH 4.5-5.0 Some plants will not tolerate higher pH such as Blueberry, Bilberry, Heather, Cranberry, Orchid, Azalea, for blue Hydrangea (less acidic for pink) , Sweet Gum, Pin Oak.
    Acid soil of pH 5.0 – 5.5 Plants for acid soil in this range include Parsley, Potato, Tomato, Heather, Conifers, Pine, Sweet Potato, Maize, Millet, Oars, Tye, Radish, Ferns, Iris, Orchids, Rhododendron, Camellia, Daphne and Boronia.
    Acid soil of pH 5.5 – 6.0 Plants for a moderately acid soil include Bean, Brussels Sprouts, Carrot, Choko, Endive, Kohl Rabi, Peanuts, Rhubarb, Soyabean, Crimson Clover, Aster, Begonia, Canna, Daffodil, Jonquil, Larkspur, Petunia, Primrose, Violet and most bulbs.
    Acid soil of pH 6.0 – 6.5 Plants that prefer this soil include Broccoli, Cabbage, Cauliflower, Cucumber, Egg Plant, Pea, Sweet Corn, Pumpkin, Squash, Turnip, Red Clover, Sweet Clover, White Clover, Candytuft, Gladiolus, Iceland Poppy, Pansy, Rose, Snapdragon, Viola, Wallflower, Zinnea and Strawberry.
    Acid soil of pH 6.5 – 7.0 Plants that favor very mildly acid soil are Asparagus, Beet, Celery, Lettuce, Melons, Onion, Parsnip, Spinach, Lucerne, Carnation, Chrysanthemum, Dahlia, Stock, Sweet Pea and Tulip.

    So where exactly is he getting that the pH is outside of a normal range?

    So if you want to continue this line of inquiry, you need to do two thing:

    1) explain how it is linked to contrails if the results are localized.
    2) show how the samples are gathered, the lab results, and reference sources for “normal” levels.

  22. captfitch says:

    I wasn’t implying that his evidence was valid but at least he came to the table with SOMETHING. I’m curious if he can answer your two questions.

    I’m also encouraged by the fact that his “evidence” isn’t simply his own two eyes which leads me to believe that there may be chance he could be open to a reasoned discussion. Plus he hasn’t yelled or insulted us like CTYforg and others have in the past.

  23. Yeah, it’s good to have some actual figures to chew on. Science is largely in the numbers.

    Oh, and another number:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts22.html

    The average adult in the U.S. eats about 7-9 mg aluminum per day in their food.

    That’s 7,000 to 9,000 ug, normally, in your food

    So what’s this about climbers in Shasta drinking the water and getting poisoned?

    For lots of numbers, moxaman, if you REALLY want to get into it, see:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22.html

    Especially part 6:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22-c6.pdf

    And 7:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22-c7.pdf

    Because of the ubiquitous nature of aluminum, contamination is a major problem encountered in the analysis of aluminum by all methods except accelerator mass spectroscopy (AMS) using radioactive 26Al. When using the other methods, all items used during collection, preparation, and assay should be checked for aluminum contribution to the procedure. Only by taking these stringent precautions will one be able to produce accurate results.

  24. moxaman says:

    If aluminum is “ubiquitous” it’s because of contamination from pollution… aluminum is found normally only under the ground, not in the air. Only micro trace amounts are found normally in food, air, or water. If there is more it is from a pollution source. I’m in the process of getting standing water tested. I’ll let you know what it contains with regards to aluminum and barium. Air samples are being tested by someone else and I will publish those as well. Funny, but I don’t ever remember seeing persistent contrails in the 20+ years I’ve been living in the LA area. Are there suddenly so many new jets in the skies with their new style engines that emit these vapors? Has the weather changed so much in the last month or two to cause these persistent contrails to suddenly appear? I HIGHLY DOUBT IT.

  25. moxaman says:

    http://www.longevinst.org/nlt/newsletter6.htm

    Aluminum compounds in Food

    Since Aluminum is the third most abundant element in the earth’s crust, it should not come as a surprise that Aluminum is found in all plants and living organisms. All food contains Aluminum. Table two presents a list of usual food with their aluminum content expressed in micrograms of elemental aluminum per one hundred grams of edible product. Again in food (like in nature) aluminum does not exist as metal. In food aluminum is part of aluminum sulfate or aluminum oxide or other totally harmless compounds.

    Food Names Aluminum in Microgram (µg) per 100 g Edible Product Food Names Aluminum in Microgram (µg) per 100 g Edible Product
    Raw Milk 110 Yogurt 150
    Parmesan 2,000 Cottage Cheese 190
    Grapefruit 100 Avocados 390
    Apple 21 Melons 23
    Artichoke 110 Tomatoes 45
    Radish 260 Broccoli 79
    Spinach 970 Brussels Sprouts 420
    Rice 110 Corn 350
    Corn Flakes 410 Potatoes 110
    Brown Sugar 410 White Refined Sugar 42
    White Bread 220 Rye Bread 290
    Tuna Fresh 79 Cod 52
    Abalone 230 Mussels 27,000
    Krill 6,300 Beef 100
    Chicken Breast 110 Bacon 60

    Table 2: Aluminum content of some food in micrograms per 100 grams of edible product Source: Table of Trace Element Contents in Japanese Foodstuffs

    [ Top ]

    Aluminum in Drinking Water

    Alum (aluminum sulfate) is most widely used because it is effective, readily available, and relatively inexpensive. Aluminum sulfate in water produces Aluminum hydroxide (L), a gelatinous insoluble compound that sinks slowly removing waterborne micro-organisms (bacteria, viruses, protozoa) and other small particles.

