Home » contrails » Contrails, Dark Lines, Black Beams, & “Chemtrails”

Contrails, Dark Lines, Black Beams, & “Chemtrails”

People who think persistent contrails indicate some kind of conspiracy (which they call “chemtrails”), sometime point to the “dark lines” that sometimes accompany contrails. Since they can’t immediately think of why these dark lines should be there, they assume it’s part of the conspiracy. Either there is some kind of “dark chemtrail”, or the plane is projecting a dark beam of some kind of negative energy, or it is following a dark beam.

In reality these “dark lines” or “black beams” are simply various kinds of shadows. There are actually three main kinds of dark line related to contrails.

1. Self Shadow

Where the contrail itself is in shadow and appears dark. This can happen a number of ways. The sun can be low on the horizon and the contrail can be shadowed by a mountain or a thick cloud bank (such as in this video). In rare cases the plane can be flying directly towards the sun, and the contrail will shadow itself. When self-shadowing, the leading edge of the contrail will be brightly lit, with a dark area behind it, such as parts of the contrail above.

2. Parallel Shadow

The contrail is simply casting a shadow on a layer of cloud beneath it. The cloud layer is thin enough so you can see through it, but it’s visible, so you can see the shadow on it. Theoretically you could cast a shadow on a cloud layer above or behind a contrail, if the sun were low enough, but this would be rather difficult to observe. Most “dark lines” are of this type. There’s an excellent explanation of these shadows over at Atmospheric Optics.

There’s nothing new about such shadows. Here’s some from 1955:
http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/088/mwr-088-05-0181.pdf

One interesting thing about these shadows is that it frequently looks like the contrail is below the clouds, when it’s actually above them.  You can see this illusion in the photo above. The reason this happens is that the white of the thin layer of clouds and the contrail are additively transparent, so they look identical, regardless of which one is in front of the other. The illusion happens because the brain interprets the bluer regions of the cloud as being darker regions in the same plane as the cloud, when they are actually holes in the cloud.The contrail will seem solid white when viewed through the holes, or when it is in front of the holes.

3. Edge Shadow (Volumetric Shadow)

The most interesting type of contrail dark line is when the contrail is lined up with the sun. This produces a slice of shadow through the atmosphere that looks like a dark line when viewed edge-on. It is quite difficult to visualize what is going on since you have to think in three dimensions, and we are accustomed to thinking of shadows as being flat, since they are usually cast on surfaces. You are not seeing a thin dark shadow here, you are actually seeing a huge slab of very faint shadow, but it’s viewed from looking along the edge. Imagine you have a thick sheet of glass. Viewed head on, it’s transparent, but if you look at it from the edge, it seems a lot darker.

The above image is an excellent demonstrating of the fleeting nature of these edge shadows.  Two photos taken just a few minutes apart, int the first the camera is more fully in line with the plane of the contrail.  In the second the contrail (or the photographer) has moved, and we are viewing the edge shadows from a slight angle which reveals they are made up of two or three segments, caused either by the plane turning slightly, or variations in upper level winds bending the contrail.

Most photos of these odd shadows don’t include the sun.  But when they do, you’ll see that the sun is lined up with the contrail (or part of it)

The photo on the right is a rather dramatic illustration of this effect. The “dark line” here is caused by the slab of shadow cast by the portion of the upper part of the exhaust trail of the space shuttle Atlantis that is lined up roughly in a flat plane with the camera and the sun. The sun has just set, so the rays of the sun are almost parallel to the ground, so the upper portion of the plume is casting a long tall shadow through the air towards the horizon. This is viewed edge on from below, and so looks like a dark line. Since it’s a full moon, the sun is directly opposite the moon, so the “shadow” looks like it’s pointing at the moon (if you look closely, you’ll see it continues past the moon). This is particularly dramatic because of the combination of the setting sun and a vertical exhaust trail. With normal contrails, the sun has to be higher in the sky to cast the slab of shadow downwards.

The image above is another great illustration. There are multiple contrails, but only the one that intersects the sun creates the edge shadow. Photo from “Col” on usenet uk.sci.weather.

[UPDATE] This video I shot in my kitchen gives an excellent illustration of these types of shadow.

[Math Warning] It’s a bit difficult to explain these edge shadows (also called volumetric shadows). You can think of them in terms of three dimensional geometry. The contrail is a line in three dimensional space. The camera (or observer) is a point in three dimensional space. The sun is essentially infinitely far away, and so is only really relevant as a directional vector (a vector in three dimensions, where the magnitude is unimportant ). These three quantities are what you need to consider to understand the condition for the edge shadow.

Given the line (contrail) and direction vector (sun) we can form a plane that contains the line, and is parallel to the direction vector. This plane cuts through the contrail, the atmosphere, and intersects the ground. Projecting two end points of the contrail along the plane in the direction of the sun’s vector, we get essentially a two dimensional parallelepiped (although the far edge is not very well defined). This parallelepiped is quite thin (it’s as thick as the contrail), so when viewed from the side, you won’t see much. But when the viewer is in the plane of the parallelepiped – specifically anywhere along the line on the ground formed by the intersection with the plane formed by the contrail and the sun – then they will be viewing the parallelepiped from edge-on, and so it will seem to be a dark line that intersects the contrail.

Since only the portion of the contrail that is roughly within this plane is contributing to the shadow, there may be other potions of the contrail that are not in the the plane, and hence do not seem to be casting a shadow. In fact they are, but since it is in a different plane, they are not visible unless the viewer was to move to a new position. This can be seen in the two photos above. In one it looks as if the plane was following a dark line, and then veered off. In the Shuttle photo, the highest portion of the trail, although brightly illuminated, is not contributing to the visible shadow. However a viewer in another location may have been able to see a different edge shadow trailing from this upper portion.

[Update] I found a useful video of an contrail edge shadow (or “volumetric” shadow, described above):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98nE4Gb90Kk

It’s all in one shot, which is great, as you can see how the various misinterpretations can arise. It starts out with a shot of a black line across the sky, with no visible reason for it being there. The sun is obscure by the house on the right.

The cameraman then zooms in in the dark line, and we see a contrail being formed along it. It looks like the plane is following the dark line, or somehow projecting a beam of dark energy in front of it!

Then the cameraman walks around the house, and we see the source of the dark line – the contrail is EXACTLY lined up with the setting sun, and is simply casting a volumetric shadow which the cameraman is lined up with. The shadow is accented as the suns rays are nearly parallel to the contrail. Here I’ve stitched some frames together so you can see this. I encourage you to examine the video to confirm this.

[Update 2]  Check out this video of the Space Shuttle launch, a dark shadow forms in the last 30 seconds:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsRuJ37kyZg

[Update 3] Crepuscular rays are parallel, but usually don’t look it. This is partly why the contrail edge shadows are not recognized as the same type of thing.

Crepuscular rays are parallel!


view of crepuscular rays from space:

230 thoughts on “Contrails, Dark Lines, Black Beams, & “Chemtrails”

  1. Brendan says:

    OK I’ll e-mail a few of them to you. They aren’t very good pics so I won’t be mad if you don’t post them, but you should still be able to make it out.

  2. There were five pics, pretty similar, I’ve uploaded them to:

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

    Here’s one with the contrast enhanced:

    I suspect what this is is a shadow cast on the low clouds from the street-level lighting.

