How many people believe in chemtrails?
How many people are interested in chemtrails? Not very many I suspect. But how to measure them? One way is to see how popular they are on the internet. You could measure how many web pages mention “chemtrails”, but that could give a distorted picture, as the people who believe in chemtrails might tend to be much more likely to post their beliefs on the internet. Lots of people knit, for example, but only a tiny fraction of them make knitting web sites.
We could count blog posts, but that has similar problems, as people who believe in conspiracy theories seem quite keen on spreading those theories, and so are more likely to blog about them
The best way that occurred to me was to measure search terms. Simply see how many people were googling for “chemtrails” vs. other words. In this Googlified world, if people are interested in something then they google it.
Here’s my raw data:
| Google Blogs | Google Images | Video | News | Scholar | Pages/Posts | Groutability 2006 | ||
| “Global Warming” | 67500000 | 733828 | 996000 | 18420 | 32584 | 102000 | 91.98 | 80 |
| Ufo | 36700000 | 317795 | 3335000 | 163722 | 929 | 24000 | 115.48 | 80 |
| Knitting | 20600000 | 601088 | 668000 | 7035 | 1715 | 143000 | 34.27 | 50 |
| Archery | 11900000 | 95539 | 296000 | 3614 | 1453 | 12500 | 124.56 | 12 |
| Parkour | 4510000 | 35404 | 83100 | 39931 | 49 | 39 | 127.39 | 8 |
| Fread | 2600000 | 3224 | 8280 | 32 | 10 | 3580 | 806.45 | 1.6 |
| Grouting | 1600000 | 6873 | 17800 | 193 | 58 | 36600 | 232.79 | 1 |
| Bboy | 1210000 | 14443 | 25700 | 77250 | 10 | 49 | 83.78 | 3 |
| Chemtrail(s) | 791000 | 4828 | 9180 | 2123 | 5 | 38 | 163.84 | 1 |
| “fox hunting” | 707000 | 7923 | 15900 | 106 | 64 | 2380 | 89.23 | 1.2 |
| “Killer Bees” | 434000 | 7090 | 10400 | 195 | 197 | 568 | 61.21 | 0.8 |
| Morgellons | 236000 | 3756 | 2970 | 143 | 4 | 26 | 62.83 | 1 |
| Vexillology | 112000 | 1037 | 1610 | 0 | 4 | 34 | 108 | 0 |
| Reborning | 47000 | 397 | 1070 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 118.39 | 0 |
The columns are fairly self explanatory. They are the number of results returned by google for web, blogs, images, videos, news and scholar. The pages/posts column is the ratio of total web pages to blog posts. The “groutability” column is the ratio search volume for that word to the search volume of “grouting”. I chose grouting as it seemed like a thing people would be searching for at a fairly constant volume, but not too much.
I chose search terms that had a similar result to chemtrails. I also added some outliers, that were very popular, or very unpopular, mostly activities practiced only by a few (like reborning). I included “morgellons”, as it seems like the most similar thing I could find with a distinct name.
You can look at the numbers and draw your own conclusions. Chemtrails has more results than “killer bees”, but less than “bboy” ( a type of athletic break-dancing). It has vastly less than knitting and archery. But a lot more than “reborning” (making realistic baby dolls).
But how many people are interested in chemtrails? Well, there are about 30,000,000 knitters in the country, and 600,000 blog results. So given the 4828 blogs results for chemtrails, that would indicate 241,000 people have some interest in chemtrails. But, like I said, it’s not easy to accurately extrapolate. If you could extrapolate from blogs, you could say there are three times as many chemtrailers as there are vexillologists (flag enthusiasts).
Or you could say: a lot more people are interested in Parkour than are interested in chemtrails.
[Update] Chemtrails on Usenet (archived on Google Groups), were only mentioned in 1999. Here are the year-to-year search results for the word “chemtrails”. There are NO results prior to 1999
1999 – 1070
2000 – 2050
2001 – 2810
2002 – 2250
2003 – 2060
2004 – 2100
2005 – 1570
2006 – 2450
2007 – 2230
195 comments Tuesday 08 May 2007 | Uncinus | contrails
195 Responses to “How many people believe in chemtrails?”
Leave a Reply
To quote someone, please use <blockquote> and </blockquote> tags, for example:
<blockquote>But surely the contrails would evaporate?
How do you explain that, given those facts?</blockquote>

If there are such a small amount of people interested in “Chemtrails”, why such an effort to create this website debunking the whole idea??
241,000 people is not “a small amount”. Even 4828 people is quite a few, but this misses the point. *I* am interested in contrails, so I write about them.
I would estimate that several millions under 5 millions believe and are aware of the possible multi uses of such old technologies that have long been deployed by communist countries. Weather modification is an old technology that seems to be interconnected to chemtraisl in some way or another or very many possibleuses again – more so than the government say chemtrail aerosols are used for. The sad thing is that it was the USAF and USNAVY that coined the word chemtrails and not any conspiracists. There are no theories my friends, unless you include all science and all scientific laws that were all founded on theories! Use some science and you will see we do use science to out perform and control nature in attempts to control and outdo it. Always have, always will? At our own perils.
It is our freedom to defend our belief just as insane Christians do that rule America?! We have so much more logic than false religion. Truth in science and science to find the truth based onlyon government and independent sources – including declassified data freely available – you lazy asses – do some research!
straight up, u suck contrail science
How do you get this raw data anyways? how can you find out how many people search something? >;D
Most of the numbers in the table are the number of search results found by google. Like where is says “Results 1 – 10 of about 1,380,000 for Chemtrails“.
The only column that reflects how much people searched for it is the “Groutability” column, which was calculated with Google Trends, being the relative height of two graphs:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=chemtrails%2C+grouting
That’s about 1:1
And
http://www.google.com/trends?q=chemtrails%2C+archery&ctab=0&geo=all&date=2006&sort=0
is about 12:1
The Physics of Chem-Trails.
Aluminum and Barium is being sprayed into the air via the jet exhaust and these poison trails last from 1/2 hour to 1/2 a day.
It is physically impossible for an ordinary Con -trail to last between 1/2 hour to 1/2 a day.
If your car exhaust was to last more than 1/2 minute it would be because there was a problem and particulates were in the exhaust gas. Jet Turbines are far more efficient at burning hydrocarbon fuel therefore any trail which lasts more than 1/2 hour on a sunny day is a Chemtrail and could physically be nothing other.
[Physical Systems, Lancaster England.]
Car exhaust vapor evaporates almost instantly because of the high temperature.
Jet plane exhaust vapor exists at 30,000 feet at -40 degrees. So it lasts a lot longer. It’s a totally different thing. Try running your car at -40 degrees and see what happens.
Contrails are essentially clouds. If contrails could not last longer that 1/2 a minute, then clouds could not last longer that 1/2 a minute. Clearly clouds often last for several hours, and hence so can contrails.
The more efficient a jet engine is, the more water vapor it produces, and hence the larger the trail is, and the longer it lasts.
Thank you Uncinus for that insight.
So why are we seeing Contrails at 13,000 feet in Summer if it required 30,000 feet and -40 degrees?
Is it colder in England? LOL
And why if these are perfectly normal Contrails do many of them Start and stop and are in perfect rows?
It does not require 30,000 feet. It requires -40 degrees for persistent contrails. Normally that is around 30,000 feet, but contrails can form a sea level in the arctic regions.
In England in the summer however, It seems very unlikely you are seeing contrails at 13,000 feet. If you think you have, then I’d ask you: how did you measure the altitude?
Contrails start and stop at the same point because they are entering or leaving a region of moist air. They are in “prefect rows” (usually not quite prefect, but still), because they are planes that are flying the same route. Since the wind at that altitude is often around 80 mph or higher, then the trails are blown to the side by the time the next plane comes along.
That’s illustrated quite well if you look at satellite photos, such as these:
http://contrailscience.com/contrails-above-and-below/
Check this out – what do you think of that?
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-9164016902654021495&hl=en
I think it is a mistranslation of the word “dupple” (as well as a general misleading translation), this is fully explained here:
http://contrailscience.com/germans-admit-they-used-duppel/
Karsten Brand quite explicitly does NOT believe in chemtrails. He’s talking about something totally different in your video.
To measure altitude try this method
http://wrockets.trib-design.com/index.php?project=nick&page=trig
or if you like – just hack the radio traffic.
How do you explain this evidence:-
Chemtrails – Lab Report On
Air Grab Thru HEPA Filter
http://www.rense.com/general82/chemm.htm
Is this lab making it up?
JB
That method is for rockets, where you know where they took off from, and assumes they go straight up. So it is not applicable to jet planes.
Listening to radio traffic is only useful if you know exactly which plane you are observing.
But again, how did YOU measure the height of the plane as 13,000 feet?
That lab report is explained here:
http://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-non-science/
Basically they are not measuring what they think they are measuring, neglecting to mention that they filtered 1 TONNE of air to get their sample, but then measured the concentration relative to 1 gram of particulates. Hence being off by a factor of a million.
It might be useful to you if you have a quick look at the other articles here. They are listed at the top of the left column.
And the Aluminum and Barium are not Chaff?
So, let me see if I have this correct – firstly every trail is a perfect Contrail and not a Chemtrail, then it turns out the German Military admit to spraying crap into the air from jets but these are not Chemtrails.
Well that solves that then, everything is as it should be.
What about the UK government admitting it too spreyed crap to see how it dispersed after it was caught red handed – was that just a normal Contrail too?
Aluminum is not TOXIC yes, its perfectly safe right – it does not dumb down the population and makes them ill.
So everything is just fine.
Chaff is an anti-radar counter measure – small particles of plastic coated with aluminum used to disrupt radar. Chaff does not include barium.
The video you posted was about spraying chaff. Chaff is not a contrail. Chaff is invisible from the ground, so cannot be what you are seeing that you think are “chemtrails”.
Aluminum is NOT especially toxic (for example, soda cans are made of aluminum, and food is often cooked in aluminum foil.), but that’s beside the point, as there has been no evidence of aluminum in contrails.
“the UK government admitting it too spreyed crap to see how it dispersed” is not contails either, they were low altitude tests, and would have not have been visible. That was also several decades ago.
Perhaps everything is not fine in the world, but there is simply no evidence that contrails are anything more than vapor trails from jet aircraft.