    However, under some circumstances, or if not used properly, aluminum compounds used in water treatment can result in residual aluminum (metal) in finished drinking water.

    The EPA has set the maximum acceptable level of aluminum (metal) in freshwater at 750 micrograms par liter

    OK, so the MAXIMUM acceptable levels are 750ug/liter. I’m going to wait and see what my standing water shows. If indeed aluminum is a product in these contrails then I would suspect the levels to be higher. BTW… that 750mcg/liter is far too high IMO. Aluminum has no known nutritional use in the body.

  26. Can you quote a reference to back up your assertion that Al is not found in the air? Because the the CDC’s toxicology profile says:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22-c6.pdf

    6.4.1 Air
    There are varying levels of aluminum in the atmosphere, depending on the location of the sampling site, meteorologic conditions, and the level of industrial activity or traffic in the area. Aluminum levels are expected to be low in areas influenced by the ocean and high in areas with wind-blown soil. Background concentrations of aluminum in the atmosphere generally range from 0.005 to 0.18 μg/m3

    and please read section 6.5 of that report, and then explain your definition of “micro trace amounts”

    The last month has had a lot of contrail weather in the LA area. But that’s all that it is – unusual weather. We get unusual weather all the time (relatively speaking). Every 20 years, one year has the most unusual weather in those 20 years. Remember when it snowed in LA in 1989? Had something changed then? No – just unusual weather. Some years you get massive hail storms, some years you don’t. Some years you get lots of contrails, some years you don’t.

  27. OK, so the MAXIMUM acceptable levels are 750ug/liter. I’m going to wait and see what my standing water shows. If indeed aluminum is a product in these contrails then I would suspect the levels to be higher. BTW… that 750mcg/liter is far too high IMO. Aluminum has no known nutritional use in the body.

    What you need to do is compare it to historical samples of standing water, like from 1970:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22-c6.pdf

    Aluminum was detected at dissolved aluminum concentrations ranging from 0.001 to 2.760 mg/L with a mean concentration of 0.074 mg/L in 456 of 1,577 raw surface water samples collected during a 5-year survey at various locations across the United States (DOI 1970). Dissolved aluminum concentrations were detected in about 48% of the 380 finished drinking waters sampled and ranged from 0.003 to
    1.6 mg/L with a mean of 0.179 mg/L (DOI 1970).

    So that’s a range of 1 to 2,760 ug/L, in 1970.

    You’ve still not explained how isolated high levels of aluminum can be tied to contrails. Why would the levels not be the same everywhere?

  28. JazzRoc says:

    moxaman:

    Only micro trace amounts are found normally in food, air, or water.

    Not really “micro trace amounts”, eh?

    Raw Milk 110 Yogurt 150 Parmesan 2,000 Cottage Cheese 190 Grapefruit 100 Avocados 390 Apple 21 Melons 23 Artichoke 110 Tomatoes 45 Radish 260 Broccoli 79 Spinach 970 Brussels Sprouts 420 Rice 110 Corn 350 Corn Flakes 410 Potatoes 110 Brown Sugar 410 White Refined Sugar 42 White Bread 220 Rye Bread 290 Tuna Fresh 79 Cod 52 Abalone 230 Mussels 27,000 Krill 6,300 Beef 100 Chicken Breast 110 Bacon 60

    Nice to see education in action. Way to go with those mussels…

    In food aluminum is part of aluminum sulfate or aluminum oxide or other totally harmless compounds.

    Aluminum oxide is a hard white insoluble grit used for sanding papers. Aluminum sulfate, on the other hand, is SOLUBLE in water, and quite poisonous. Yet it is used by water companies to purify water, as you mention. “ALUM” – a hydrated aluminum sulfate is a solid block (looking like a piece of glass) I have used back in the days when safety razors weren’t so safe (or sharp) – as a styptic agent. It causes blood to congeal and clot.

    SO keep on with the learning process. If I were you I wouldn’t pause for a decade or two.

  29. moxaman says:

    Uncinus… of course there will be aluminum in the air… due to POLLUTION. It isn’t “naturally” found in the air. I suspect most (not all) of the aluminum inhabiting vegetables and other foods (like mussels for instance) is the result of industrial/aviational air and water pollution and the ability of the organism to extract aluminum from its source.

  30. moxaman says:

    Air quality test results from Phoenix, AZ. Aluminum, Barium, and other metals exceed safety limits.

    http://www.rense.com/general82/chemit.htm

  31. You know it would be very helpful if you read the links I gave you. Chapter 6, for the third time:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22-c6.pdf

    Aluminum is released to the environment by both natural processes and anthropogenic sources. Because of its prominence as a major constituent of the earth’s crust, natural processes far exceed the contribution of anthropogenic [human caused] releases to the environmental distribution of aluminum (Lantzy and MacKenzie 1979). Anthropogenic releases are primarily to the atmosphere. The largest source of airborne aluminum- containing particulates is the flux of dust from soil and the weathering of rocks (Lee and Von Lehmden 1973; Sorenson et al. 1974). In addition, aluminum-containing dust is generated by volcanic activity (Varrica et al. 2000). Human activities, such as mining and agriculture, contribute to this wind-blown dust (Eisenreich 1980; Filipek et al. 1987). About 13% of atmospheric aluminum is attributed to anthropogenic emissions (Lantzy and MacKenzie 1979).