    A possible scenario is an “edge shadow” (see top post). If you are lined up with something like a power line, or some kind of utility line (fiber phone lines are getting quite think now), and that is somehow lit from below, then you’d get this kind of edge shadow “in” the low cloud/fog.

    The fact that it did not move with the clouds is a clear indication that it’s “attached” to the ground – caused by something on the ground.

    I would suggest you look behind that house and see what falls in the line from your viewpoint to the edge of the house.

    Also, if you see it again – note the weather conditions (misty), and try to move to the left or right and back to see if it vanishes as you move from the plane of the edge shadow.

  3. Brendan says:

    I’m sure it is just a shadow of something, I’ll have to look into those edge shadows a little maybe. I didn’t think about lights from the ground on something to make a shadow in the sky. At least you saw it though. I’m not really a big conspiracy theorist or anything I just thought it looked sort of crazy.

  4. captfitch says:

    This could have gone the total opposite way if Brendon wasn’t open to another persons reasonable explaination.

  5. Paul says:

    I saw a contrail shadow once – never seen one before (or heard about them). I was the passenger in a car heading west early one spring morning (the sun was up) and suddenly this very dark band appeared right up above us, stretching right across the sky. It freaked me and the driver out at the time, till I cranked my head over the dashboard to see a plane though I still didn’t realise it was the contrail shadow till I read up on it.

    Amazing thing to see – wish I’d had a mind to stop and photograph it (and I had a camera with me too – doh!).

  6. Black Beam says:

    Patently absurd to push the shadow hypothesis … There are days when the sky is a veritable tapestry of dispersion and new chemtrails .. only one might demonstrate the Black Beam .. if any .. all-in-all it’s a very rare phenomenon. Polarization study might be of benefit. Top of this blog has a real classic Black Beam photo .. the one with the few cars in the fore-ground and the lamp standards in the background. Other’s might be shadows … that’s a black beam. No question. Thanks for sharing.

  7. Of course only one trail has the “black beam” (“edge shadow” in the article above”), it needs to be lined up with the sun from the perspective of the viewer.

    It’s theoretically possible for more than one black beam to show up at once, in different directions, but the path of the trails would have to cross at the sun (again, from the perspective of the viewer). That would be an impressive sight.

    These are not shadows ON something, they are shadows IN THE AIR. You can only see them viewed edge on.

  8. YourAllLiars says:

    .. This site is just Insane..
    — DisInfo site —

  9. TheFactsMatter says:

    “.. This site is just Insane..
    – DisInfo site —”

    Could you PLEASE tell us what specific info is “disinfo”?! All the information in the articles on this site is based on basic science. Please provide a SINGLE instance of “disinfo” and I’m sure Uncinus will remedy the situation. Honestly, I think you’ll have a VERY hard time finding any errors in this website. Then again, you are probably just going to “hit and run” and not even bother reading replies to your post.

  10. I think I’ve asked for specific errors at leat twenty times, and not got any from the belivers.

    The skeptics, on the other hand, have always been quick to point out my errors.

  11. Dave Lambers says:

    I just discovered your website through Drudge because of the “missile launch” – or whatever it was – yesterday. I expect I will come back and read through your articles. This page caught my eye because as a kid in the 70s I loved aviation and spent a fair amount of time in my parents’ back yard staring up at the sky watching airplanes fly over. I remember occasionally seeing these “black beams” – they really intrigued me for awhile until I figured out they must be shadows. Sometimes when the sun was low I could see them out in front of the airplane even though no contrail was visible – I guess this was the shadow of the airplane itself? Anyway my point is that these are not a recent phenomena as some conspiracy theorists claim – I observed it 35 years ago – yes, even ones like the “edge shadow” above (3rd picture). Same thing with so called “chemtrails”. I saw all kinds of contrails as a kid; contrails that dissipated immediately, contrails that persisted but stayed intact for many minutes, and contrails that spread out thinly until they covered a good portion of sky. Those who claim this all started in (pick your year) simply weren’t paying attention. It’s just like when you buy a new car and suddenly you notice all the other cars of the same make on the road – they were there before, you just weren’t noticing.

  12. Kim Flanagan says:

    I just saw one of these lines for the first time where I live in Las Vegas. Thank you for posting this information, I was really wondering what it was. I’m surprised by the number of people who automatically jump to conclusions and refuse to see the real science. When a cloud passes under the sun, it blocks the light and causes the sky to darken. This is the same thing, except this is the thin line of a contrail that is causing the blockage, not a larger cloud. Therefore, it would cause only a sliver of the sky to darken.

    I know there are things about our universe that we can’t explain, but I don’t think this is one of them.

  13. RR says:

    This site is ridiculous. It does not explain how the shadow can be in front of the plane. How can there be a contrail shadow where the plane has not been yet. On top of that, sometimes these black lines are in blue sky (not a shadow casted on a cloud)

    This is a dis-info site. What a terrible disservice you are doing here.

    Explain the shadow in front of the plane. That is the question. Search Black Line in front of chemtrail on youtube, you can see some videos. I saw one on Sunday and thats what has fueled my search for an answer.

    Angered and confused
    RR

  14. JFDee says:

    RR,
    maybe you can post a link to one of the YouTube videos that we can refer to so that we talk about the same thing.

    One first thought about a shadow in front of plane or contrail: why can’t it be when at the same time you yourself can cast a shadow in front of you?

    It all depends on the position of the sun and your direction.

  15. MikeC says:

    Ot course thre can be a shadow in front of the plane – all that is required is that the sun be behind it!

    Ditto with any other shadows – where is the sun?

  16. captfitch says:

    First question answered so as far as blue sky question even when there are no clouds in the sky there exists massive amounts of moisture and particulates that aren’t really visible. Apart from the contrail lines the other way you can see this is when you look at the all the lines through the sky at the edge of a cloud. I’m sure uncinus knows what I’m talking about and can post a pic.

  17. The shadow in front of the plane is confusing because the shadow is IN the air, not ON something. It is actually explained in the post at the top, but perhaps not very well.

  18. 4TimesAYear says:

    I don’t know that chem-trails are the government experimenting in weather control or not, but I can answer why the government would do such a thing to its own citizens. Because they can – they have done it before:

    Secret US Human Biological Experimentation
    http://www.apfn.org/apfn/experiment.htm

  19. But those experiments looked nothing like contrails.

    The German government invaded Poland a few decades ago. Does that mean they are still doing it?

    Of course the Government could be doing bad things. But is there any evidence that they actually are?

  20. SimonHF says:

    Here’s a pic I took which appears to show a passenger jet casting its own shadow in-front of itself. It certainly looked like the sun was directly behind the line. Taken on new years day too… what a start to the year!
    [img]http://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/Coquitlam-20110101-00081.jpg[/img]

  21. Nice. It’s not the jet casting the shadow though, it’s the contrail casting an edge shadow.

  22. Mr. Suntour says:

    Ok, I may be way behind the curve here, but I just discovered something that helps explain things even more. The Tyndall effect shows how a “shadow” can be created even when there are no clouds in the sky.

    For example:
    [img]http://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/800px-Toronto_-_ON_-_Schaft_des_CN_Tower.jpg[/img]

  23. I don’t think that shadow shown relies on the Tyndall effect. The Tyndall effect just determines the light scattering color and is used when the size of the aerosols are closer to the wavelength of the light. This is an “edge shadow” from the unusually tall and narrow CN tower. The shadow is cause by light not falling on the aerosol particles and hence darkening the slab of sky lined up with the tower, the viewer and the sun. You could get a similar shadow even if the sky were filled with transparent soap balloons.