Thanks for that Uncinus.
Here is my hypothesis:
Depleted Uranium has been used in large quantities since 1990s in three wars. It has now poisoned large areas in Europe and the middle east.
The Criminal US company, Haliburton, is now paid by the UK government to monitor the troposphere radiation levels since 1990, prior to that it was measured by the MOD.
see here:
http://www.countercurrents.org/moret270206.htm
To help reduce this high radioactive level —- cloud seeding is done to wash the radioactive crap out of the air.
see here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1516880.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3893671.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding
Flooding is better than Nuked up kids, hence the Chemtrails.
Hence this is why the UK had the flooding for the first time in history in Summer last year.
And if you think this is not a worthy hypothesis, get yourself a copy of the radiation levels in Europe before and after 1990.
TTFN
JB
Check this out:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/070306poison.htm
If you want to reduce the Radioactivity in the air you cloud seed to cause rain to wash the particulates out.
Now you know why they are Chemtrailing.
Now you know why they keep it hush hush.
The problems with that argument are:
1) No increase in radioactive has recorded in the US.
2) No increase in rainfall has been recorded in the US beyond normal year-to-year variations.
If your theory were true, then at least one of the above would be true.
Besides, contrails form at too high an altitude to create rain.
In the UK, Rain fall swamped the midlands in summer last year, the highest rainfall ever in history. Chemtrails were recorded constantly.
In 2003 The average Radiation levels in the UK had never been higher, since then it has reduced, but occasionally after dust storms in the middle east it peaks again.
check this out and ask for the original data:-
http://www.countercurrents.org/moret270206.htm
In the US:-
How can one account for jet trails over the Arizona desert, is that air full of water in the Desert areas? NO.
So why the many 100 mile trails across the desert if the air there is so dry?
Were there more “chemtrails” in 2007 than in any other year? Where are the records of these chemtrails? Why no flooding in 2003-2006?
If you want to establish a correlation, you’ll need some actual figures, or at least some source for your assertions of “Chemtrails were recorded constantly”
How could contrails be connected to increased rainfall? Contrails form at too high an altitude to affect rainfall.
Persistent contrails (which you call “chemtrails”) have been recorded all over the world. How do you explain those?
The air ABOVE the desert areas is sometimes “full of water”, yes. Because the weather on the ground has little connection to the weather six miles up.
Contrails are not connected to rainfall.
Heavy overcast & rainfall follows Chemtrailing.
Hardly Surprising if the Chemtrails are rain seeding?
And if you claim there is no such thing as Chemtrailing or Chemtrailing to rain seed then tell this to these guys:-
http://video.google.co.uk/videosearch?q=raincloud+seeding&sitesearch=#sitesearch=&q=rain%20cloud%20seeding
http://video.google.co.uk/videosearch?q=raincloud+seeding&sitesearch=#sitesearch=&q=rain%20cloud%20seeding
http://video.google.co.uk/videosearch?q=raincloud+seeding&sitesearch=#sitesearch=&q=rain%20cloud%20seeding
http://video.google.co.uk/videosearch?q=raincloud+seeding&sitesearch=#sitesearch=&q=rain%20cloud%20seeding
http://video.google.co.uk/videosearch?q=raincloud+seeding&sitesearch=#q=jet%20dumping%20fuel&sitesearch=
So no one is flying about putting crap into the air (Chem trailing) OK
Its just normal combustion products.
Many thanks for that Uncinus,
I have personally witnessed the worst Chem trailing in my area Summertime 2007. This is the Lancaster/ Morcambe bay area in England. This year has not been as bad as summer 2007 but I do have logs of Photos taken on my digital camera (time date logged) from earlier this year if you send your Email I will compile them in pdf format and post them for you to see and indeed publish.
The striking thing is how low the altitude and the very fine detail on some of these images.
In 2003 – 2006 I was not making efforts to observe and quite frankly had no concerns about aircraft trails at that time, I however would have had no option but to take notice had there been trails as blatantly obvious as those in my time logged photo collection.
I would have expected jet trails to be far more prevalent in Winter months rather than summer months due to seasonal temperature differentials.
Also some trails stop for about 2-3 Km then start again as though one tank ran out and they have switched tank or something.
Flooding 2007 – check this out:
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7130089.stm
Have you figured out how to get the altitude yet?
I assume you are familiar with trigonometry?
Also, if you know the make of jet you know its real size.
Has the penny dropped yet?
Thanks for that Uncinus,
I reside in Lancaster England.
Prior to summer 2007 I was unaware of persistent trails from aircraft.
In summer of 2007 the trailing was so profuse no one could fail to notice.
Summer 2007 was by far worse than this summer 2008, but I do have a photo record of trails accumulated from February 2008 with date/time stamps.
From these photos you can clearly see they are not high altitude.
Regarding flooding in 2007, check this out:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_United_Kingdom_floods
Prior to 2007 I had not had reason to notice anything unusual in my area.
Summer of 2007 was exceptionally bad compared to this year 2008.
In 2007 we had very bad flooding in some areas.
Persistent Contrails (which could only be Chemtrails in warm Summer months) have been recorded all over the world.
I would say there is a whole raft of possible reasons.
Here is my second Hypothesis.
You show old images of trails behind bombers and fighters. Remember this, at the time they were spraying water into the inlets to act as both fuel extenders and octain improves.
The water works in 4 ways.
Firstly it helps cools the supercharger and incoming air.
Secondly it slows down the flame front allowing for a much cleaner burn. (Octain improver and fuel extender)
Thirdly as it converts to steam in the cuylinder it increases the gas compression therefore increasing power output.
Thirdly it cools the Exhaust valves hence you can now run the engine at higher revs fro longer without burning out the motor.
I wonder if they are now spraying water into jet engines to have similar effects and that is one reason we are seeing so many persistent trails?
Of course they would not want the public to know this as the same technology could be used on cars etc.
To answer your question.
To be honest, seeing how I know for an absolute fact 911 and 7/7 were inside jobs – I am very sure the US and UK governments would not think twice about bumping off population by air poisons.
We are currently being lied to on every front.
JB, I think you miss an important point here.
Engine exhaust is basically two things, steam and carbon dioxide. There is no need to ADD water to a jet engine to produce persistent contrails, it produces more than enough by itself.
Consider this, written in 1921:
http://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/argonne-battle-cloud-mwr-049-06-0348b.pdf
A modern Boeing 777 carries 45,000 gallons of fuel, creating 50,000 gallons of water over a full range flight – 2 or 3 gallons PER SECOND. So you can see there is no need for additional water to be sprayed into the engine (and nor was there in 1921). I also doubt that spraying water on the inlets would help cool air that was already at -40 degrees.
No, all that was needed for a cloud to form was that the conditions be right, as they said in 1921, when the science was the same:
Redox reaction of Hydrocarbons using Air to provide the Oxidizing agent have many byproducts.
The more efficient the system the more water exhausted.
Are there any recorded instances of -40 degrees during UK Summertime at any altitudes up to and including 40,000 ft?
Whilst the sun is shining?
If not then we can eliminate that possibility entirely.
In outer space were there is a vacuum, in sunlight the temperature is scorching hot.
Which layer of atmosphere do you suggest can have the sun shining on to it in British summertime and be -40 degrees, what gas can actually do that?
Does that not defy the laws of thermodynamics?
How do you explain horizon to horizon condensation trails at below 20,000 ft in England, during the day, in summer?
It must be said, we do live near the sea and are subjected t othe warm gulf stream too.
Thank you for that Uncinus,
Which gas can be in bright sunlight and actually be at –40 degrees?
At what altitude in summer time with the sun shining in the UK does it ever reach temperatures as low as –40 degrees?
The trails I have a problem with are Summer time trails in bright sunshine, very low, well under your 40 thousand feet and are often in the sky for between 1 hour and ½ a day.
Often there are jets flying well above these trails but by the time those jets have reached out of sight, the trail is almost faded or totally faded – do they put out less water vapor, do they travel through warmer air even at much higher altitudes?
And are you seriously trying to claim that from the comfort of your office you are 100% sure all the reported trails ARE ordinary? Do you see a problem with that scientific method Huston?
JB, surely you have noticed that it is a lot colder at the top of a mountain, than it is at the bottom.
Consider Mt. Everest for example. It’s about 30,000 feet high, and is very cold at the top. Of course it’s a bit warmer in summer, but lots of climbers still lose fingers and toes every year, because it’s extremely cold up there (-100F on a bad day). On the warmest day, it’s -15F (-26C).
As a rough rule of thumb, you can calculate the temperature at any altitude by subtracting 3.5F (or 2C) for every 1000 feet of altitude above sea level. (This is known as the lapse rate). So in general, the temperature at 30,000 feet is 105F of 60C below the ground temperature. So if it’s 65F degrees on the ground (a fairly normal temperature for a UK summer morning), it’s about -40F at 30,000 feet. The actual temperature will vary with the atmospheric conditions, upper air winds, and frontal systems. But this gives you a reasonably accurate estimate.
I’m not sure where to get UK forecasts, but this link gives the temperatures above San Diego California (a much hotter place than the UK). Today it’s -40F at about 32,000 feet.
http://www.usairnet.com/cgi-bin/Winds/Aloft.cgi?location=SAN&Submit=Get+Forecast&hour=06&course=azimuth
Jet’s trails will fade when the leave a region of moist air. This is quite apparent in satellite photos, see these for example:
http://contrailscience.com/contrails-above-and-below/
If you think you’ve seen contrails formed at very low levels, then I ask you how you measured the height of those planes.
Regarding things in bright sunlight being at -40 degrees. Cirrus clouds are a very good example. Since they exist in air that is -40 degrees, and they are white (reflecting rather than absorbing the sun), then the sun does not heat them enough to overcome the cooling effect of the air. Contrails are a form of cirrus cloud – being made of ice crystals
Un,
Sure, it is colder up top and who would disagree with the tops of mountains being colder.
But were is it ever -40 in bright sunshine EVER below 20,000 feet over England in Summertime?
And what about the key issue here:
Quote JB
“And are you seriously trying to claim that from the comfort of your office you are 100% sure all the reported trails ARE ordinary? Do you see a problem with that scientific method Huston?”
Well ARE YOU 100% SURE none of these reports have some credibility?