    13% is pollution. 87% is natural.

    The Phoenix results are another example of not understanding units. In this case though they confuse the concentration in a few grams of solid matter with the concentration in over a tonne of air, making their results thousands of times too high (so high that if they were true, everyone would be dead). This is all fully explained here:

    http://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-non-science/

  32. captfitch says:

    All this info is fantastic. I was trying to look into this today but I was flying all day and didn’t get a chance.

    Moxaman- Do you believe that aluminum is a natural byproduct of aviation or do you believe that aluminum is being released on purpose? And if it is being released on purpose what is the distribution method?

  33. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    OK, so the MAXIMUM acceptable levels are 750ug/liter. I’m going to wait and see what my standing water shows. If indeed aluminum is a product in these contrails then I would suspect the levels to be higher. BTW… that 750mcg/liter is far too high IMO. Aluminum has no known nutritional use in the body.

    Don’t forget that’s maximum level for FRESHWATER.

    I would suspect the levels of pretty much any kind of pollutant to be higher in your standing water than in freshwater.

    If you found dog pee in it would you then assume that aircraft are spraying dog pee?

    Anything you find in that water, you have no idea where it came from.

  34. captfitch says:

    If you found dog pee in it would you then assume that aircraft are spraying dog pee?

    You just said the absolute best thing I have ever read on this fourm!!!! EVER!!!

    Epic!!

  35. JazzRoc says:

    Uncinus:

    You know it would be very helpful if you read the links I gave you. Chapter 6, for the third time:

    http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp22-c6.pdf

    That’s a marvellous resource. I especially liked this:

    While the intake of aluminum is mainly through the ingestion of food and drinking water, inhalation of ambient air represents a small contribution to an individual’s exposure to aluminum.
    Background concentrations of aluminum in the atmosphere generally range from 0.005 to 0.18 μg/m3 in the United States.
    If the inhalation rate is taken to be 20 m3/day, then the total amount of aluminum obtained from inhalation of 0.18 μg/m3 would be 3.6 μg/day, suggesting that ambient air is not normally a major exposure pathway for aluminum.
    This is negligible compared with the estimated dietary intake for adults of 7–9 mg/day.
    However, the aluminum content of air in urban and industrial areas has been reported to be considerable higher, ranging from 0.4 to 8.0 μg/m3.
    If the inhalation rate is taken to be 20 m3/day, then the total amount of aluminum inhaled would range from 8 to 160 μg/day, which is still negligible compared with the aluminum intake from dietary sources.
    Dusts arising from soil, especially in industrial or agricultural areas, and from the metal surfaces of air conditioners can contain large amounts of aluminum, resulting in high localized concentrations and, subsequently, in higher exposures.
    Typically, however, for the general population, inhalation is likely to be less important as an exposure pathway than is dietary exposure to aluminum, but may represent a source of greater exposure in some urban environments
    “.

  36. moxaman says:

    Socialist Deputy Erik Meijer submits to European Parliament

    European Parliament: question on aircraft condensation trails which no longer only contain water

    Strasbourg, France
    By Erik Meijer
    to the Commission

    Subject: aircraft condensation trails which no longer only contain water but cause persistent milky veils, possibly due to the presence of barium, aluminium and iron

    1) Is the Commission aware that, since 1999, members of the public in Canada and the USA have been complaining about the growing presence in the air of aircraft condensation trails of a new type, which sometimes persist for hours and which spread far more widely than in the past, creating milky veils which are dubbed ‘aerial obscuration’, and that the new type has particularly come to people’s attention because it is so different from the short, pencil-thin white contrails which have been a familiar sight ever since jet engines came into use and which remain visible for 20 minutes at most and can only be produced if steam condenses on dust particles due to low temperatures and high humidity?

    2) Is the Commission aware that investigations by these complainants, observations by pilots and statements by government bodies increasingly suggest that what is happening is that aircraft are emitting into dry air small particles consisting of barium, aluminium and iron, a phenomenon which in public debate in America has come to be known as chemtrails?

    3) Unlike contrails, chemtrails are not an inevitable by-product of modern aviation. Does the Commission know, therefore, what is the purpose of artificially emitting these Earth-derived substances into the Earth’s atmosphere? Does it help to cause rain, benefit telecommunications or combat climate change?

    4) To what extent are aerial obscuration and chemtrails now also being employed in the air over Europe, bearing in mind that many people here too are now convinced that the phenomenon is becoming increasingly common and are becoming concerned about the fact that little is so far known about it and there is no public information on the subject? Who initiates this spraying and how is it funded?

    5) Apart from the intended benefits of emitting substances into the air, is the Commission aware of any possible disadvantages it may have for the environment, public health, aviation and TV reception?