    I think it’s simpler to say that when there’s a haze in the air, you get dark and light shadows, just like you would in a smokey room. Unfortunately the concept of an “edge shadow” is rather difficult to get for most people.

  24. Peter Thompson says:

    Hi, Thank-you for taking the time to explain to all the people with questions. Most people like myself are reasonably intelligent people who may indeed just be noticing these things for the first time and naturally are curious and to an extent concerned.

    I would really appreciate you helping me understand the following to put my mind at ease. My office has an elevated position and I started noticing these trails (not because I read some sort of conspiracy sites.) I started looking into it out of curiosity. After the Icelandic volcanic problem, I remembered a site called http://www.flightradar24.com which plots all commercial flights on Google Maps.

    There is a clear correlation where I live between planes that seem to have contrails not appearing on flight radar, whilst the commercial planes do, and also don’t seem to leave contrails. I find it odd that the same jet propulsion technology can leave in some circumstances when appearing (from the ground level) to be at similar high altitudes. Odd that the ones with the long lasting contrails don’t appear on flightradar, when others do. The commercial jets also follow clear flight paths, the contrail jets don’t.

    Also, my interest in the sky first peaked by a white haze at ground level that didn’t exist some years ago when I could see a distant city. I thought it was seasonal and I hadn’t noticed it before, but Iit has now been a whole years that I’ve been watching and this haze is always there now (worst early mornings, and mid afternoon – but before rush hour). On my travels I have now seen it everywhere, it is not a local phenomenon, nor does it follow heavy traffic routes, but can exist in rural locations making a sudden increase in fog unlikely.

    Lastly, I flew to Sweden for the day from Heathrow last week, and was similarly surprised to see these jets flying just below us spewing out thick contrails. They were white with no commercial markings on them and fly faster than the commercial jets. Incidentally, again the commercial jets (which it was now easier to see indeed were flying at the same altitudes) were not leaving long contrails. I couldn’t believe just how many of these jets we saw doing this (many passengers were commenting on this happening).

    I would really appreciate you pointing out the science as I’m getting concerned about what I’m seeing – the days start blue and nice, and then the skys just turn milky white within hours every day. They then clear in between (regular commercial traffic goes on all day), and then about 2pm start seeing the contrails jets all over the sky and again within 1hr – milky whiter once more. Please, can you answer each paragraph in turn?

    Thank-you for spending your private time doing this, and anyone else who thinks they can answer any of the above.

  25. Alexey says:

    Well, Peter, I do not think that such a correlation exists. Commercial flights often leave long persistent contrails. Like yourself, I live in the UK, in the centre of East Anglia. Since discovering this site in November 2010, I watch contrails regularly and take pictures of aircraft using 12x zoom camera. They generally appear white at the altitude, but some of them have identifiable livery, in particular, the red-nose planes of Norwegian Air Shuttle.

    Yesterday it was a great contrail day in South England, as you can see on the MODIS satellite images:
    http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=AERONET_Chilbolton.2011083.terra.1km (taken at 11:45 AM) ;
    http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=AERONET_Chilbolton.2011083.aqua.1km (taken at 1:30 PM).

    It seemed like every flight passing through this large area of humid air was leaving a persistent contrail. At least, it was so after the southern wind spread this area to our region by the afternoon.

    [img]http://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/P1020621.JPG[/img]

  26. Peter Thompson says:

    Thank-you for your response Alexey, I certainly did notice it myself. Especially driving through and around Birmingham! I just wanted to point out that I was not claiming to tell liveried planes from the ground, I was only referring to this from my plane journey where colours and writing is actually fairly easy to spot in most circumstances. It also doesn’t account either for why these planes are not appearing on flightradar24.com when it tracks everything with a transponder – even private planes. The sky can have 7-9 jets in it, yet only 1 or perhaps 2 that are both following flight paths and show up on flightradar24. That site also shows a trail of the last X minutes of the flight allowing you to see if they are in a holding pattern for example.

    I do still hope that all the points I inquired about will be addressed in due course, but genuinely thank-you for your contribution. Out of interest, have you noticed the persistent year round haze I mentioned? It is considerably noticeable right at ground level. I have watched it for a year before saying anything to ensure it is not as simple as smog, fog or pollen etc.

    I so want to believe in what is being said on this site – I’m still not over my skepticism as yet though. I live in Milton Keynes FYI. I think it is hard to argue that the haze hasn’t increased, can it be proven this is because the number of flights has dramatically gone up in the last 10 years for example? Or there is now more moisture in the air for example for some reason?

    I think it is hard to say there is nothing up when so many people have become aware of the issue like myself. Not because they spend their time on silly conspiracy websites, but because they have become aware of the changes in the world they have seen every day over a long period of time.

  27. captfitch says:

    I’m sure there’s a term for this phenomenon but I don-t know what it is- I think your increasingly concerned because you have a bias toward expecting something is going on and a few observations that confirm your hypothesis only serve to positively reinforce your bias to a much greater degree than observations that degrade your hypothesis.

    For instance if you believe you saw aircraft that were moving much faster than normal commercial aircraft while on your flight. This observation served to reinforce your idea that the aircraft responsible for the spraying were different than regular planes. What you didn’t know was that the aircraft only appear to move much faster because judging speed while in an aircraft is extremely difficult because our brains are not equipped to handle such large distances and fast speeds. Additionally virtually all commercial aircraft are allready travelling at around 80% of the speed of sound. An aircraft that was travelling “much faster” would most likely break the sound barrier and that would be heard all over the place.

    Lastly- because of the visual illusions related to seeing other aircraft while in the air it often appears that an aircraft is much closer than it really is and if you tried to notice markings they would be very difficult to see. That’s again related to the fact that our brains don;t handle those types of scales well. Knowing this, ATC controllers don’t identify conflicting traffic in terms of colors or company but by general aircraft type- 737 at 12 o’clock for instance. If it happened to be a Southwest Airlines aircraft I could probably tell that very far off- say ten miles or so depending on angle, light etc. But if it were an OmniAir aircraft or simularly marked, mostly white aircraft I may never see the markings even at a mile.

  28. Alexey says:

    Peter,

    I have seen the answers to the most of your questions elsewhere on this site, but I’m not going to dig them up for you again, sorry.

    My point is that commercial planes do leave persistent contrails. I’ve seen them many times both from the ground and from other planes and taken a few pictures. On the web there are plenty of high resolution photographs where commercial flights in question have been identified. So I wouldn’t worry about an identified plane doing the same thing – leaving a contrail.

    As for the identification, I doubt that flightradar24.com reports all commercial flights. Also, how big is the area on the map that you check for these flights? Note that you can see contrails that are dozens of miles away.

    As for the “ground level” haze, I would not say that I’ve noticed significant changes in this country for the last twenty years. Perhaps, it is because I’ve seen a lot of it all around the world and it often was noticeably denser. We are lucky to live on a big island, where weather changes frequently, even for your place that probably is as far inland as it can be.

  29. Peter, you seem to be suggeting that there’s a class of un-liveried aircraft that create persistent contrails where other aircraft do not.