Check out this news report from Science & Technology News:
L.A. to resume controversial cloud-seeding project 2008-06-17 05:03:06
http://rss.xinhuanet.com/newsc/english/2008-06/17/content_8382176.htm
Are you still 100% sure they are ALL ordinary contrails or could some of these trails be more exotic Chemtrails?
JB,
No it is generally not -40 at 20,000 feet on a warm summer day in England. So if you’ve observed contrails being formed that low, then that’s very suspicious.
How did you measure the altitude of the contrails you saw?
I’m not 100% sure of anything. No scientist ever should be. I’m 99.9% sure that the reports of “chemtrails” are contrails, or other benign phenomena (like sky-writing). I base this high degree of certainty on the evidence that has been presented, and has been analyzed on this site and elsewhere. I’m open to the possibility that there is something behind the “chemtrail” theory, but I’ve not seen any evidence to back it up.
Local water boards have been doing cloud seeding for decades. This is nothing new. It does not create anything that looks like a contrail. It’s controversial because it’s not clear how well it works, or even if it sometimes works too well, creating localized flooding.
http://www.google.com/search?q=cloud+seeding+water+board
I am emailing you to inform you of a strike that is being organized on July 4th 2008 against the New World Order and the spraying of chemicals in our skies. I am hoping to reach as far as I can with the message that there are good people out there who really want to change things. We all need to support each other and create a the kind of world it should be. Please spread the word of change and promote this website after all this affects us all. Please visit http://www.freewebs.com/changetheworldforever for more info. We need to change what is happening to our world and to our skies, for the sake of ourselves and for generations to come.
Brilliant exchange between Uncinus and Blacker – why did it have to stop, you both seemed to be having so much fun?
As I suggested in a post yesterday, if we could convince the required people (e.g. air traffic control) to provide details of suspected chemtrail spraying planes’ altitudes and local weather stations in the affected area we could scientifically say “it is not physically possible for a contrail to form in those conditions” ergo it must be something else – perhaps a chemtrail.
J A Blacker – did you manage to determine if those planes were at 20,000 feet or lower?
Surely ATC would have to be in on the conspiracy?
You can measure the altitude of a plane with a digital camera, providing the lens is long enough for you to be able to identify the make of aircraft. See here:
http://contrailscience.com/measuring-the-height-of-contrails/
You might also want to look at this, and see if you think it’s good evidence:
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/report.shtml
I’d be interested to see what you think of that.
Thanks for links. Very interesting – as you probably know from my YouTube video I have a 300mm lens on a 35 mm digital SLR so I may well attempt a few calculations of nearby contrails that “could” be something else. Must get on with some real work soon!!
As for the other article I have not had a chance to review in any detail – obviously I have read the summary (the bottom up approach as we like to call it over here). The summary appears to suggest that “unidentified” aircraft air creating more persistent contrails when “normal” planes are not (I assume this is the point he is trying to make). Clearly this fits with a chemtrailers viewpoint. What are your views on this report, do you think it is good evidence?
As for Air Traffic Control being “in on the conspiracy” – I doubt all of them are as it is impossible to control everyone, plus we are not 100% sure there is a conspiracy are we? I noticed from above that there is a 0.1% chance that you think chemtrails may exist. If that small chance remains then I hope you would be keen to prove/disprove chemtrail existence once and for all too.
Would like to hear your views.
I try to be scientific, so I don’t rule anything out. Instead I judge the evidence, and see what the most likely theory is.
For example, right now I have a headache. There could be several causes of my headache. For example, it could be because I drank too much wine last night, or because I spend too long looking at a computer screen.
But it could also be because I was abducted by aliens, who implanted a chip in my brain through my nose.
Now, stay with for a second, what’s so improbable about that? Thousands of people have reported being abducted by aliens. Many have implants. Some have even had them removed by surgery. This theory would explain my headache very well, and given the huge implications if it is true, then should I not be keen of prove/disprove it once and for all? Should I not go get my head x-rayed?
No, clearly not. Because there is NO EVIDENCE of alien abduction and implants. Not of of me, and other than the reports of people who though they were abducted in their sleep, not of anyone. without any evidence, why would I investigate?
So, while I’ll always give a very very small chance that something might have happened (aliens, chemtrails) – I feel no need to act upon this small chance, no more than I feel the need to constantly worry about being hit by a meteorite, or winning the lottery.
And where I say 99.9%, it’s really more like 99.999999% The 99.9 was just a figure of speech.
Ok – so back to earth and its surrounding atmosphere. I don’t think your 0.000001% belief is enough for you to seriously consider being involved in an experiment to prove/disprove such an (in your opinion) unbelievable theory. That is your choice and I respect it.
So realistically we should probably cease our conversation until there is some evidence that we can see/touch/analyse – if this never transpires then you win (if this is indeed a game). In a way I actually hope you do win because then there is nothing to worry about regarding the hundreds of theories about what chemtrails are!!
With regards to evidence, alien or chemtrail related, there may well be loads of it out there but it is just not available to me, you or joe public in general. Hence conspiracy theories. So to say there is NO EVIDENCE is actually quite narrow minded of you (maybe a side effect of the mind control chemtrails out there LOL).
I personally think that conspiracy theories are healthy because they allow humans to question the world they live in. In the majority of cases of life (well in my opinion anyway) there is no smoke without fire. In a way this particular theory has definitely given you a lot of interesting things to think about and I dare say, without the theory your contrail website may not have been created and DEFINITELY would not have so much interest!!
Anyway – you never answered my question “What are your views on this report, do you think it is good evidence?”
Good luck with the headache
Science allows humans to question the world they live in. In fact, science actively encourages it. Conspiracy theories, for the most part, do not. Conspiracy theories only encourage you to believe the conspiracy theory – they are generally not open to questioning, specifically not to scientific questioning, which prefers real evidence.
I’d be happy to discuss some real evidence, evidence we can “see/touch/analyse”, but until then, I’ll keep putting forth my evidence (old photos and papers about contrails that show that “chemtrails” look and act like contrails), and I’ll keep pointing out that the “chemtrail” theory has no actual evidence.
As for the report – he claims that he observed air traffic for 105 days, and his most interesting finding was that identified flights produced contrails that lasted up to 2 minutes, while unidentified flights (at unknown altitudes) lasted for several hours.
There are a number of problems with the study. For one, the very neat division into short identified trails, and long unidentified trails is just too neat to be credible.
Really, it’s kind of hard to know what to make of the report. For one thing, we KNOW that commercial airliners can produce highly persistent contrails – this has been observed and documented for decades.
And the report is from 2000. Eight years ago. If it were evidence of anything, then why has it not been verified? Seems like anyone could do it.
Here’s the real result of the report: Over 105 days in winter 2000-2001, over Houston, TX, only six days were suitable for the formation of persistent contrails, and eight such trails were observed, but the planes making them were not identified.
Like many others I believe that there is organized activity going on in our skies, and I believe it is done with a purpose. But unlike others, I believe this purpose is NOT to poison the people or reduce the population. I can’t even speculate as to what the purpose may be, but the wealth and power of the world was built on the backs of its people, and trying to destroy it would be a stretch. Also, I read here that it is going on in Iraq, our government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars “spreading democracy” over there, I doubt they would want to kill everyone. Also, if there was indeed spraying general populations with the intent to sicken, I am guessing there are people in very high places with a great deal of power that may just “leak” that information for obvious reasons.
Interesting observation in reading all the threads, you consistently dismiss people’s memory or visual observations and and label certain sources as not credible. And you rely heavily on science and facts to support your position. But whenever something doesn’t smell right regarding world events (9/11 stuff, financial collapse, intelligence reports of WMD) the government and media are in lock step with one another endlessly quoting unnamed sources and relying on eyewitness accounts. seems a bit odd, agree?
What seems odd? That I rely heavily on science and facts to support my position?
Given that science, and those facts, what exactly has convinced you that “there is organized activity going on in our skies”?
I have my degree in Biology, so I’m a big science and facts guy, and I dont dispute a thing you’ve said regarding contrails. What has me convinced is that I am outside alot and stumbled on this chemtrail thing a couple months ago. My natural instinct was to start “looking up” alot more. Now, I live in the midwest and nothing too exciting happens here, and 95% of time I haven’t seen anything out of the ordinary. But now on 2 or 3 different occassion for stretches of 3 days at a time I see planes every-frickin-where leaving long white trails (call them what you will), and by the end of the day its cloudy. Now that in conjuntion with the fact that I watch the news alot and I see these live shots with reporters, and son of a gun if there are long white lingering trails in the sky in the background. For me, its been far too common of an occurance (with info in the internet, tv shots, my own observations) for it to be coincidence.
what is odd to me is that when authorities don’t know exactly what happened (pick any subject) the information that is disseminated to the public relies on sources and eyewitness accounts, which are unreliable, but they are presented as fact. You do quite the opposite, which I would almost always tend to agree with, but the fact that you discount anyone’s personal observations based on the sheer volume of people who are questioning whats going on goes against logic, for lack of a better word. Do you even entertain the possibility that the long white lines in the sky may not be contrails and possibility something done with a purpose? I know you will probably say there is no evidence to contradict, and I agree. But could it be possible?
Sure it could be possible, and yes, I entertain the possibility that some of what people see might not be contrails.
But the bottom line is that there’s not been any evidence presented to suggest that what people are seeing are not contrails. There’s lots of evidence that they ARE contrails though, primerily:
1) Photos of what people say are “chemtrails” look exactly like photos of what scientist have been saying are “contrails”. And they’ve been saying it for decades.
2) Eyewitness accounts of what they describe as “chemtrails” match what science tells us contrails should look and act like.
That’s really the majority of what I’ve been writing about here. Of course, in addition to that you get things like “I saw contrails form at 8,000 feet”, or “I saw goo falling from a chemtrail and I got sick”. Now those would be evidence of something odd – but when pressed for details, they really can’t provide anything to back up what they saw, and so I have to assume they were mistaken in the altitude of the plane, and the “goo” was tree sap, and their illness was just an illness. I have to assume those things because that’s the simplest explanation, and there is no evidence to suggest a more complex explanation is needed.
You made an interesting observation in that: “My natural instinct was to start “looking up” alot more.” – you paid no attention to persistent spreading contrails until you heard about the chemtrail theory, and they you started to see them.
So what happened? Were there no chemtrails until you started looking for them two months ago?