    6) What is being done to prevent individual European states or businesses from taking measures unilaterally whose crossborder impact other States or citizens’ organisations may regard as undesirable? Is coordination already taking place with regard to this? Is the EU playing a part in it, or does the Commission anticipate a future role, and what are the Commission’s objectives in this connection?”. (Avionews)
    (006)

    http://www.avionews.com/index.php?corpo=see_news_home.php&news_id=1077601&pagina_chiamante=index.php

  37. Why do you post the question, but not the answer?

  38. moxaman says:

    Weatherman confirming “chaff” being sprayed over Klamath Falls area.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XS8ahQgy5hM

  39. JazzRoc says:

    Moxaman:

    Weatherman confirming “chaff” being sprayed over Klamath Falls area.

    CHAFF is SOLID.

    You can no more “spray” chaff than you could “spray” teaspoons.

    It is made of metal-plated fibres just over an inch long. They are insoluble and non-poisonous, and break no regulations.

    All they do is confuse weathermen – and YOU.

  40. Steve says:

    It’s sad to see how this Chemtrail movement has grown. Here’s the latest example by the same guy that wrote the “What in the world are they spraying” article that you completely showed to be false. I’ve tried to explain the facts about contrails to this guy and now I’m being accused of helping the “corporate political elite who are making millions from this agenda. It’s kinda scarry how ill informed they are about contrails and misguided in their attempt at waking people up to the new global threat of “Chemtrails”.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsWpSPBwA-w

  41. moxaman says:

    Yes, it is scary. Especially when you read that ecosystems are dying, animals are dying, and humans are getting sick. Much of the evidence is anecdotal, I’ll admit, but SOMETHING is causing these living things to wither and die. Here is a recent example of this from pristine New Zealand.

    http://www.mysteriousnewzealand.co.nz/chemtrails/chemtrailsbettyrowe.html

    S

  42. Steve says:

    Follow up article showing Aluminum levels in Shasta water supply below normal with no or only trace amounts of Aluminum found.
    http://www.mtshastanews.com/news/x1176011800/New-tests-find-trace-or-no-aluminum-in-area-water

  43. Thanks Steve. Unfortunately confirmation bias automatically kicks in for many theorists. If tests support your theory then they are correct, but if they disprove your theory, then they are part of the conspiracy.

  44. That NZ article is interesting. I like this bit:

    Betty had told us that she had first seen Chemtrails in the year 2000, 28 years after she and husband Walt first came to the island in 1972. We began the interview by asking Betty if she remembered the first one she saw…

    BR: Oh yes. Oh completely yes. Sitting on the couch out there looking out the front window, and of course, the bay. I had read an article about them, oh, several days before that. There had been an article in a magazine (Ghost Riders in the Sky, Investigate Magazine, December 2000), I read the article with interest and noted the pictures and so forth. Then several days later as I say, we were sitting on the couch looking out across the bay and low and behold, there they were. I said to my husband ‘this is exactly what I just read about’. I went and got the article and the pictures and we compared and sure enough… That was the first time I saw them.

    MNZ: Though they could have been there before that…

    BR: Exactly.

    MNZ: But you just didn’t notice them?

    BR: Well probably not. Or I would have probably thought like so many people do, that they’re just air traffic, contrails – and so forth. But having just read that article I immediately thought that this is the same thing I just read about. And I’ve seen them regularly since then. On a regular basis. Sometimes every day, every single day. Even Christmas Day.

    At least she’s being honest about it. Most theorists say that if they don’t remember seeing them it was because they were not there. It’s clear Betty only noticed them because she read an article about them. If only other chemtrail theorists could make this connection.

  45. captfitch says:

    I love it when I learn a fact about something that you see everyday and never realize. I can’t think of any good example right now.

  46. moxaman says:

    Funny how the persistent contrails have all but disappeared over LA recently. The weather has been all over the map… 80’s and dry to 60’s and damp. Clouds or clear… no contrails. Why is that? The weather is idnentical to days when I witnessed these things for many weeks in a row. Now nothing. Are you all going to tell me the weather has changed… it hasn’t. Explain that one.

  47. moxaman says:

    This comment from the recent Mt. Shasta tests.

    WATER TESTING

    5) Lets look at the question of testing, the procedures and tests results. Regarding the over 40 water tests performed by both Siskiyou and Shasta County residents, all testing followed recommended laboratory protocol and the waters tested did not come into contact with any aluminum containers or lids. In regards to the discrepancies found between our group and that of the governments testing mentioned in your paper, what they tested and how they tested could very well produce false-negative results.

    First of all, when we approached the Mt. Shasta City Council, we never asked for the underground wells or spring waters to be tested. Why would we? Aluminum typically has not been found in most underground wells or springs in our state. So those four tests were a waste of taxpayers money. I found it interesting that those tests were performed despite this fact.

    In regards to the 3 ponds, I can only suggest that because they were not rubber lined and the fact that aluminum does eventually settle to the bottom, unless those ponds were agitated, it could very well produce a false negative result. In regards to the creeks and lake, the settling factor of aluminum may be a reason that not much aluminum was found. Of the 40 tests our group took, most all were sampled from either rain or snowpack waters. Here are the latest aluminum tests results our group took in April of this year: Shastice snowpack sampled: 1540 ug/l; Mt. Shasta City rainwater samples: 850 ug/l & 41 ug/l.