    Why then are there no photographs of these aircraft? It’s quite straightforward to take very high quality photos of aircraft even at 35,000 feet. It would be very easy to shoot a few photos of a plane, at various magnification, to show the actual plane, and then the trail it leaves.

    For something so earth-shattering as a secret conspiracy to alter the weather (or something similarly large-scale), it would seem like someone would make the effort to actually document what is going on.

    Regarding FlightRadar24, they don’t track the following:

    ATR-42
    ATR-72
    Boeing 707
    Boeing 717
    Boeing 727
    Boeing 737-200
    Boeing 747-100
    Boeing 747SP
    All CASA models
    All Bombardier Dash models
    All Bombardier CRJ models
    Dornier 328
    All Embraer models
    Jetstream 32
    Fokker 50
    McDonnell Douglas DC-9
    McDonnell Douglas MD-8x
    McDonnell Douglas MD-9x
    Saab 340
    Saab 2000
    “Air Force One”
    Most military airplanes

    Which covers quite a lot.

  30. captfitch says:

    Wow- that’s a pretty useless flight tracker.

  31. JFDee says:

    Peter Thompson said:
    “Also, my interest in the sky first peaked by a white haze at ground level that didn’t exist some years ago”

    If you are looking for the cause of that haze, why not start from the ground up? There are enough possible causes to check out before you would have to look at sources that are seven miles up.

    Hygrometers – even with logging functions – are easily available so you could check the local relative humidity curve. It’s also possible that wild or cultivated plants are releasing pollen in masses, but that would be more likely a temporary phenomenon. Then there is the possible source of industry and traffic.

    Regarding “not existing some years ago”, the climate is changing. A warmer atmosphere will be able to hold more water absolutly and cloud generation will increase (probably contrail generation as well ?).

    http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html

    This may even influence ground conditions in a regions where the spread (difference between current temperature and the temperature where condensation sets in) is generally lower than elsewhere.

    If your concern and your determination to investigate are serious enough, you should not have to rely just on what you see. Get equipment – telescope, camera, personal weather station, you name it.

    If you shy away from all that, you will have to take our words.

  32. JFDee says:

    Make that “rely just on what you see with your bare eyes”.

  33. Peter Thompson says:

    Hi, list of airplanes without ADS-B is fair enough Unicus, but hardly modern airplanes. I realise there are plenty of older airplanes still in use, but it wouldn’t correlate with the ratio of the contrail airplanes I am seeing versus those that do show up and don’t have contrails.

    What you say regarding scientific proof is fair enough – but I would like to point out that whilst I am receptive to the comments you make – there is a tone in the way some replies are written in the blog above that suggest you are perhaps not so receptive. I hope you will discuss with genuine scientific interest when I post the results of what I have started this weekend.

    I think only a fool would argue (putting science to one side) that from an ethical and historical point of view that it is a least a possibility that governments or military are conducting some sort of experiment / on-going action. Whether they believe it to be in our best interests or not is neither here nor there, but do not deny it is possible.

    However, I read and accepted from the comments that science is what is needed. Therefore, I managed to get 5 friends spread about in different parts of the country to help with an experiment I have started. For the last week I have been taking samples (on cotton buds and sealing in zip lock bags) of the black powdery residue that settles in large quantities on my car each night. I have washed it every day (no product, just a good clean), and then taken the sample the following morning. I got 5 friends to wash their cars on Saturday morning, and all have taken a cotton bud sample today. I’m paying for all them to be analysed.

    It may not be good control conditions, but it will certainly be an indicator as to whether it is worth paying for more conclusive tests. All are reporting a black dust on their cars after just 24hrs (no-one has driven their car in this period, it has just served as a large collection surface area). The black dust is best described as something representing the dust you get from disc brakes on car alloy wheels (carbon??). There are an assortment of more urban as well as rural areas.

    It will be interesting for me to see what the tests show, and I hope that you all ‘put your money where your mouth is’ by contributing to genuine debate about this when the results come in without dismissing out of hand. Much great science and proof comes hand in hand with hypothesis and theorising. And before you quote from elsewhere on the site about pollutants not coming down from high up in the stratosphere, I believe that heavy particles when in sufficient quantity in the air will come down in an even distribution over large areas.

    As I repeatedly say, I fervently hope that there is nothing going on – it will not be a moment of triumph if heavy metal or other concerning results are shown. Fingers crossed it is low levels of contaminant that could be attributed to heavy industry etc.

    Best regards, Peter

  34. Peter Thompson says:

    @ JFDee, yes, I have a reflective mirror telescope and a personal weather station. However I think that as per my post above that direct air quality tests are the things of real relevance here (and from a personal selfish point of view, apart from the loss of blue skies the only thing I’m really bothered about anyway).

    I’m going to see if it is possible to procure for sensible money the ability to do long term testing of air quality myself – I have some friends at Cranfield University nearby that might be able to help me with that though – they are already involved in some weather testing.

  35. captfitch says:

    But why should you invest any amount of money to conduct air quality testing when there already exists extensive testing- especially in North America? if I want to know what’s in my air I can go check it out. Even the local news goes as far as stating the number of particulates in the air every night.

    Instead of starting an independent monitoring sytem why don’t find out as much as you can about what is currently being monitored. What they monitor, why they monitor it and what levels are healthy, unhealthy etc. Further- there are many groups who belive there should be several more items monitored and that the collection methods are inadequate.

    I would start there. I know- it’s not very romantic this way but I’m afraid your going to spend money just to learn what everyone already knows.

    Finally, because there are literally thousands and thousands of sources of air pollution/particulates how in the world can you draw the conclusion that what you find originates from air traffic. Wouldn;t you have to know ALL the current sources and products to rule them out?

  36. Peter Thompson says:

    Hi, you’re right – as I mentioned there is some existing air quality monitoring not too far from me. However it is fairly high level stuff and does not say what the particulates are (and this detail is probably not as freely available as you have in the US – I’m in the UK.)

    It would be interesting if there is some regional / national correlation in any unusual elements found in our tests. It could turn out that the black dust for example, is the continuing spewing of ash from Eyjafjallajokull which I believe is still releasing plenty into the atmosphere. Or maybe black pollen?? I am not making a straight assumption it could be down to airplanes, but they are one of the few dispersal methods that could cover very large areas fairly uniformly (suggesting huge quantity of particulates). Tests will show the composition of the dust, and whether the particulates show any patterns or trends that will help make some sort of educated guess at the origin. So no, I think doing tests will mean you wouldn’t need to know every type of air pollution source to start making headway.

    I have to say, after spending a good deal of time making measured reading on your site (loads more to go!), I’m starting to come down on the side of contrails rather than chemtrails. The air quality (and ground haze) has always been my major concern throughout all my recent observations and ‘research’ though and I want to look into this further.

    It might make it off topic, but I’m sure it will be on interest to the type of people who find this site as I did. And maybe complete the picture.

    It will take quite some time to read all the info amassed on this site, and the comments left – hopefully I will have some info to share ref tests by this point.

  37. Woody says:

    Hi there.

    It’s implied in the video below that this is a plane in the process of spraying chemicals shot close up, and the chemicals are being sprayed from outlets on the planes wings. What is your verdict on this?
    Thanks
    woods

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whd_F1r_iG4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

  38. MikeC says:

    Notice that the video highlights the “nozzles” – but that the “spray” isn’t coming just from them – it is coming from the whole width of the wing almost.