Or were there always chemtrails?
Back to 1921?
Or were there always, as the science seems to indicate, contrails – and you just did not pay them much attention? Could this also have happened to other people?
Ahhh yes, we meet in the middle. I grant you that it is even PROBABLE that there were always contrails, and I hadn’t paid much attention. But the fact that you admit that it is POSSIBLE that what people are seeing are not contrails leads me to believe that you are person that has the ability to think independantly. The only reason I even say that is because some of the posts on a different topic state that they think you are a disinformation source, govt agent, whatever the hell they were saying.
Lastly I will add, it appears you have been to handling school, even when people got personal in their posts, you maintainted a non-emotional, factual response. A lost art.
I just don’t see much sense with being anything other than polite, especially with people I don’t know. You never get a constructive discussion between strangers if one side is tossing insults.
What do you think though, about my suggestion that you perhaps only started noticing contrails after you heard about the chemtrail theory?
I think its definately plausible that nothing has changed, but I also think that statistical probability that nothing has changed is slim because the general population has started increasingly observing more trails, odd patterns etc….I would be interested to see the number of internet searches on the subject from 1995 to present.
What if they started observing more trails simply because they were looking for them? There are actually at least twice as many trails as there were a decade ago, as there are far more flights now – but some people claim there were NO trails.
Consider this story: People though they were seeing something new, but in reality were just seeing something they had never looked for before.
http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&File_Id=5136
I think that theory is thin. The sky is something everyone looks at most everyday, and if people were simply observing things they’ve seen everyday, there would be no reason to talk about it. What makes the topic interesting is that people started seeing things they had not seen before, to the point it made them scratch their head and wonder what’s going on? What do you think about it would be interesting to see the # of searches on the internet for the past decade regarding the subject. If you saw a significant spike in the last 5 years, that would be interesting, but could be easily disregarded because more people than ever have internet now.
Did you read the article? People can see tings without noticing them. People look at their windshields every day, but only when there was a scare story did they notice there were a bunch of dings in it.
Lots of people HAVE NOT NOTICED anything odd about the sky. So why is it so odd that people did not notice anything before a particular date, when they first noticed it.
Think about it. Take the 99.99%of the population who have NOT noticed – if any of them were to suddenly notice something, then did that mean it was not happening before?
Obviously not. So why assume it was not happening before for the 0.001% who HAVE noticed.
And people did notice before 1999, see these newspaper reports:
http://contrailscience.com/contrail-confusion-is-nothing-new/
Your theory regarding people not noticing these chemtrails/persistent contrails may not be completely wrong but here is a different spin on things…
This is only a “theory” – perhaps the sky HAS dramatically changed due to manipulation and people are genuinely noticing this, whether it is because they are reading/seeing it on the web, or (less so) they are noticing it themselves without any “help”. These people may be more open minded than the majority of people, or just more observant. However, what also might be happening is that subconsciously thousands/millions of other people are noticing it BUT because they are so closed-minded and/or it would be such a huge leap for them to accept that the government (and other groups) would do something secretly without their knowledge they do not “develop” the subconscious thoughts into their consciousness. Also, it is taken for granted that the sky and clouds are totally natural, therefore it is the last place people would expect strange things to be going on, so it would take longer for the development from subconsciousness to consciousness.
More likely though, they just don’t care or notice it because it is not mentioned on Big Brother, OK magazine (and other crappy pointless programmes that talk about “celebrities” or people wanting to be celebrities).
So to say that just because only a small percentage has noticed is NOT justification to say it does not exist. There is always a wave effect, where a small amount are ahead of the game, before the majority catch up.
My thoughts anyway.
Nik, that’s an interesting theory – but if open minded people are the only ones that are noticing the sky has changed so dramatically, then why dot they ALL leap to “government level conspiracy” as an explanation?
Why do they skip over other possible explanations:
– There are twice as many planes as there were ten years ago
– Engine design has changed over the last 20 years, with engines that produce more contrails
– They moved towns, and contrail formation varies with local climate
– Contrail formation conditions are random, and we just had more over the last few years
– Global warming produces more vapor in the air
– Pollution from China and locally creates more condensation nuculi, making contrails bigger
– Their perception of contrails is heightened because they worry about “chemtrails”.
You see, you don’t have to accept that the government is messing with you in order to notice the sky has changed. Plus, what percentage of people actually trust the government? Sure, quite a few people do – but hardly the 99% that you imply. Heck, 37% of the population think that aliens have contacted the American government, and 80% of Americans think that the US government is hiding the fact that it knows of the existence of aliens.
http://www.cnn.com/US/9706/15/ufo.poll/index.html
A very large percentage of the population seems VERY “open minded”, in the sense of tending to believe ideas that contradict science. If 24% of the popluation believes in witches, then why did they not notice the sky change?
What I think is at issue is this: we have the facts, but do we have ALL the facts? I can’t answer that, and the average american doesn’t have access to the individuals that would have all the facts. You’re obviously a smart guy, and its no secret that there operations and projects that both corporations and governments engage in that are not public information, correct? A healthy bit of skepticism is a responsible approach to anything. The list of subjects is endless. Ultimately I think the bottom line is this, many that have posted on this site have their reasons for raising flags, you rely on existing scientific research, and there is disagreement among us on existing scientific research and what they believe they are observing.
Sure, there are secret projects, both for commercial and national security reasons. See, for example:
http://www.google.com/search?q=“top+secret”+site:.mil
So we know there are thousands of secret projects – but how do you choose which possible secret project you want to believe in? You’ve got to have some evidence. It’s that supposed evidence that I’m focusing on here.
I’m not sure what you mean by “there is disagreement among us on existing scientific research” – what existing scientific research do you disagree with?
I would like to point out a few things I noticed in the first 40 or so posts.
One of your repeating comments is that contrails don’t form at low altitudes in moderate climates. Someone counters with I see them at 20,000 and you again say contrails shouldn’t form in the summer at that altitude. You completely miss the point of the opposing argument; that they are forming at low altitudes and warmer temps is a high indication that they are not typical contrails. Albeit, the altitude measure proposed is based on solid trig functions, it is based on knowing 2 things from which you can solve for anything else. That is your exact horizontal distance from the object and the angle between you and the object. It would be very difficult to know the exact distance to an object in the sky unless you were between the tropics with the sun overhead and a visible shadow.
From a scientific standpoint you both lose on the respective issues and win on the other. I’d also like to address your 99.99999% certainty that what appears to be a contrail is never anything else. I suppose this depends on you school of thought, but IMO anyone who is that certain something does not exist is in no way thinking logically or scientifically. On a quick side note, how did you come upon the mass of 1 tonne of air and a 1g sample? (I really just want to know) I think a logical conclusion by a scientist considering all factors and not wanting to believe that experiments are being conducted could lead to no more than a 90% certainty of non-existence.
Granted, there seems to be a lack of rock-solid evidence but you must consider a number of factors. If some kind of spraying is going on, it can be assumed that those who conduct whatever it is do not want anyone to find hard evidence. Various governments throughout the modern era have been attempting to control the weather and modify climates. The militaries of several currently existing countries have expressed the desire to use weather modification as a weapon and/or as a domestic utility. Moreover, the desire, technology, funding, and theoretical research regarding geoengineering is very likely at a worldwide high. The status of global warming is also likely at a very high degree of acceptance. Accordingly, there is an increased desire to slow the warming trend while energy consumption continues to rise. Currently global warming theory doesn’t provide any clean fuel or energy reduction model that will have a substantial effect in the next 25-50 years if not more. One of the more prominent geoengineering ideas is the solar shield placed between the earth and the sun in a steady orbit. The current cost estimates are in the low trillions of USD (to clarify for europeans that is on the order of $x10^12 or $1,000,000,000,000 if I’m not mistaken the US trillion is the UK billion?) That is based on the Discovery Channel mini series on geoengineering. In 1992 a cost estimate study was done showing that enhanced cloud seeding with sulfur compounds above the ocean, distribution of particulates matter in the atmosphere, propagating phytoplankton to act as CO2 sinks, and population control were some of the most cost effective methods. It also noted that the current data was inconclusive as to the effectiveness of all but population control and that research and development should begin as soon as possible. http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309043867
That source is a bit dated. These are more recent.
David Adam and Liz Minchin. “US urges scientists to block out sun”. Sydney Morning Herald. 29 Jan. 2007 – THE US wants the world’s scientists to develop technology to block sunlight as a last-ditch way to halt global warming.
It says research into techniques such as giant mirrors in space or reflective dust pumped into the atmosphere would be “important insurance” against rising emissions, and has lobbied for such a strategy to be recommended by a UN report on climate change, the first part of which is due out on Friday).
…The US response [to a 2007 IPCC report] says the idea of interfering with sunlight should be included in the summary for policymakers, the prominent chapter at the front of each panel report. It says: “Modifying solar radiance may be an important strategy if mitigation of emissions fails. Doing the R&D to estimate the consequences of applying such a strategy is important insurance that should be taken out. This is a very important possibility that should be considered.”
Catherine Brahic. “Solar shield could be quick fix for global warming”. New Scientist. 5 June 2007 – A solar shield that reflects some of the Sun’s radiation back into space would cool the climate within a decade and could be a quick-fix solution to climate change, researchers say.
Solar shield reverses global warming; emissions reductions do not Robert Roy Britt. “No Stopping it Now: Seas to Rise 4 Inches or More this Century”. LiveScience. 17 Mar. 2005 – “Even if all industrial pollution and auto emissions suddenly ceased today, Earth’s climate will warm at least 1 degree by the year 2100 and seas will rise 4 inches (11 centimeters), according to a new study…The warming is likely to continue through 2400, another study forecasts…The worst-case scenario projects the global average temperature rising 6.3 degrees Fahrenheit within this century and the sea level climbing a foot or more…”Many people don’t realize we are committed right now to a significant amount of global warming and sea level rise because of the greenhouse gases we have already put into the atmosphere,” said Gerald Meehl, who led the study out of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).”
http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11993-solar-shield-could-be-quick-fix-for-global-warming.html
Considering the above, and the cost estimates of frequent low level particle deposition vs high level, and particularly the frequent ideas of cloud seeding, is it not more than 0.00000001% likely that some money, research, and development would go into a program such as increasing the likelihood of creating a persistent contrail, extending it’s lifespan, and improving overall distribution? To that end, one can easily reason that they would test numerous substances for effect, monetary cost, and potential risk factors. Thus, a seemingly logical conclusion is that there is a very likely (<86%) chance that at least some of the theories of chemtrails are true.