    GOVERNMENT BLAMES ALUMINUM SPIKES ON THE GOBI AND SAHARA DESERTS

    6) As for NASAs study, which suggest that the aluminum spikes are coming from storm drifts from the Gobi and Sahara deserts, I have a few concerns:

    a) Mr. Chetelat, the Redding California RWQCB geologist, who was quoted in your paper,
    pointed to the NASA study, suggesting aluminum and storm drifts were the cause of any spikes
    in aluminum levels. Although, according to a trusted source, the NASA study is nowhere to be
    found. I plan to call Mr. Chetelat on Monday and see if he can provide me with that study. I
    encourage your paper to do the same.

    b) Did not desert storms occur before 1990? Rosalind Peterson Co-founder of Agriculture Defense Coalition and former USDA Agriculture Crop Loss Adjustor, researched California State Department of Health Drinking Water data between 1984 and 2008.

    According to Peterson, Prior to 1990, these spikes [of aluminum and barium] were not evident in many drinking water tests results (most tests results were -0-). Why?

    c) Also, according to Peterson, The California Air Resources Board flew over toxic clouds in the Pacific, [that were identified coming from China] and aluminum and barium were not listed in toxic elements found. See: http://www.californiaskywatch.com

    Citizens concerned about aluminum contamination and where it may be coming from, should google, Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base. These toxic weather modification schemes, which claim will mitigate the effects of global warming, have been in the planning stages (and funded by Congress) since the early 1990s. Powerful corporate and government interests are now openly promoting, injecting our skies with tons of these fine aluminum particulates, hoping that it will serve as a sunscreen for the earths surfaces. Some believe these are mad science schemes. Science Daily reported, that a Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory study showed, that this type of manipulation of our weather could very well lead to droughts. The National Center for Atmospheric Research study showed, that it could damage of fragile ozone layers. See Science Daily articles: Geoengineering Could Slow Down Global Water Cycle at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/search/?keyword=geoengineering+and+drought and Stratospheric Injections To Counter Global Warming Could Damage Ozone Layer at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080424140407.htm
    Citizens from all NATO countries are waking up to the fact that they have been experimented upon for at least a decade. Many believe that the fallout from these toxic aerosol programs is disastrous to our health, our environment and our economy.

    My hope with this letter is that it will stimulate more questions and interests in you and your colleagues at the Mt. Shasta Herald, so that it may give you a fuller understanding about these very important ongoing health and environmental concerns.

    Sincerely,
    Rose Taylor

    P.S. For those who want to deny that aluminum doesn’t effect our brains please see the Discovery Magazine’s article in attachment. A neuropathologist who swears there is a direct link between aluminum and Alzheimer’s and other neurological disorders. It is a compelling read of how scientists like himself who discovered very strong links between aluminum and Alzheimer’s years ago, have had their research thwarted (lack of funding) over the years. His most important discovering so far, is that research shows a very strong connection between aluminum aerosols and its ability to pass through the blood brain barrier. Those who know that these chemtrails (that are so noticeable in our mountain skies) are real, will also realize that injecting tons of fine particulate aluminum oxide into our skies is either, arrogantly insane or worst just plain malevolent. See: attachment or http://discovermagazine.com/1992/sep/alzheimersstepch102

  48. The weather in LA has changed, it’s been cold, windy, and sometimes raining. A number of storms have rolled through. It’s been very different to March’s weather.

  49. Can you give a link to the source of that Shasta info? I’d like to see A) the testing procedure, B) the full test results for ALL test, C) the evidence that links it to persistent contrails.

    Oh, and D) the reason why it’s only in Shasta, when persistent contrails are everywhere.

  50. moxaman says:

    Uncinus… nonsense. The weather is identical to the weather a month ago. Some days cold and dry, others cold and damp or cloudy, and others sunny and warm… JUST LIKE A MONTH AGO. Temp is identical too. Only difference is there are NO persistent contrails. None.

  51. moxaman says:

    uncinus… sure. Here’s the link… scroll down to the comments section.

    http://www.mtshastanews.com/news/x1176011800/New-tests-find-trace-or-no-aluminum-in-area-water

  52. I read that. It does not answer any of my questions. I’d like to see A) the testing procedure, B) the full test results for ALL test, C) the evidence that links it to persistent contrails.

  53. JazzRoc says:

    moxaman:

    Here’s the link… scroll down to the comments section. http://www.mtshastanews.com/news/x1176011800/New-tests-find-trace-or-no-aluminum-in-area-water

    The LAST comment is nearly a year old. Hasn’t the topic died there?

    New-tests-find-trace-or-no-aluminum-in-area-water

    Who did? What group was that? Does it matter?

  54. moxaman says:

    Uncinus… it is virtually impossible to prove that elevated levels of anything come from contrails… unless you have a plane trailing behind the jet scooping the material up to measure it just isn’t feasable. The FACT is persistent contrails were seen almost daily up until a month ago. The weather remains IDENTICAL in temperature and humidity. Why have they suddenly disappeared???

  55. moxaman says:

    German scientist EXPOSES chemtrails as secret military operations.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg8hcTQlH5I&NR=1

  56. uncommonsense says:

    Why do debunkers use math and science to make their points, while conspiracy theorists use insults?