    Also those “nozzles” – they are the flap pivots on a DC-10 – eg see http://www.photovault.com/show.php?cat=Technology/Aviation/FlightCommercial?tg=TAFVolume27/TAFV27P09_14

    I see the poster has added some fairly interesting comments below this version of the video, saying that the original poster contacted tanker enemy:

    “”Nice job tanker enemy… I like the enhancements. Btw, I took the video while we were flying over Canada. Thanks for translating the video so more people will understand what’s going on. I’ll post more as I see them”.

    USAFFEKC1O’s account has just been resetted (last visit:one year ago!). No normal user could do that to his own channel. This thing confirms that another individual had preyed it,stealing his access’ data (another military or one of the stalkers) and writing all that nonsense in every copied video around the internet:this actions come clearly from the Youtube Staff.”

  39. I think this video has legs mostly because people don’t know that there’s two types of contrail. The exhaust contrail – which come from the water in the exhaust, and the aerodynamic contrails, which just come of the temporary pressure changes in the air moving over and around the plane, and in the vortices it leaves.

    Although they are both condensation trails, it’s a pity there is not a clearer naming difference.

  40. MikeC says:

    I don’t think the believers care about contrail types – it has legs now because there’s a message from the original poster to TankerEnemy as per my message #140….so they are even more convinced that it’s all an evil plot.

    Shame the original poster is no longer online 🙁

  41. De Arre says:

    I like slowerxx’s reply to Uncinus back in 2008. I’ve actually got a post it note with various 3d drawings with a line & direction vector etc. I have a mental image of a silver sword. As the light reflects off of it, I can see two angles, as there is a dividing tint running down the centre of the blade. If the light shone throught it, I guess it would make sense for me to see a dark shadow. I say this because the opposite of light is dark, so the opposite to opaque must be slightly dark. On the 19th of April I saw a darkshadow, running from the ground up to a cloud in the sky (not too far from Northolt, UK).

    What I find interesting about slowerxx’s reply is this: I would’ve wrote the same words if I had witnesed what they wrote. I would be blunt, straight to the point and unaccepting of any resolution unless it is logical and substantiated with evidence.

    September 15, 2008 Nik said “The point I am really trying to make though is that I have been looking at chemtrails/persistant contrails for well over a year now and have only just noticed this phenomenon. Why are people only now noticing these eerie looking black lines if it has been happening for over 50 years? They are DEFINITELY something that would stick in your mind, bit like a rainbow.” You can read Uncinus’ reply.

    I really like looking at vapour trails in the sky. Also, I’m sure I can see “that” slip stream at night, a shadow cast by the moon (or maybe the moon and sun?), high in the night sky. I’ve seen interesting X’s, XX’s. XXX’s and many more. I’ve just looked at this http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Anticrepuscular+rays , I’ve also read a few comments on here.

    Two commentors relate to me most:
    The first being slowerxx (2008). As a reply to him I say: A month or so ago, I was watching tv when I saw a bright light in the sky. I assumed it to be a plane of some sort (now known as FO), nothing spooky. The strange thing is it looked like the nose of the FO (high in the sky and a few hundred metres away) was aligned with me. The headlights of the FO was a tanned, beige colour. I’ve seen lots of planes headlights as I live near Heathrow Airport. A voice in my head indicates “this is a bit different..”. I continued to watch the FO, and suddenly got paranoid, like something disasterous was going to happen with the FO. So I stared intently.

    This is NO WORD OF A LIE! From the right I saw bright star like object, the only difference being this object appeared smaller than a star. It was travelling fast, like a propelled rocket.

    I need you, the reader , to picture a U. The FO, is on the Left start point of the U, the object came into view at the end point of the U.
    U is the shape of the path that the starlight obect took before it hit the FO.

    This is no word of a lie. I’m 101% sure I should’ve seen an explosion. After the interaction between the FO and the star-like object, the tanned-beigey-headights of the FO headlights brightened to the colour that I’m used to seeing. The FO altered it’s path and flew towards the direction the sun rises from. The FO appeared to be a plane, it’s light sequence was a little faster than normal, I assume that there are variation for different types of aircraft.

    2) Nik (September 15, 2008): I’m 31 years old and have been “clocking” trails in the sky for as long as I can remember. I have never ever seen a black shadow line (from the ground, to a cloud in the sky – diagonally) in my life. Until 19th April this year,between 4 and 6pm. I’ve never heard of a edge shadow until now, and it looks like what I saw, only there wasn’t a contrail like the one in the picture at the start of this thread.

    I believed Uncinus’ explanation was logical until I read slowerxx’s comment. Feeling 50/50 after this I read a few more comments and got to Niks. This is where I stop feeling what Uncinus is saying, and start believing that the instruments that came before HAARP & Hadrons Collider, have had some kind of effect on the Earths magnetic cycle. I also believe that it has played a major part in the rise of the worlds sufferers of Bi-Polar disorders.

    The big problem is this. Science has conducted many tests before HAARP & Hadrons Collider. They were unaware of the worse-case scenario then, and they are still unaware now. This is most likely due to a shift in the magnetic poles in their Human frames, caused by the the tests that they have conducted. You need to build a few other instruments before you get to build a instrument as powerful as these two. This is fundamental.

    We all wonder why the World leaders are ignoring the people and doing what the want to do? Why there is much more inhuman behavior, although we have evolved into more peaceful mammals? I’d do your mathematics, and it might give you the same answer that I got: The Earth and it’s inhabitants (especially Scientists) are suffering from a variety of Bi-Polar disorders, most likely caused en route to Star Wars technology.

    Please watch this video on youtube, it’s very old but it is informative. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnRPZOUVhJ4 Afterwards, ask yourself this

    “Does it sound like the Establishment is expecting visitors from outer space?” I say this because HAARP appears to be useless on ground level (in relation to missiles).

    I’d like to back this up with facts and evidence but like most of you, I have no evidence. I may be suffering from a Bi-Polar disorder, I may have been seeing things. I doubt this is the case but it’s what I’d like to believe until I get some real answers.

    So, I conclude this long long post, and wish everyone a Good Easter Weekend, or a good weekend in general.

  42. tryblinking says:

    If you have no evidence, why do you believe in Chemtrails?
    Why this conspiracy and not Planet X, faked moon landings, El Chupacabras or evil reptilian overlords from the Draco Constallation?
    You must have some reason.

  43. Jay Reynolds says:

    These people that say they’ve never seen a contrail shadow(dark line) are a great example of why some people say they’ve not seen persistent contrails before. Most people are only peripherally interested in looking skyward, no matter what they say. It is hard to walk, etc. if you are not watching where you are going! It is quite easy for a contrail to leave a shadow on a lower cloud deck. I have also seen contrail shadows on a full moon night.

  44. John says:

    If you believe something to be true, then you do a quick google search of your belief, and you find lots of videos & blogs posted by people who have the same belief.
    That is not evidence, nor is it research.

    Why do chemmies sound so proud of themselves for doing their “research”?
    And then they insist on this being some sort of new, top-secret info, which only they know about.
    Then they shove it in your face like it’s some sort of proof of anything,
    when infact, it had already been adressed 5 posts previous.
    Which they would have noticed, if they had done any actual research… It’s ironic.