Oh, and you misquote J A Blacker with 1/2 minute duration when he says 1/2 hour to 1/2 day. And he also failed to show an adequate method of determining plane or trail height.
The air/sample figures are explained here:
http://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-non-science/
I do know what the point is, exhaust contrails at 20,000 feet in summer would be very odd – if not impossible. So I ask people to provide evidence that there are contrails at 20,000 feet. I get no evidence, so I assume they were mistaken.
Blacker says 1/2 an hour. But the point is the same. He claims contrails cannot last longer than 1/2 an hour. However, they clearly can – and have been reported doing so in vast amounts of scientific literature. The 1/2 a minute was in relation to car exhaust – but that can also last for hours if it is cold enough, like in Alaska.
I agree with you when you say “there seems to be a lack of rock-solid evidence”. I understand what you are saying about how you think the government has an incentive to perform secret experiments for national security. Sure that’s quite possible. But that’s really not what I’m arguing against here.
The chemtrail theory says that there is a massive operation being conducted daily with thousands of planes, and hundreds of thousands of people, and an enormous yet stunningly perfect cover-up. Now that is where you need evidence. Are the trails any different from contrails? No. Is there any evidence of a huge cover-up? No. Have any of the thousands of people involved produced credible evidence? No.
Thats the bottom line – there is no evidence that chemtrails are actually ocurring.
In that respect I have to agree. I’ve only really been into chemtrails for less than a year, and the initial rhetoric is provocative. (no offense to anyone, by rhetoric I just mean argument or debate) And I still would not say I agree that there are no chemtrails whatsoever at this point. I also would not say I believe strongly in the more eccentric(?) ideas of mass mind control or poison as a primary objective. At least not with Ba and Al compounds ;-p Mass mind control or at least manipulation is done through the media and is effective enough.
I was introduced to the chemtrail controversy last year. I started watching the skies with avid interest in early June 2007 in South East Ohio, USA.
In “my” experience, trying to make sense of it, it seemed that mid-summer storm clouds had lots of trails formed above them and that most often (once my theory was formed), the storm clouds came to nothing. Much of the US has been experiencing drought in the past decade or so – so it dovetails neatly with chemtrail theory – wherein the metals involved are supposed to be “water hungry” and condensation forms around them. Thus, they’d be pulling the water from the cloud and preventing rain.
So, in summer of 2007, I watched the skies a lot. On an afternoon of particularly noteworthy activity, I took some photos. One photo (and I really hope I can find it), was of a cirrus-looking cloud, complete with chromatic rainbow effect, passing in front of a cumulus cloud. From what I’m finding on ye olde Internet, cumulus clouds live below 6500 feet and cirrus clouds are above 23000 feet.
Assuming I’m not a crackpot who’s making this up, what on earth would make something that looks like a cirrus cloud form BELOW a cumulus cloud? The temperature is supposed to be too high at those low altitudes, correct?
Now, the other thing I’ve noticed about “heavy chemtrail days,” is that the planes appear to be at multiple different altitudes but the trails look the same. One trail is formed by a small dot of a thing that barely looks like a plane at all. Another will be formed by a plane close enough to the ground that the engines are clearly visible. The trails from the “closer” plane look the same as the ones from the “farther” plane, just bigger. I have no true documentation of this and will make no claims as far as my ability to identify aircraft or estimate altitude. So I’ll let that hang there for now. Just a subjective observation that has fueled my chemtrail belief.
At this point, I’m coming back to the idea of them being contrails – or – at the very least, MOST of them are contrails. But I’ve still seen stuff that doesn’t fit so neatly into the contrail explanation.
Thanks for your patience,
Tombo
I’d have to see a photo, but clouds don’t always fit into neat pigeonholes regarding appearance and altitude. Cirrocumulus clouds can look very like cumulus clouds, and yet form at the same altitude as (or higher than) cumulus clouds.
I found the photos I was looking for. Where shall I send them?
uncinus@gmail.com
I normaly would have thought this whole subject was bulshit. However ive seen huge trails in the sky. And every time they succeed in making clouds form then it gets wavey line formations which eminate from the so called death tower on the farm near here. Every time they spray thewhole family get ill. When they dont everyones fine CONSISTENTLY every time. I moved from a no chemtrail area to a chemtrail area. In the new area all my plants died and theres a fungus taking over the garden (and all of the obvious health issues like coughs colds breathing difficulties etc).
I was so pissed off I called the MOD and the local environmental health. Both who laughed at my “gullability”. Ive become so pissed off about it i decided anything was worth a go at stopping it so I spent over £100 building a don croft type chembuster with orgonite. Guess what? the next day the sky completly changed. The spraying broke up. then black helecopters kept circling. Ive never seen any before so it was one hell of a coincidence. The next night a super loud low stealth bomber circled the small usualy quiet villiage. All of this fuss for some crazy device that is aleged to clear things that aparently dont exist???? that prooved to me there and then chemtrails are real.
If youd like to know if chemtrails are real and harming you or if you are crazy or gulable i would suggest making one of these things and putting it out in your garden. If you do youll see the mask slip and youl never be able to go back to sleep with all the other zombies again. just search chembuster on youtube for instructions. theres a war on for your mind, start reclaiming it.
I purchased my boyhood home from my parents several years ago and the trails that were there when I was a small boy, are just as prevalent now. Aside from an occasional cold, I’ve been as healthy as a horse my entire life. Also, none of my neighbors have ever been sick and a majority of the folks, including my parents, have lived healthy lives into their 80’s. Sorry, persistent contrails do not make people sick.
Oxymoron.
You make it sound like they’re specifically out to get you. Load of self important bollocks!!!!
pushka,
At first I had suspected your post was a parody of a typical chemtrailer post. I mean you had everything: wild speculation, misspellings, accusations that skeptics are the ones who are crazy. then when you mentioned “chembuster with orgonite” I knew that it was an over the top parody. Good work.
pushka,
Hmmm. Chemtrails… black helicopters….
Do you know where your keys are? Is anything missing from your fridge?
here come the agents. so obvious.
how do i know chemtraks are real. the RAF told me…
“how do i know chemtraks are real. the RAF told me…”
Great, now they even have a NEW made up name! And did the RAF tell you that there are “spray programs”, OR that the lines in the sky are evidence of a “spray program”. HUGE difference between the two things. Also, I don’t believe for a second that the RAF told you any such thing. I would appreciate some details.
Also, what is an “agent” and what is so obvious? I find it quite amusing that people who believe differently are automatically referred to as “agents”. Seems AWFULLY paranoid. I also find it funny that you guys call those of us educated in these subjects “agents” but whine about it when we call those UN-educated in these subjects, chemtards.
I certainly believe in chemtrails.Despite the fact that government and military officials and the mainstream media dismisses the phenomenon,uses disinformation propaganda,and even attempts to poke fun at believers;its clear that it IS for real.It even has an official term.Its called “aerial obscuration”,and it involves dispersing micro-fine metallic particles in the upper atmosphere,via the exhaust or outfitted nozzles on airplanes.The most commonly used materials are aluminum oxide and barium stearate.The most commonly stated reasons from those in the know,are for global warming mitigation,weather modification or use with the HAARP system.There is no reason to haggle over whether it exists or not,because it DOES.The only thing people can do,since the program will likely continue for many more years,is to reduce particulate exposure when outdoors.I currently use a mask.
“it involves dispersing micro-fine metallic particles in the upper atmosphere,via the exhaust ”
How on earth would these metallic particles survive being cumbusted thru a jet engine??
How do you know these material are to be found in the trails in the sky? Have there been any actual samples from a contrail? …not a ground based “sample” but an actual IN SITU sample…right from the plume?
If “aerial obscuration” is an official term, then why does it not show up on any official sites?
http://www.google.com/search?q=“aerial+obscuration”+site:.gov
http://www.google.com/search?q=“aerial+obscuration”+site:.mil
or any scientific papers?
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=“aerial%20obscuration“
This is a covert program,and there has been considerable effort to avoid referring to it by any name.But the U.S. air force has used the term aerial obscuration.Clifford Carnicom provides the most compelling evidence of chemtrails,as far as measurable particulate evidence is concerned.SR1419,there have been in-air vacuum captures of chemtrail particles from lingering trails obtained by flying a sample-collecting plane through a heavy chemtrail zone(these samples may not necessarily come from exhaust,but fitted spray nozzles instead)The composition reveals predominantly aluminum and barium,but also lower amounts of other metals,like thorium.Some of these are luminescent or reflective,hence the reason for the visibility of chemtrails at night.So this is the sort of crap raining down on us;powder fine metallic particles,some of which are radioactive.Who knows what the long-term effects will be,not only on humans,but other organisms as well.It is known,for example,that aluminum in soil slows the growth of certain food crops and trees.
Really? Where?
Really? And where is this evidence from the in-air vacuum captures? I can’t see it on his site. Can you give a link?
Benjamin:
Is it?
WIKI “aluminum” and you’ll find:
Aluminium or “aluminum” is a silvery white and ductile member of the boron group of chemical elements. It has the symbol Al; its atomic number is 13. It is not soluble in water under normal circumstances. Aluminium is the most abundant metal in the Earth’s crust, and the third most abundant element therein, after oxygen and silicon. It makes up about 8% by weight of the Earth’s solid surface. Aluminium is too reactive chemically to occur in nature as a free metal. Instead, it is found combined in over 270 different minerals. The chief source of aluminium is bauxite ore.
WIKI “clay minerals” and you’ll find:
Clay minerals are hydrous aluminium phyllosilicates, sometimes with variable amounts of iron, magnesium, alkali metals, alkaline earths and other cations. Clays have structures similar to the micas and therefore form flat hexagonal sheets. Clay minerals are common weathering products (including weathering of feldspar) and low temperature hydrothermal alteration products. Clay minerals are very common in fine grained sedimentary rocks such as shale, mudstone and siltstone and in fine grained metamorphic slate and phyllite.
Ian Bryant:
Yes, we’re a funny lot, aren’t we?
We get our inspiration from people who are ignorant and confused, yet confident enough to go on a science website with not a question, but an answer. But no evidence.