  57. moxaman says:

    I’m not using math and science, I’m using my eyes. My eyes tell me that persistent contrails have all but disappeared over Los Angeles over the last 3 – 4 weeks. Prior to that the sky was filled with them on a daily basis. The weather has remained the same. Same temps, same humidity. Why have they suddenly disappeared?

  58. captfitch says:

    What has the upper level weather been doing over the last few weeks? I could care less what you feel on the ground- especially in CA.

  59. moxaman says:

    CTYForg,

    Thank you for that. It was very informative. Of course the folks on here will debunk it, saying it’s normal for aluminum levels to be 61 times normal levels on snow, or the change in soil PH is due to something else entirely etc. In the meantime ecosystems are dying, animals and fish are dying, and it remains difficult to prove that chemtrails (persistent contrails) are the cause.

  60. 61 times normal is not normal.

    But what’s the expected variance? Is it normal to have localized maxima? Or is it normal for poor collection methodology to result in inaccurate results?

    Why don’t they write this up? It’s hard to follow on video. Where is the raw data and the descriptions of the collection methodology?

  61. CTYForg says:

    @ moxaman
    Hit me up through youtube etc if you are in LA (youtube.com/ctyforg)

    I have many years photo/video now. Sadly there are persistent contrails year round in many types of weather over LA. Flight traffic, newer engines and most likely changes in the earth/troposphere itself have made the problem of persistent contrails, aerosol pollution (chemtrails) far worse in the past 10-20 years.

    I dont know what to say, but i have noticed persistent trails over LA during the past month…its just that there has been more humidity/overcast rainy weather…but they’re there still. Its a major problem, depending on how much of an environmentalist/spiritualist you are.
    Uncinus is no one to care about, so dont waste time arguing, just learn and pay attention.

  62. Moxaman says:

    My eyes tell me that persistent contrails have all but disappeared over Los Angeles over the last 3 – 4 weeks. Prior to that the sky was filled with them on a daily basis. The weather has remained the same. Same temps, same humidity. Why have they suddenly disappeared?

    CTYForg says:

    i have noticed persistent trails over LA during the past month…its just that there has been more humidity/overcast rainy weather…but they’re there still.

    Hey, I’ve seen them too. There’s less of them, but the weather has changed, it’s been very cold, especially over here on the West Side.

    But Moxaman says the weather has not changed. There seems to be some dispute as to degree, etc.

    Perhaps this tells us something about individual observations?

  63. uncommonsense says:

    RE: Perhaps this tells us something about individual observations?

    If you don’t have all the answers. the human mind will fill in the blanks with preexisting information in the brain to gain closure. It’s why children see the boogie man in the dark. I really appreciate both sides of this argument on contrails or chemtrails. Everyone is trying to shed some light on this otherwise cloudy prison planet.

    From Plato, The Republic

    [Socrates] And now, I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature is enlightened or unenlightened: –Behold! human beings living in a underground cave, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all along the cave; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets.
    [Glaucon] I see.
    [Socrates] And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all sorts of vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stone and various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of them are talking, others silent.
    [Glaucon] You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners.
    [Socrates] Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave?
    [Glaucon] True, he said; how could they see anything but the shadows if they were never allowed to move their heads?
    [Socrates] And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would only see the shadows?
    [Glaucon] Yes, he said.
    [Socrates] And if they were able to converse with one another, would they not suppose that they were naming what was actually before them?
    [Glaucon] Very true.
    [Socrates] And suppose further that the prison had an echo which came from the other side, would they not be sure to fancy when one of the passers-by spoke that the voice which they heard came from the passing shadow?
    [Glaucon] No question, he replied.
    [Socrates] To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images.
    [Glaucon] That is certain.
    [Socrates] And now look again, and see what will naturally follow if the prisoners are released and disabused of their error. At first, when any of them is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand up and turn his neck round and walk and look towards the light, he will suffer sharp pains; the glare will distress him, and he will be unable to see the realities of which in his former state he had seen the shadows; and then conceive some one saying to him, that what he saw before was an illusion, but that now, when he is approaching nearer to being and his eye is turned towards more real existence, he has a clearer vision, -what will be his reply? And you may further imagine that his instructor is pointing to the objects as they pass and requiring him to name them, -will he not be perplexed? Will he not fancy that the shadows which he formerly saw are truer than the objects which are now shown to him?

    So… Have you seen the light or are you still in chains?

  64. uncommonsense says:

    Sorry… too deep?

  65. JazzRoc says:

    uncommonsense:

    Sorry… too deep?

    No. Too recent.

  66. I like the Allegory of the Cave, as it very eloquently describes the role of science in the world. Our observations, our models, and our interpretations are necessarily indirect inferences, always with potential for error and room for improvement. Science helps us find the best representation of reality – that which most closely matches the observations. It lets you break the chains.

    Unfortunately a lot of people take it to mean “since my interpretation of the world differs from that of most people, then mine must be correct, for I have left the cave”.

    Here’s the Cave in claymation.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4XXItJYFKA&feature=player_embedded#!