    ‘K’ is the perfect example.
    This whole article is about a shadow for god’s sake, how can you not understand it?
    Nevertheless, ‘K’ ignores (i’m guessing she didn’t even read it) all that, and starts posting things about how she is “researching” into “Anti-light devices” and spouting off about invisibility.
    When any sane person would think – “Hmmmm, a shadow… that sounds reasonable”
    Not only that, but if there really was something invisible in the sky:
    It wouldn’t be black… It would be invisible… YOU WOULDNT BE ABLE TO SEE IT.

    Am i going mad???

  45. Jonathan says:

    Uncinus,

    I have been looking up at the sky all my life, I dont know why but everytime I go outside I am always looking up. I have observed chemtrails for a very long time and there is nothing natural about them. As for the black lines that sometimes accompany the chemtrails, is by no means a shadow. They have been out even at night without chemtrails or clouds in the sky. The line will stretch from horizon to Horizon Usually east to west, I thought maybe it was coming from Lawrence Livermore Labs but I have no way of confirming this. I do know that they deal with lasers and weapon technology. If you have heard of project blue beam this would make sense. Anyways your a good debunker unfortunate for you however most people are not as ignorant as they used to be. I read an interesting article lastnight about the connection between chemtrails and O- blood types, the reason I mention this is to find out how many rh- blood types are here and if they are having the same experiences that Iam having.

  46. Do you have any photos?

    You might also want to look up crepuscular rays, and particularly anticrepuscular rays, which can be very dramatic, but have natural origins.

    http://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&sa=1&q=anticrepuscular+ray&biw=1684&bih=1024

  47. Stupid says:

    http://www.atoptics.co.uk/droplets/glorair.htm

    There it is !!…been looking for an explanation.
    I’ve seen this phenomenon from aircraft windows, when looking down at the plane’s ground shadow when ~2000k feet (a guess). There is a halo around the shadow.
    Also around the shadow and within the halo, every reflective surface will glow brightly…stop signs, highway signs, vehicle tail lights, glass-bead traffic marking paint, etc.

  48. Stupid says:

    Wait, perhaps it may have been a ‘heiligenschein’….or a combination…

    http://www.atoptics.co.uk/droplets/heilig.htm

  49. John says:

    Jonathan,

    Please ellaborate on your comment about the black lines being “by no means a shadow”.

    Because the FACT is… Its a shadow. In every sense of the word.

    So if you know otherwise, or if you have some sort of magical piece of information which goes against all known science, then tell the people! Because we honestly want to hear it.

    But if (as i suspect), your just assuming things based on your current beliefs, then i’m afraid it will remain just a booooring shadow.

    May i suggest, you forget everything you “know” about chemtrails, and analyze the evidence for what it is.

    For example:
    If i believe in angels – The black lines in the sky are shadows.
    If i belive in bigfoot – The black lines in the sky are shadows.
    If i believe the titanic was an insurance job – The black lines are still just shadows.

    But… if i believe in chemtrails – The black lines are something sinister…

    The point is Jonathan, if you want to understand something, let go of your beliefs first, they are clouding your judgement.

  50. J says:

    I’ve noticed a dark line across the sky with a plane following it before on a few occasions…..

    But the other day I saw the strangest thing!

    It was as though something not visable to the naked eye was flying a few plane lengths ahead of the plane leaving a dark exaust plume which the other plane followed!

    This was definitely NOT a shadow….

    I wish I’d of recorded it, but I was so perplexed that I couldn’t look away to grab the camcorder!

    I found this sight while searching about it as I found it so strange.

  51. J says:

    Oh, I should point out that the other times I’ve seen “the line” it’s been from horizon to horizon in a patchy cloudy sky, but this time it a clear blue sky.

  52. I would still suspect it was a shadow, but it was being cast on a thin layer of hazy cloud beneath the plane, and the sun was lined up with the contrail.

    Essentially a parallel shadow (see pic at the top of this page) but since it’s lined up with the plane you only see the bit that does not have contrail behind it. And since you say it was a “clear blue sky”, it would have to be basically a layer of haze, so it still looked like clear sky.

    Of course, it’s very hard to say without pictures.

  53. I shot a video in my kitchen that illustrates the “black beam” edge shadow:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soIoo9vX5UE

  54. JFDee says:

    A striking demonstration!

    I just hope you did not have to sacrifice a perfectly good steak …

  55. Just the usual breakfast bacon shenanigans.

  56. Ross Marsden says:

    Very good. Thanks.

  57. Chris Rxxx says:

    I invite anyone who has seen Pink clouds or Mist in the Night Sky to join my FaceBook Group “I saw The Mysterious Pink Clouds At Night”.

    I witnessed them in Canada at 9:45PM EST on OCT.24.2011. The very next night after London, England had similar sightings. Please join if you saw something on these nights, anywhere in the world!

  58. JFDee says:

    I’m sure you are familiar with aurora effects; the current zone of activity covers pretty much of Canada, following the magnetic pole:
    http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/pmap/gif/pmapN.gif

    So you probably know that you have witnessed something different. Maybe they were noctilucent clouds?
    http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2003/19feb_nlc/

    I must say, I once saw a rare aurora event over Germany two days after a major solar flare event, and it was mostly reddish and cloud-like, very different from what I had seen earlier on a trip to the Lofote Islands (Norway). I assume the reason was the different angle of the magnetic field lines in the lower latitudes.

  59. JFDee says:

    So it was most likely the effect of a solar flare, after all:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/oct/26/northern-lights-southern-exposure-us

    Pity I missed it …

  60. JFDee says:

    The “Guardian” link does not have a date, for some reason. Here is annother link:

    http://www.fox8.com/weather/wjw-northern-lights-display-october-24-2011-txt,0,1373038.story

    A nice video gallery with pleasant music:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udOGnUds1EE

  61. danno says:

    Well great debate,
    to the haters that wanna tell people off for there veiws i say ” chill winston” everyone here has a valid point of some sort, wether its there veiw or just belief theres more to life than u know,
    I seen my first tunnel ( black path in front of plane) a month ago with my boy, we were driving in the car when we seen it and stood in the middle of the road looking, it lasted 20 seconds and when we moved a few meters to one side it dissapeared, when we stood back in the innitial spot we seen it it was gone, what i seen was a tunnel in front of the plane that disipated as the plane flew its path into it, to me it looked a dark brown with a lighter section where the plane was entering as a pre determined path, the veiws you have to shadowing and other theories all sound good in theory,
    My argument is for you all to beleive one theory u are closing your mind to other possibility’s, as good and basic your shadow theorys are ” de arre” had a major point in regards to the changes of the world around us,

    As for the chemtrails ive been in the auto racing faternity for 20 years and public fuels have changed dramaticaly imagine the differance in aviation fuels and there makeup and how theyve changed for environmental and other reasons, hence when i was a kid they would disperse quickly and were different,

    As for the puppet masters of this world if u had proof of this you’d be dead, lol

  62. MikeC says:

    There’s been very little change in aviation jet fuel since jets started flying commercially – Jet A was first specified in the 1950’s, and all of them are essentially kerosene, and the differences are mainly to do with how wide the “cut” is so how flammable they are.

    the current standard for Jet A1 is available here – http://www.seta-analytics.com/documents/DEF_STAN_91-91_R6.pdf and a general history of jet fuels is on wiki at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel

  63. jp says:

    I have seen a shadow under the ‘contrail. Yet it looks like SPACE not a shadow. And there was no sun as it was night time, but there was a moon but it was not behind the contrail.