Then we discover wonderful things, such as “the trails remain, therefore they’re spraying” and “no, it’s not the engines that are “spraying”, but spray nozzles” (while showing engines that are “spraying” and NO spray nozzles)! And then the “dust in air” thing, where dust is supposed to have sorted itself out (ground dust as opposed to “trail dust”) so that just “trail dust” has popped into collection trays.
We enjoy the disappointment which must fall to brave chemtrailers when they discover the majority of ALL dust is naturally aluminum, for the reasons given in the post by Anonymous (which was in fact myself, having also failed to notice my cookies were scrubbed).
Anyway, didn’t you say you had been persuaded? Are you in two minds?
Chemtrails are real.Aerosols are real.The material is being dispersed via nozzles,not jet exhaust.All the evidence and independent analysis points to the use of specifically chosen tiny particles of various metallic elements.These elements seem to have one thing in common.They can be ionized,or charged,either by artificial means or exposure to the sun`s rays.Look at the bernard eastlund patent and the HAARP program,and you will see the likely reason they are “spraying” the atmosphere with these particles.The applications are many and varied and seemingly beneficial,but one has to wonder what side effects altering the atmosphere will have on us and the planet.I`m beyond skepticism.I know they are doing this,I just worry about the long term consequences.
If there’s all this evidence, then why can’t you link to some? Preferably the best, and something that’s not already been addressed on this site, like:
http://contrailscience.com/chemical-analysis-of-contrails/
or
http://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/
Indeed, evidence please.
I have to take back the part about not being in jet exhaust.According to a hughes aircraft patent,it IS possible to disperse metallic particles via jet fuel.This means some commercial jets could be(or already have been)equipped to deliver particles along with their military chemtrailing counterparts.It is also apparent,according to independent research and analysis,that biological disease-causing materials and even polymers,are being dispersed.Not just metallic particles.All aircraft may not be dispersing all types of materials at the same time,but all of these materials have been found over the past decade or more.So our atmosphere is being applied with a variety of materials that are hazardous to humans.And it IS making its way to the ground where we breathe.
Benjamin:
According to a hughes aircraft patent, it IS possible to disperse metallic particles via jet fuel.
According to patents, it is possible to do anything. Does this mean the “everything” happens?
What would happen is that the turbines and casing would become eroded by the metal ions and oxides passing through the exhaust at 2000 degrees Fahrenheit in unpredictable ways, and the engine would go out of balance and out of commission.
This means some commercial jets could be (or already have been) equipped to deliver particles along with their military chemtrailing counterparts.
No it doesn’t. Not without the evidence that Boenoid presents.
Particulate matter of any sort cannot pass through aircraft fuel systems without causing them to fail. The fuel could contain a mixture of organic metal liquids which would pass through, but then produce a BRIGHT GREEN or BRIGHT WHITE exhaust.
It is also apparent,according to independent research and analysis, that biological disease-causing materials and even polymers, are being dispersed.
All of these would BURN in air at 2000 degrees Fahrenheit.
A FLAME is known as being a GOOD method of STERILIZATION.
all of these materials have been found over the past decade or more.
All of these materials have been discovered, their origin unknown.
So our atmosphere is being applied with a variety of materials that are hazardous to humans. And it IS making its way to the ground where we breathe.
Well, NO, it isn’t.
If it were, it would turn up in air-samplers all over the world.
Thousands of climate scientists, the majority independent and in foreign countries, are also sampling the atmosphere. These guys have something to prove, and reputations to make. Yet NONE OF THEM haved picked up your ball and run with it. Could it be there’s nothing to discover?
Well,it doesnt really matter anyway.The fact remains,that even if jet fuel isnt being used,aerosol operations are.And these operations have caused a dramatic increase in particulate matter in our air.This increase is NOT explained away by ordinary pollutants from industry.In fact,it repeatedly shows up in communities that have no industry and are located many miles away from those that do.I appreciate healthy skepticism,but obstinance is another matter.It should be clear to even most laypeople of average intelligence that goverment and military are involved in dispersing metallic particles in our atmosphere in order to transform it into some crude plasmatic medium that will allow them to do everything from blocking communications to altering weather and even inducing natural disasters.It may sound like science fiction,but the technology is there folks,and so is the evidence.Regarding air sampling,if these scientists havent picked up the ball and run with it,I would say its likely that they`re afraid to,or at least reluctant to reveal their results or draw any conclusions that might make waves.This is a big and covert operation,and no one involved wants the public in on it.Everyone,including politicians and media,have repeatedly denied these activities and downplayed the potential dangers.
Benjamin:
even if jet fuel isn’t being used, aerosol operations are
Neither you, nor anyone else, has provided any evidence for this. Trails aren’t the evidence, are they, for they are now the jet fuel “not being used”.
these operations have caused a dramatic increase in particulate matter in our air
This is borne out neither by the ubiquitous air samplers of private industry nor by the ubiquitous air samplers of hospitals nor by the ubiquitous thousands of atmospheric air researchers worldwide. There has been a slow WORLD increase in airborne aerosols (over fifty years) which matches the industrial growth of the East. The highest aerosol pollution in the world is found travelling southwestwards from the Indian subcontinent, passing over Northern Africa. It has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE US.
Particulate matter is REPEATEDLY removed from air by the movement of WATER in the atmosphere.
The most massive of volcanic eruptions has ALL TRACE of its particulate matter removed within a year or two, and that may hundreds of millions of tons of fine metallic (mostly Aluminum) ash. There are 1500 active 24/7 volcanoes on the surface of the earth.
Airborne dust gets washed to earth, or the sea, quite naturally.
NOT explained away by ordinary pollutants from industry
All the “chemtrailer” tests fall so short of scientific standards that any scientist knows them to be worthless. No conclusions are valid using such tests.
In fact, it repeatedly shows up in communities that have no industry
If you are testing for aluminum or barium, you’ll find them if you are merely yards from exposed soil. The KSLA test was conducted right in the centre of a barium mining area. Even so, the test water was well below limits and acceptably drinkable.
I appreciate healthy skepticism, but obstinance
Obstinacy. You should forgo yours.
It should be clear to even most laypeople of average intelligence
As was the Earth being flat, and the Sun going round it. The point of Science is to make visible that which cannot be seen. And NOT to come to easy and plausible (and wrong) conclusions.
goverment and military are involved in dispersing metallic particles
There’s no evidence of any sort. There never has been. The only evidence I see is of a great ignorance of science coupled to paranoia.
to transform it into some crude plasmatic medium/blocking communications/altering weather/inducing natural disasters
Here you fail to understand the SCALE of what you are talking about. Blocking comms HAARP can do, but the rest of it would require powers which would VAPORIZE such an establishment. Just because you’ve seen a “planet-smasher” on Star Trek doesn’t actually MEAN that one day it will be possible, (and that day’s today).
It may sound like science fiction
That’s because it IS.
the technology is there folks, and so is the evidence
You don’t even understand this “technology”. Your misunderstanding of it isn’t evidence either. You have simply repeated two unsubstantiated assertions.
Regarding air sampling, if these scientists haven’t picked up the ball and run with it, I would say it’s likely that they’re afraid/reluctant to reveal their results/draw any conclusions that might make waves
Some of these will be private and unaffiliated to anyone. If they found something unusual, why would they keep quiet?
This is a big and covert operation, and no one involved wants the public in on it. Everyone, including politicians and media, have repeatedly denied these activities and downplayed the potential dangers
That’s a great paranoia, my little chicken.
Hey,if you want to be a denier,thats fine.Frankly,I would love to dismiss the whole subject too.But I cant.There are too many things that dont add up.Just remember,you dont have to be paranoid or a believer in conspiracy theories to see the truth about chemtrails.But you do have to open your eyes.The evidence is there for those skeptics with the courage and open mind to actually look at it.
Evidence? You keep talking about this evidence you say it’s out there…well..where is it?
If it’s so clear, you should be able to link to SOMETHING that proves persisting contrails are, in reality, harmful “chemtrails.”
Chemtrails ARE real.And they are NOT water vapor or ice crystals or whatever the officials or skeptics say they are.They are composed of a man-made solid particulate conglomeration of some sort,the exact contents or ratios of which are not known(metallic elements are strongly linked to chemtrail fallout)But they are having a dramatic effect on our cloud cover and weather.Most days you can look up and not see one cloud in the sky that isnt artificial.What concerns me,is the effect on human health,water and soil quality that these chemtrail particulates have when they settle to the ground or are carried down by rainfall.
chockie:
Chokie, why do you suppose that such materials have not been discovered by these machines? (They are used everywhere in factories, towns, and cities.)

Who knows? Perhaps these air samplers have captured those materials,but they havent been reported or studied.Remember,these are covert activities that have been repeatedly denied and kept quiet by officials,including state and federal politicians,EPA and military.The only air sampling evidence likely to be revealed would come from independent researchers,not government organizations,who are probably the biggest users of these machines.Such independent evidence has been revealed,but not officially recognized.The samples continue to show metallic salts,polymers,fibers and even biological materials like molds.
You mean that airborne mold spores were found …… in the air?
Dust, which is also commonly found in the air, contains dirt, which contains metallic salts. It’s also quite likely to contain tiny fibers, many of which are polymers (like polyester).
And if if something odd was being found, how do you know it’s coming from contrails? Why not car exhaust? Or power station exhaust? Where is the connection to contrails?
Where has this “independent evidence” been revealed?
Most people,unfortunately,are not even aware of chemtrails.They are completely oblivious.Even when they are pointed out,people seem unconcerned.But chemtrails are real,and the more intelligent people I know are very concerned about them.They have accepted the plausible,and now,largely confirmed hypothesis,that the military has been dispersing disturbingly large amounts of aerosols into the upper atmosphere with the purpose of modifying it into an electrified gas state.As one man put it,they have basically attempted to create another ionosphere within the lower atmosphere for various electromagnetic applications.And I firmly agree with this based on the strange “electric” clouds and other atmospheric phenomena I`ve observed.I`m also convinced that the military is able to remotely manipulate these ionized materials in the atmosphere.
Well, that should be very easy to scientifically demonstrate then.
So where is the evidence of any of that?