  67. CTYForg says:

    mas y mas y mas….
    I’ve really gotta make some chemtrail t-shirts…they’d sell like hotcakes…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCL6zdq0_t4

  68. y más ¿qué? Mas people saying things about contrails that are factually wrong: “the most they have ever been know to last is 20 minutes”. Can you actually back that up?

  69. Feb.5, 2010 Got Blue? Weather Modz/Los Angeles Crimes
    Persistent Contrail=Climate Change
    This is what I SAW.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uMuK-cW2is

  70. How about the last few days?

    Pay careful attention over the summer. I’ve arranged for most of the contrails to be removed, which should warm things up.

    Statistics are your friend here.

  71. JazzRoc says:

    It’s warmed up here in the Canary Isles too, with cirrus uncinus horsetails from zenith to horizon.
    Cutting through them are the single hourly overflights between S. America and Europe.
    A GRILL, so-to-speak, rather than a “grid”, for there are NO N. America to S. Africa flights.
    These trails (the largest I’ve seen over here) have spread miles…
    But it’s breezy, warm (in the sun) and hazy, a beautiful day for a swim – except the Atlantic’s at its coldest right now.

  72. Steve says:

    Here’s a Youtube channel dedicated to making Chemtrail videos. Insane.
    http://www.youtube.com/user/Truthmediaproduction#p/u

  73. That’s some dedication. Makes you wonder.

    I like how in one of the videos he’s accosting people outside the scientology building. The guy actually reminds me of a scientologist.

  74. Steve says:

    More insanity. Article found on Rense and David Icke. http://rense.com/general90/metc.htm

  75. JazzRoc says:

    Steve, thanks for the humor. It was a blast, all the way from “What is not addressed in this increase in dementia is the more than 10 years of breathing Chemtrails with nano aluminum-coated fiberglass. Billions of tons have been sprayed on us.” – all the way to Hildegarde Fatbum.
    David Icke I owe most of my readership to, despite fighting in the trenches there for a mere THREE DAYS.
    Well, you really can’t argue with the fact that the buggers are mad, can you? LOL

  76. moxaman says:

    Weatherman admits military spraying the skies. He’s wrong about the chaff though… unless they put it in jet fuel itself.

    http://www.noonehastodietomorrow.com/agenda/weather-modification/2259

  77. Why is he wrong about the chaff bit? Chaff has a distinct effect on radar (obviously, as that what it was designed to do), so that’s why it shows up on the weather radar like that. Contrails don’t show up on regular weather radar.

  78. JazzRoc says:

    moxaman:

    He’s wrong about the chaff though

    Very amusing. Further proof that chemtrailers are “miswired” in such a way as to ALWAYS get their facts wrong.
    I’m waiting for the “programming” argument to be applied to XMAS TINSEL. It, like chaff, is aluminized paper, glass, or plastic.
    Why don’t you argue that the “conspiracy” has existed since the invention of “Father Christmas” and the Christmas Tree?
    TINSEL being the obvious precursor to CHAFF… isn’t obvious to you that the devilish PTB set a high value on our acceptance of CHAFF, so much so that TINSEL was created a hendred and twenty years ago to fool us.
    Those fifty thousand year old reptiles know a thing or two by now…
    Oh, and by the way, passing either CHAFF or TINSEL though a jet engine would ruin its function: the material has a set LENGTH which is TUNED to the wavelength of the operating radar beam.
    I can’t imagine aluminized film or whisker lasting a fraction of a second at 1100 degrees Centigrade, can you?

  79. I think moxaman views this as a partial admission, with the following logic:

    A) The conspiracy theory states that the government sprays something that creates unusual persistent contrails.
    B) The government has admitted to spraying things
    C) Therefore, the theory is correct.

    That’s kind of like:

    A) The conspiracy theory states that the Mafia killed JFK
    B) The mafia have admitted to killing people
    C) Therefore the theory is correct.

    Except the second example is actually more accurate, as JFK was actually killed. There’s not actually any evidence that the persistent contrails people see are anything unusual. So a closer example would be:

    A) The conspiracy theory states that the CIA abducted Obama and replaced him with an alien
    B) The CIA has admitted to abducting people
    C) Therefore the theory is correct.

  80. Steve says:

    More insanity, article claiming Monsanto has designed a seed to resist the harmful effects of Chemtrails. http://farmwars.info/?p=2927 Interview with Mike Murphy also worth listening to just for the complete fear mongering he puts out. This is the website that is producing his video production.http://www.realityzone.com/currentperiod.html I hope anyone who understands the true science of contrail formation can make a comment on these two sites to bring some sanity back. I would like to laugh it off but these “chemtrailers” are starting to alarm people worldwide to something that just doesn’t exist so it needs to be resisted with reason based on science.

  81. JazzRoc says:

    Steve, I’ve been to the first link and left a comment. Just a drop in the bucket… 🙁

  82. JazzRoc says:

    …and what I see is that it wasn’t published. Only posts where people are SURE that there is Al and Ba in trails get their comments published there.

  83. Steve says:

    I know, I had the same problem. Some Chem-trail youtube videos will also ban you if you try to explain what a persistent contrail is. It’s really just a cult, with cult rules.

  84. CTYForg says:

    but guys, if its some sort of “cult” what is the agenda. I mean really… I’ve never seen one person wearing a “chemtrail” t-shirt. So what gives?