  64. I suspect it looks like “space” as space is dark.

    You probably saw a shadow cast on a thin layer of cloud (or high altitude fog/haze) under the contrail. You see moon contrail shadows most often when the moon looks a bit hazy and often has a halo. See example:

    http://www.bushcraft-magazine.co.uk/blog/?p=597

  65. GE says:

    There is a very massive problem with your explanation of these black contrails being ‘shadows’. It sounds pretty sound when the contrail is perfectly aligned, but it takes a full hit when (a) the contrail moves like mad and the ‘black’ contrail remains perfectly straight, and (b) when the original contrail disipates and the black ‘shadow’ is still there. Or, like I saw last month, no white contrail whatsoever, just the black. So, I’m afraid your ‘shadow’ theory is pretty shaky.

    Strange thing is, this is happening all the time now. I can’t remember seeing a single ‘black’ contrail prior to the 2000’s — and I’m a commercial pilot!

  66. Once you’ve started noticing something, I think you naturally notice it a lot more. Like when you buy a new car, you suddenly notice more cars of that kind on the road.

    The black line can be made from only a short segment of a contrail that is lined up with the sun. It’s not always apparent which contrail it comes from, especially if it’s on the other side of the sky.

    Maybe you could get some good photos of these? I recommend a very wide angle lens, or multiple photos, so you can see the whole panorama of the sky.

  67. Jay Reynolds says:

    GE,
    I have long sought the help of a licensed commercial pilot who flies FL300 and believes in chemtrails.

    So far, after 15 years, I haven’t found one. They always turn out to be less than advertised…..

    Will you offer up some confirmation of your claim to be who you say you are?

    I doubt it.

  68. SR1419 says:

    this picture from 1983 has a “black line” :

    http://www.1000plus.com/Imagic/8301sund.htm

  69. captfitch says:

    Jay- I don;t think you ever will find a “commercial pilot” who beleives in chemtrails. I have flown with or trained hundreds of pilots and not one of them has ever even considered the notion that chemtrails are real. In fact the theory is such a joke with the pilot community that we reference it all the time.

    Besides- there’s no way GE could prove he is who he says he is any more than I can unless he gave his name and address then we could go look up his licences. But no pilot I know would ever do that on the internet.

  70. Jay Reynolds says:

    I’ve seen some pilots give their name before, but they didn’t believe.

    I was walking yesterday near sunset and thought about this poster.
    As I watched my own shadow I realized just how absolutely absurd that GE’s claim really was.

    Of course pilots see their plane’s shadow all the time. As a passenger, and I’m not a frequent flier, I’ve watched the plane’s shadow on the ground. All pilots have seen this, as well as their own plane’s shadow, on clouds below them.

    Just like I cannot escape my own shadow, if there is a contrail, and there is sunlight, how could it NOT leave a shadow?

    Think about THAT…..

    Still, just a simple google image search led me to a real FEDEX pilot willing to state his name(he’s an author), who has posted a photo of his MD-11’s contrail shadow:
    http://www.markwdanielson.com/aboutmwd.html

    So, GE, I think you are probably just another hoaxer.

  71. Lynn Brooks says:

    I believe you’re right, it’s a reflection of a contrail.

  72. Lynn Brooks says:

    Today was the first time I ever saw a beam of darkness. It was great to stumble upon your intrepretation of this phnomenom!

  73. pulledmyheadoutnowutry says:

    for anyone with one quarter of a brain…unicus while moderately entertaining is obviously blind but more likely a government mis-information employee.i have seen these black beams ten times or so…and my theory is that they are guidence beams for the unmarked(illegal in us airspace by the way)afterburning engined spray planes.these planes are most likely unmanned.i saw two planes following these beams flying out of a certain public california airport this morning(5-30-2012).noteably there were four other spray planes this morning in the space of the same one hour period that were not following black laser like beams…and no… the sun was absolutely not in any any position to cast these”shadows” as unigov tries to suggest.just the fact that the planes in question have no numbers or identifying markings should raise questions.people like to laugh and poke fun and say “you believe in that chemtrail conspiracy theory?” my standard reply is no..i don’t believe that they are ok…you are the one who believes in them that they are not harmful to our health.for all the “believers” out there..get a new style led flashlight rated at 70 lumens or more..take it outside late at night in a dark area..turn it on and point it away from your face..up that is..those millions of shiny particles you illuminated are not dust..they are in fact metal particles.you can observe the same thing with a hand held laser pointer(although using a laser pointer outside is now illegal in california..go figure?)so unigov…keep spewing dis-information..maybe the sheople will buy it if you say it three times or more like in advertising.god bless and get the best hepa filter you can and at least filter the air you sleep in..peace out

  74. MikeC says:

    If the particles are all metal then it should be a trivial exercise to get a sample and prove it. Of course then proving that they came from aircraft is not quiet as easy – but at least you will have some verifiable evidence in your hands.

    Also how do you know all these planes are unmarked? how powerful is your telescope? Are you aware that the only required markings on civilian aircraft are the registration markings, and they only have to be about 12″ (1 foot, 30cm) tall on the side of the fuselage?

    Did you compare the flight paths of the suspect aircraft with those available on http://flightaware.com/ to ensure they were not known flights? And if you do know they are illegal then have you reported them to the FAA and police?

  75. MikeC says:

    PS – apparently laser pointers are NOT illegal in California – http://www.laserpointersafety.com/rules-general/uslaws/uslaws.html#CALIFORNIA_Laser_regulations

    shining them outside is not problem either – just not at at aircraft or other vehicles, or at people or guide or service dogs – but if all you are going to do is illuminate dust (whatever its composition) then go for it.

  76. JonnyC says:

    So all of this strange, fishy business going on in the skies.. we are just supposed to accept it? Of course the government wouldn’t do anything like this! they are just contrails! Come on, didn’t you read NASA’s explanation?
    Uncinus, why are you putting so much effort into ‘debunking’ chemtrails? Can you be so certain there ISN’T something going on? aren’t you curious at all? Or do you just blindly trust what has been put forward by nasa and the gov’t as the truth?
    The evidence for chemtrailing is overwhelming. And it’s much more convincing than this ‘persistent contrail’ explanation – which can stop and start abruptly, due to ‘changes in pressure and humidity’? Come on, I’ve seen these things stop and start, leaving a distinct gap. On perfectly clear, cloudless, blue-sky days. Did a contrail ever stretch from one end of the sky to the other when you were a child? Really. Think about that.
    Look up people, the evidence is right before your eyes. Are we all conspiracy-crazed tin-foil hat wearing loonies? Watch the skies for a few weeks, and come up with your own opinions. Why have this many people even found your web site? Doesn’t it seem right that if so many people have noticed these unnatural things in the skies, there is probably something unnatural going on? We are human after all. We have intuition, and are intelligent to know if something is natural or not. The skies are much different from when we were children. Open your eyes, trust your instincts. The proof is there, not in these calculated, long-winded explanations and ‘contrail science’.
    (Oh wait, because a scientist said it, it must be true! hahaha)

  77. JFDee says:

    JonnyC said:

    “So all of this strange, fishy business going on in the skies.. we are just supposed to accept it?”

    First we need evidence that something strange and fishy is going on. If you say “evidence is overwhelming”, what are you referring to?
    Certainly you don’t mean the loads of photos and videos of contrails posted everywhere, and certainly not all those papers talking about possible geoengineering.