Gerry- I think your right about the electrified clouds. I was flying through some clouds the other night and the whole nose of the plane started to glow with amazing bue-green dentrite strings of electricity. I could reach up to the windscreen and the electricity was drawn to my fingers. It was on the wing tips as well. And then just when we exited the cloud they went away!
Oh wait- nevermind. It was St.Elmo’s fire.
Boy it’s a good thing I figured that out or I might have freaked out.
Sorry- couldn’t resist.
Are you people ready to stop this contrail and water vapor nonsense? I walked out today and counted about 7 aerosol trails.The skies were messier and hazier than I`ve seen in a while.You people can go on trying to ridicule believers in the aerosol program,but we know it is happening.Water vapor trails do not expand for hours or produce strings at the trail edges from the wind currents.You know,I dont think you people realize how serious this is.If these aerosol fallouts keep increasing the alkalinity and conductivity of our soils,we may not be able to grow good crops in some areas.The fallout has already been linked to the death of certain tree species,including the pinon pine in the southwest U.S.In some places,even heavy rain wont improve the growth of certain vegetation because of the high alkalinity of rainwater.All of this has been conclusively linked to aerosol trail fallout.
“Are you people ready to stop this contrail and water vapor nonsense?”
Not a chance…
Please provide a single bit of evidence to show that there is any such thing as “aerosol fallouts” coming from these trails. I have yet to see any such thing and would immediately change my position if anyone were to provide some evidence.
Also, provide me with verifiable proof that “aerosol fallout” has ANYTHING to do with the death of any trees.
Actually, yes they do. Just look in any book on clouds and you will see this described. Even look at old books, like this one from 1970:
http://picasaweb.google.com/Uncinus/CloudsOfTheWorld1972?feat=embedwebsite#
So, you might want to check your information before making bold claims.
The only evidence required is that obtained from using your own two eyes.Just watching the sky and watching these trails completely contradicts the claim that its only water vapor.Occasionally,I`ll even see a water vapor contrail and an aerosol/chemtrail in the same airspace where I can make a comparison.The contrails evaporate almost immediately,the aerosol trails expand and persist and have a denser and smokier appearance.And this frequently occurs in very low humidity,so we know we arent watching ice crystals in supersaturated air.I mean,come on.Who are you people trying to fool? We know what we are seeing.
Did you read the 1970 book? It directly contradicts what you are saying. Are you saying the book is a forgery? What about all the other books on clouds? Are they all fake too?
Why don’t you find a quote in a science book that says that contrails always evaporate almost immediately, and never persist.
Let me toss out a quote from the Encyclopedia.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/623212/vapour-trail
Again, this directly contradicts what you are saying. So what’s going on here? Are you denying all the science of meteorology?
I didnt say that normal contrails always evaporate immediately.But they usually require colder temperatures and much higher humidity to persist.So when we see persisting “contrails” in vary arid climates unsuitable to normal contrails,we must conclude that man-made sub-micron particulates are involved,such as those delivered by aerosols(chemtrails)”Ice crystal plumes” would not be possible under such conditions.
Actually, you said:
Implying that the “chemtrails” are somehow visually different from normal persistent contrails
Are you then saying that “chemtrails” are actually IDENTICAL to persistent contrails, just that they persist when the humidity is too low?
If so, how are you measuring the humidity at 30,000-40,000 feet? Can you give an example of when you did this, and what were the figures and visual observations?
Really? There is ZERO scientific proof for “CHEMTRAILS” and 100% scientific proof for CONTRAILS.
But, instead you’re ignoring every single shred of scientific evidence and believing your eyes instead?
Since you use your eyes to determine the “truth…
Do you believe that the Earth is flat?
Do you believe the Earth is the center of the Solar System?
Do you believe the Sun lives underground and shoots out of the Earth every morning?
Do you see where I’m going with this?
Your eyes can’t tell the chemical composition of a contrail.
Your eyes can’t determine the altitude of a contrail.
Your eyes can’t tell temperature or humidity at 30,000 feet.
Science keeps us out of the Dark Ages, it keeps us from falling back into Witch Trials and ignorance. Please do a little investigation behind the SCIENCE of contrails before you jump feet first into conspiracy theories.
Well written Suntour. Witch trials are already underway as you see on youtube. These people have already made up their minds and have already concluded that anyone that doesn’t think as they do, are the enemy. I have seen comments about “shooting pilots” and “blowing airplanes out of the sky” because of the trails, and it’s just so sad.
These people live in another world. A world where suspicion and assumption matter more than evidence and fact.
@”Faith in Science”…..
Its a fact that contrails (contrail cirrus) have radically changed weather/ecosystems of the planet
and that this exhaust does create aerosol particulate waste.
thats science…
far too late did we/they even confirm/measure this….
on 9/11, how ironic.
To ignore this would be to Ignore science.
Who’s “side” are you on now?
Do you actually see that the ARTIFICIAL augmentation of our planet
to be a thing of concern.
This is a very simple issue, with “crazies” on one side(waste of your time)
and people like yourself(just as unimportant) on the other.
You’re both “wrong” to me.
Care to become a real thinking, feeling, caring human being?
Ok then…be concerned about the EFFECTS YOUR ACTIONS HAVE ON THE WORLD
AROUND YOU. Make changes daily to minimize these EFFECTS.
end of story.
@Faithinscience
There has been a 10-30% drop in recorded sunlight reaching the ground in the past 30 years.
Its called global dimming, now largely attributed to Contrail Cirrus aka “artificial clouds”.
All the climate models are F’d because the moron “scientists” have been overlooking this sort of thing for decades.
This has affected EVAPORATION RATES around the world which has 100% beyond a shadow of a doubt
affected weather/rain etc etc etc….
My father is a now retired US dept of Fish/Wildlife Biologist/Administrator at the Washington level.
What did your daddy do>?
Not so:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming
The dimming trend has actually been reversed recently, party due to lack of volcanic eruptions, and partly due to clean air acts in developed nations.
Of course contrail cirrus have an effect, but not at all like you are suggesting.
Nobody is denying or ignoring it. But if you want to discuss it, please take a little time first to get the science right.
CTYF, I’m editing your posts to remove personal insults. They detract from your argument. If this seems to alter what you mean, then don’t use personal insults.
What “I mean” is that you’re trying to say that POLLUTION IS GOOD.
And what I’m saying is POLLUTION IS BAD.
Your wiki is not proof. I’ve got other info with different numbers.
Once again. Would you like to reiterate what I have just said.
Why is it that you think POLLUTION IS GOOD?
Why do you think that there is “no cause for alarm”?
Just because you want to? Thats not proof.
I laugh at these tests/figures….
‘The effect varies greatly over the planet, but estimates of the terrestrial surface average value are:
5.3% (9 W/m²); over 1958–85 (Stanhill and Moreshet, 1992)[12]
2%/decade over 1964–93 (Gilgen et al., 1998)[15]
2.7%/decade (total 20 W/m²); up to 2000 (Stanhill and Cohen, 2001)[16]
4% over 1961–90 (Liepert 2002)[17]”
UNICINUS did you get the memo? its 2010 already.
I don’t think that pollution is good.
I think that pollution is bad.
Yes it’s 2010, the global dimming trend has reversed, and and we now have global brightening.
http://www.google.com/search?q=global+brightening
Which must raise a few questions about how the contrails are causing that.
Well then…the POLLUTION LOVER that you are you forgot to
continue with your WIKI on GLOBAL DIMMING:>>>>>>
“Global dimming has interfered with the hydrological cycle by reducing evaporation and may have reduced rainfall in some areas. Global dimming also creates a cooling effect that may have partially masked the effect of greenhouse gases on global warming.
Deliberate manipulation of this dimming effect is now being considered as a geoengineering technique to reduce the impact of global warming.”
Eat it
But you said yourself that you’ve only noticed these new trails in the last decade, and during that time the dimming trend has reversed.
So are the contrails brightening things? What are you claiming here?
OMFG man!
Its not “oh, see now you’re wrong, now we have global dimming”>.
THATS THE LOGIC OF A CHILD!
The whole thing (PLANET) is FUCKED up!!
Just about as fucked up as your average american, based upon
“rx drugs” “diet” “education” “media” “entertainment” etc…..
That is WHY we should STOP with this wasteful pollution nonsense.
You’re being manipulated by larger powers in the globalist game with these new
“climate-science” buzzwords!!!
Whats the point of the debate when YOU KNOW FOR A FACT
that it is the larger CORPORATE/BANKING MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
that is to PROFIT from any and all of these technologies.
I think the problem here is that you are unclear what you are arguing about.
I agree with you that the planet is “fucked up”, that we have horrible levels of pollution, that man-made climate change is a major issue, that there is a lot wrong with the pharmaceutical industry and the military-industrial complex.
But that’s not the issue here. The question is: have contrails changed?
You seem to want to talk about something else, something that is tangentially related, but not really the same thing.
If you want to simply say that contrails are pollution, and that their effect on the weather is something that needs to be carefully studied, then fine, I agree with you
If you want to say that we should stop driving cars and flying planes because of pollution, then also fine, I agree with the sentiment, but it’s not very practical.
If you want to say something else, like there’s a covert operation going on that has changed contrails to alter the weather, then please say it, say it explicitly, and provide the evidence on which you base it.
Wow UNICINUS.
GO BACK AND RE-READ ALL OF YOUR RESPONSES>
HOPEFULLY IF I TYPE IN ALL CAPS ONE DAY YOU WILL ACTUALLY READ WHAT I’M
WRITING BEFORE RESPONDING WITH YOUR AGE OLD RESPONSE:
“What are you claiming here?”.
YOU KNOW DAMN WELL WHAT I’M CLAIMING.
I’M CLAIMING THAT THERE ARE WEATHER/WAR/IONISPHERIC/ etc etc…
TESTS/EXPERIMENTS ONGOING, THAT THERE HAVE BEEN
AND THAT I AM
OPPOSED TO THEM.
I’M CLAIMING THAT
CONTRAIL CIRRUS, AKA AEROSOL INDUCED ARTIFICIAL CLOUDS
HAVE BEEN ONGOING AND
I AM OPPOSED TO THEM.
DID YOU GET THAT?
OK. So dont ask “what I’m claiming”.
I dont care what you THINK is “practical”.
I thought we were talking laws of cause and effect here, not what Joe Blow thinks is practical.
Most people would probably call it IMPRACTICAL to live the way I do, but I
get plenty of exersize, spend less money and eat fresh organic produce.
you think I’m going to take a lesson in practicality from just anybody?