  85. What cults HAVE you seen wearing t-shirts?

    I have actually seen a couple of chemtrail bumper stickers.

    It’s not really a cult though. It’s LIKE a cult, in that dissent and reasoned discussion is often not tolerated. There’s no agenda (except perhaps for the snake oil salesmen), there’s just a set of fixed false beliefs. Science and reason clash with those beliefs, so are not allowed.

    Speaking of science, CTYForg, have you noticed any change in persistent contrail formation as the weather is warming up?

  86. faithinscience says:

    Not allowed…
    That reminds me of Russ Tanners site called “global skywatch”. If anyone makes a comment about “chemtrails” being a hoax, the person is immediately banned and their ip is displayed publicly. REVENGE! There is NO ROOM for discussion. If you believe “chemtrails” are a hoax, you are the enemy! Not only that, but this guy is also a snake oil salesman. He sells remedies for chemtrail ailments.

  87. Steve says:

    What bothers me the most about “chemtrailers” is that they tell their kids that the “government” is purposely spraying them with some kind of poisonous mixture that is intended to de-populate the masses. They point to an ordinary harmless persistent contrail and say “there they go again, spraying us with their chemicals”. It’s actually a form of soft terrorism because it causes undo alarm everytime someone sees a long contrail. The kids are the easiest ones to believe this information especialy when it comes from their parents.

  88. Steve says:

    Here’s the trailer for “What in the World are They Spraying”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te_FOsKL_5Q&feature=channel I’ve been blocked by the owner from making any comments so please, please try to comment to expose this fraud. These video-makers need to hear some common sense logic and some real contrail science facts so they can learn what is really happening in the sky. Go to Realityzone also to make comments since that is the website of this G. Edward Griffin who is producing this video production.

  89. faithinscience says:

    “These video-makers need to hear some common sense logic and some real contrail science facts so they can learn what is really happening in the sky. ”

    Remember, they “KNOW” what’s going on, and all we do is spread “disinformation”. There is no getting through to these people. Anyone who disagrees with them is an enemy. How can one help those who don’t want to be helped?!

  90. Steve says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te_FOsKL_5Q&feature=channel
    This trailer is now playing on Icke,Rense and Alex Jones web sites getting major views. It’s so sad to read the comments that most of the uninformed viewers make which typically state that anyone who thinks that contrails can persist is a government paid shill. I agree with Faithinscience, there may not be anyway of getting to these people because they are so caught up in their own confined conspiratory world.

  91. ruffneck says:

    What do you need to get?

  92. ruffneck says:

    Why the need to set people straight? If someone wants to believe in something that does not harm you why, do you people have the overwhelming need to convert the wacky people? It makes you guys look like you have a hidden agenda.

  93. SR1419 says:

    First of all- its not an “overwhelming” need to set wacky people straight. I can only speak for myself but I originally became aware of this theory cuz some good friends were Believers and vigorously tried to convince me of the veracity of the theory.

    So, I looked into it and researched all that I could and came to a different conclusion than they did. I enjoyed the debate and pointing out their errors of fact and logic and eventually showed them why I disagreed and how some of their beliefs were, in fact, false which forced them to question the entire theory entirely. I am proud to say they no longer think “chemtrails” are being “sprayed”. They came to that understanding based on fact based analysis and rational review of available evidence.

    Since then, I am now left with this body of knowledge with no where to go. I now know more about atmospheric science, contrails, microphysical properties of condensation nuclei etc…then I ever dreamed possible…

    So, when I see people make the same mistakes, jump to the same mistaken conclusions, cling to the same myths and false “facts”…it is easy to post a quick comment and try and shed some light…its kind of like a vaguely, semi-intellectually challenging sport. I say “semi” because the debate is rarely conducted in a rational manner and based in facts and evidence and sound logic…and too often is merely me being yelled at by emotionally distraught, sincere but un/misinformed people.

    The real agenda is in the fear mongering of the uninformed “believers”. I detest being yelled at with false information and baseless speculation – all the while insulting me and accusing me of being a “shill”, “disinfo agent” etc… all for having a different opinion and being able to back it up with facts. I detest people who are so close-minded that they cannot even review pertinent information without bias…but simply resort to tired insults and myths…

    …and yet they work tirelessly to spread this false information.

    My “agenda” is not hidden- its simple and wide open; to explore, learn and combat ignorance.

    The sad part is I am viewed as a threat.

  94. Steve says:

    Thanks SR1419 for making the perfect comment about this situation.

  95. faithinscience says:

    “Why the need to set people straight?”

    Because uneducated liars who spread paranoid alarmism, based on complete ignorance about a subject I just happen to love and appreciate (Aviation), REQUIRES that I share my knowledge with these ignorant Chicken Littles. Also, I get a VERY satisfying and smug feeling when I encounter these paranoid folks who CLAIM to understand the facts and then prove that they know absolutely NOTHING about atmospheric science or aviation, with every post they make. It’s fun to watch the chemtrailers prove their ignorance. I look at it more as a hobby than a “need”.

  96. ruffneck says:

    Could anyone tell me what the Italians were dropping on Ethiopia in the 30s.

  97. captfitch says:

    obviously it wasn’t food

    baziinngg!!!

    too soon?

Comments are closed.