    For the contrail photos, you would have to show that the existing explanation on the base of atmospheric science is not enough.

    For the talk about geoengineering, you would have to show that there is indeed an acual and intentional effort going on.

    Regarding contrail gaps and very long, why can’t they be explained with variations of relative humidity? You would have to show that too. Keep in mind that a “perfectly clear, cloudless, blue-sky day” does not guarantee a homogenous atmosphere from ground to 40000 feet.

  78. SR1419 says:

    JonnyC said:

    “Did a contrail ever stretch from one end of the sky to the other when you were a child? ”

    Yes, they did:

    http://contrailscience.com/contrail-photos-through-history/

    What do you think about that?

    ..and while you are thinking…think about why clouds have distinct gaps? Why do clouds “start and stop”?

  79. bleh says:

    OMG to all this explaining of the shadows blah blah blah, people dont be stupid, it doesnt take that much thought, people want to be able to explain everything because there scared, if they cant explain it they allow someone else to explain it for them and 99% of the time the explanation isnt even understood by the people who support it. Just ask yourself this, all these things people are noticing in the sky or whatever, it wasnt noticed till now, which means there either new phenomena or there just occuring more boldly and more frequent than ever before. Its easy for the lily white stool pigeons to say “you only notice it now, because your paying more attention now” thats complete bullshit, the reason we are paying more attention is because of whats been happening in the sky! People dont just make up something up then all of a sudden people start watching more and noticing shit they never noticed before
    if that were true we would have been in a paranoid skitzo mental state a loooong time ago since people been creating conspiracy theroies

  80. bleh says:

    as far as evidence the evidence is the fact when i step outside for a smoke and look up i witness weird shit… Example 1 the moon, i saw the moon big as hell and orangey red, i seen the moon at a certain spot in the sky me and my gf. Then by the time i was done with my cig the moon had moved out of vision, in like 8 minutes the moon moved so damn fast it could no longer be seen, it freaked us out, about 1 hr later we went for a drive and noticed the moon far far away full moon, but it was so close just 1 hr earlier it was damn near a red color, then its so far away now wtf?? i seen other shit too, but whatever u wanna work for that other time its your funeral and your damned soul so..have fun

  81. People dont just make up something up then all of a sudden people start watching more and noticing shit they never noticed before

    Actually they do. See for example the Seattle Windshield Pitting Epidemic:

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

  82. GregOrca says:

    Bleh, when you say people are only just noticing these trails in the sky, it is actually only SOME people who are noticing them for the first time.
    The trails have in fact been extremely noticeable for many decades as proven by their appearance in thousands of old photographs and films and printed documents.
    The tens of millions of people who watched old Sean Connery James Bond films like “Diamonds are Forever” saw the trails forming grids over Las Vegas and they appear in TV news reports such as http://contrailscience.com/1980-nbc-news-report-on-contrails/

    So the reality is many people have noticed them far in the past, just not yourself and a minority of others.
    It’s not logical to extrapolate your experience and lack of attention to the rest of the world’s population.
    Joni Mitchel wrote songs detailing them in the 1970s.

    You also mention that the moon seems closer and then seems further away.
    This is a very well known optical illusion.
    when the moon is low on the horizon it often appears redder and larger. The largeness is a result of an optical illusion (it actually is NOT larger when verified by a camera) and it often IS redder due to rayleigh scattering because reflected light from the moon has to travel a greater distance through the atmosphere, with part of the blue spectrum being scattered and the red wavelengths being able to travel further.

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

    It might seem like a NEW phenomena to you because you only just noticed it recently but it was described in detail over 2,400 years ago.

  83. Kat says:

    “people want to be able to explain everything because there scared, if they cant explain it they allow someone else to explain it for them and 99% of the time the explanation isnt even understood by the people who support it.”

    I have to say, I agree with bleh on this one. I think this is a serious, serious problem with . . . certain people.

  84. Lack of understanding is a big problem in communication. It takes a lot of effect to ensure everyone is on the same page.

    The dark line thing is unfortunately one of those things that I know a lot of people will simply not understand, because it’s conceptually very difficult for many people – it was for me.

  85. Kat says:

    “It takes a lot of effect to ensure everyone is on the same page. ”

    I agree Uncinus. But it takes effort on both sides of the discussion. If someone is not willing to try to understand, or even occasionally take the word of someone with a lot of education/experience if the concept is just too difficult to grasp, then what can you do? I just have to compliment you and your regular commenters again on their patience in explaining things to people who seem to simply refuse to even try to understand anything that contradicts what they’ve already decided is the truth. And, on the plus side, I (and I’m sure plenty of other lurkers) have learned even more.

  86. [email protected] says:

    Seattle windshield pitting is still unexplained then?

    You aint seeing us.. U-n’-c-in-us. Get it? He’s one of THEM!!

    Lol you are right pulledmyheadoutnowyoutry.

    The humans (aliens) are going crazy!

  87. JFDee says:

    AlterEgo,

    The incident you mention is actually a good analogy what is happening with contrails today.

    Quote from Wikipedia:

    “Although natural windshield pitting had been going on for some time, it was only when the media called public attention to it that people actually looked at their windshields and saw damage they had never noticed before.”

    It’s the same today when people start observing the sky and notice things that they have never seen before – just because they had not been watching. This is not the sky’s fault.

    See
    http://contrailscience.com/contrail-photos-through-history

    and
    http://metabunk.org/threads/487-Pre-1995-Persistent-Contrail-Archive

  88. [email protected] says:

    What is the cause of ‘natural’ windshield pitting JFdee?

  89. captfitch says:

    windshield+speed+small rocks= pits.

    why aren’t the rear windows pitting?

  90. matt patchett says:

    You’re so full of sh*t it’s coming out your ears and your lungs. Give me a break. Black crap in the sky is all shadows and mirrors? Get your head out of your ass and you still might find you’re full of……………..
    ATX, USA.

  91. Jay Reynolds says:

    matt, you haven’t offered up any reasonable alternative explanation, or explained any faults in anything explained. Rather than curse and spit expletives, if you have a different explanation, bring it on.
    Otherwise, you achive nothing for anyone except for you to look silly.

  92. [email protected] says:

    @Captfitch.
    I’d say:
    (Windshield + speed) /small rocks = chip in windshield. Not pit.

    Then I’d say:
    (Windshield + speed) + indestructable dust particles that’s been introduced to Earths eco-system by a worldwide group of privileged people who vowed to keep Hitlers dream alive = window pitting 😀

    Rear windows do pit. Have a look.

  93. JFDee says:

    How is a semantic difference between “pit” and “chip” relevant in the discussion about contrails?

  94. [email protected] says:

    Search & you will find the connection.

  95. JFDee says:

    AlterEgo,

    if you have knowledge in that respect, please share it.
    I have no reason to search for anything.

  96. [email protected] says:

    You may not. Others may.

    Others are free to search for the answers & form their own opinion.

    Instead of listening to people who don’t know shit. Because anybody who actually knows what the fuck is going on in the skies is not commenting here, are they?

    Not one person with credentials.

    Not one person has said that they can fund experiments to prove or disprove any theory that they have.

    We are just a load of people who have seen some weird stuff in the skies (mostly involving shadows) and taking our first steps in searching for the answers.

    En route we bumped into Uncinus.

    If there is no connection in your own mind JFDee you are free to state that you have no reason to research anything.

Comments are closed.