Yes, I do think/imply/am concerned about and speculate that there are covert operations using sprayed (aerosol) particulates of different kinds around the globe for different “intended” reasons.
you cannot DIS-Prove that.
Pretty much end of argument.
Okay, because one minute you were claiming that contrails cause global dimming, but then it was pointed out that during the years that YOU have noticed contrail cirrus, there had actually been global brightening.
Would you care to modify your claim about global dimming being “largely attributed to Contrail Cirrus”? Or your claim about the change and increase in contrail cirrus. You can’t have both.
Now you are being a bit vague about what you are opposed to. Of course there are tests going on in all the fields you mention. But do you think that contrails are related to any of them? You seem to separate the
“tests” from the contrail cirrus in your response above – is that because you now think they are two separate issues? Or do you think that the contrail cirrus have been altered deliberately?
Now, if we can clear up what you are claiming, then can we move on to what the evidence is? Even better, maybe you could help me fill in the blanks on the “Best Evidence” page, with some actual evidence.
http://contrailscience.com/chemtrails-the-best-evidence/
?
In fact, UNCINUS, just this past year alone
both RUSSIA and CHINA were ON THE RECORD(in major mainstream news media)
for claiming the wonders of their
“Chemical mists sprayed from planes” to create favorable weather conditions at certain times and places.
Remember,
Yes I know what “cloud seeding” is.
Silver iodide doesnt need to be kept top secret.
Get what I’m hinting?
No I don’t know what you are hinting. Why don’t you just say it?
No, because the argument is not an either/or thing. It’s about the evidence. I don’t think you have any evidence that this is going on. I think that your videos show nothing unusual beyond normal contrail cirrus. That’s really what the argument is about.
For the record, can you at least say you were wrong about contrails and global dimming? Seeing as we now have global brightening.
Yes, I can have both.
“Global Dimming” and “Global Brightening” can/could be caused by
any number as yet to be determined interrelated aspects.
Can you understand that?
There is no “proof” for what is yet to be attempted to explain.
And even once an established “official opinion” is found this does not mean that it is “correct”.
Remember back when the earth was flat?
Yes, PERSISTANT AEROSOL INDUCED CONTRAIL CIRRUS CAUSES “GLOBAL DIMMING”!
BUT….that doesnt mean that we’ve even truly
DEFINED SCIENTIFICALLY WHAT
“GLOBAL DIMMING/BRIGHTENING” IS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!!
THESE ARE
BUZZ-WORDS!!! JUST BUZZWORDS!!!
who do these knee-jerk terms serve?
The scientific community?
One straw man after another after another. You’re right Uncinus, he has no idea what he’s arguing about.
Where are the chemicals? Where is the evidence? So far, I see NONE.
I guess circumstantial BS is good enough for some people.
Remember…if you hear about a “spray program” somewhere, at some time, that automatically means that all the trails we see, EVERYWHERE are part of the program.
Gimme a break!
Until I see some evidence, I will remain convinced that these trails are persistent contrails. There is no reason to believe otherwise…unless one is prone to such things.
http://www.impactlab.com/2008/03/30/china-planning-massive-weather-modification-for-olympics/
I find it so hilarious when people suggest that since their Daddy was knowledgeable about a subject, that they automatically inherit the knowledge. Personally, I don’t rely on the knowledge of my ancestors. I rely on my own education, which happens to actually relate to this discussion.
And “believing” there are “chemicals” in the trails is MEANINGLESS without evidence. Science doesn’t rely on supposition and assumption. Does a SINGLE chemtrail believer understand the scientific method?!? It sure doesn’t seem that way.
http://www.impactlab.com/2008/03/30/china-planning-massive-weather-modification-for-olympics/
Hmmm….I don’t see anything about these weather mods resulting in long, white long-lasting trails in the sky. But, I guess that if one “believes” it to be related to the trails I see over my house or in youtube videos, it must be true.
LMAO!
The assumptions are strong with you!
The Russian and Chinese weather modification was just cloud seeding, really nothing new, just tried on a larger scale. None of this is secret. It’s been going on forever, and as Faithinscience notes, looks nothing like contrails.

No shit shirlock, you need to go back and read every one of my post!
“chemtrails” is a slang term, used by different people to describe different phenomenon.
Aerosol/Contrail/Persistent Contrail/Chemical mist are more easily defined.
PERSISTENT CONTRAIL CIRRUS does cause cloud cover which in turn effects the weather.
This means “chemtrails”/PERSISTENT CONTRAILS are WEATHER MODIFICATION.
did I write ONE DAMN THING about
PERSISTANT CONTRAILS having ANYTHING TO DO with cloud seeding?
DID I?
NO. so please STOP CLAIMING THAT I am lumping
PERSISTANT CONTRAILS in with CLOUD SEEDING!!!!
THEY ARE 2 separate forms
of
WEATHER
FUCKING
MODIFICATION.
are we clear?
NO FUCKING SHIT the RUSSIANS AND CHINESE USED
SILVER IODIDE and LIQUID NITROGEN!!!
BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY ARE NOT ALSO DOING ANY OTHER KIND OF WEATHER MODIFICATION!!!!
ARE WE CRYSTAL FUCKING CLEAR?
And this is my
CRYSTAL FUCKING CLEAR
EVIDENCE
OF
WEATHER
MODIFICATION…..
Can you dispute this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4A0Io4Hyp0
No. You cannot.
So why do you keep saying
“but show me some evidence”.
I’ve done it, over and over and over.
Its artificial weather modification.
Its ongoing, It completely changes the cloud cover/sun/weather.
SO FUCK OFF.
It does not mean that they are either, in fact it’s totally meaningless when talking about contrails.
Let’s try to keep on topic. Contrails. Are they different? Are you making any claims about contrails? If so, then what is the evidence?
Yes UNCINUS,
lets keep “on topic”.
Contrails, yes, they are a part of weather modification.
THEY ARE, in and of themselves, WEATHER MODIFICATION.
That is the Proof.
If you want to talk “CHEMTRAILS” the slang term for a variety of phenomenon, thats a totally different argument.
Are you understanding this???
Personally I consider “PERSISTANT CONTRAILS” to be “CHEMTRAILS”, because
they TECHNICALLY are. Like you’ve proven over and over on this website.
(once again what is the composition of persistent contrails???)
HELLLOOOOOOOOOO earth to asshole!
Is there more to keep talking about?
I’ve already provided you with all the evidence needed.
In fact your website proves this, time and time again.
In the video I see:
- Some planes leaving contrails
- Some quotes regarding studying contrails, and how they affect the weather.
That’s all.
So sure, that’s evidence of weather modification. however, and excuse my emphasis, but, NOBODY HAS EVER DISPUTED THAT CONTRAILS AFFECT THE WEATHER
It almost seems like you are trying to win an argument by redefining it. But if all you want to say is that contrails affect the weather, then yes, I agree, you win. If you say “contrails” are technically “chemtrails” because they contain chemicals, then yes, again, I’d agree (except that’s not how most people use the term, so you are kind of inventing language there).
However, what you really seem to be saying is that persistent contrails are being deliberately created with the specific purpose of modifying the weather, and more specifically over your house. Is this correct? Because if that’s what you are saying, then that is what we should discuss.
not really inventing language. Chemtrail is a non-technical slang term which revolves around the application and experimentation with plane trails/spray /aerosol in order to do a myriad of things.
Sorry but you pick a rather slippery stance. Chemtrails are a big question mark.
There is a mountain of “evidence”, that you dont call/accept as “evidence”. Depends on how you define it.
For example, UNCINUS
I’ll give you a quick Lesson on this little thing called “reality”….
I have a cousin, now I think he’s at Langley(sp?) AFBase. He’s in the airforce.
About 6 or 7 years ago he held a position in the Pentagon. This was like one of his first gigs into the Airforce.
And basically, all he could “tell me” about his job was that he was the ONLY USAF Member in the room
operating the overhead projected computer screens/etc. for representatives of 7 countries that were working together on a plan for a fighter/plane that could go into space orbit and back.
Ok, Uncinus. Use your brain here.
Does this prove the existence of the said plane?
Does it prove the non-existence of the said plane?
If the plane actually exists and is sitting in a hanger somewhere, but there isnt one
person who can verify its existence, does it still exist?
Truth is far stranger than fiction,and there never was a work of fiction not based on reality.
Uncinus, how scientific IS your method?
Do I think that “persistent contrails” are created for the “specific purpose of modifying the weather”?
Well, as you’ve so finely made the point,
they would modify the weather regardless of weather they were
deliberate or not,
SO…based upon the track records of the past century or so of human “progress”…
you bet yer ass I think they are in some way being deliberately used. The problem is
that you cannot disprove it. So why waste your time?
I mean, you’re writing to someone who already grasps the far more ancient origins of life on earth.
Hell, UNCINUS why do you go debunk aliens! Or, based upon lack of evidence, do you also live in a
parallel dimension where there is NO life elsewhere past the edge of beyond?
Sheesh.
Do I think they are spraying directly over my house? No, I KNOW its over my house silly!
Deliberately? Seriously man…I’ve taken this issue to this extent, you think I care if you deliberately or “accidently
as a by-product of some other unrelated action” shoot ME IN THE FACE? You think I’d care why?
No hombre, I just care to make it STOP!
You seem to care. You seem to be claiming that it’s deliberate. Now if you DON’T think it’s deliberate, then I have no issue with you. If you DO think it’s deliberate, then I have to disagree with you, and point out that you’ve no evidence of it being deliberate.
Again, I’m not arguing if contrails have an effect on the weather. Everyone accepts that they do. The ONLY question here is if it’s deliberate or not. Now the only evidence you can give is: “based upon the track records of the past century or so of human “progress”… you bet yer ass I think they are in some way being deliberately used. ” – well unfortunately that’s not going to convince anyone.
Now can you explain why, if there is deliberate manipulation of contrails, there is no evidence of that manipulation? The contrails look and act the same. No chemicals have been detected. There are actually LESS aerosols in the air than ten years ago. So on what do you base your highly specific belief?
Oh neat! it's your own personal version of Carl Sagan's "The Dragon In My Garage" story!
The story goes on but you get the idea…
CCTYForg:
Wait a minute…
Have you considered that idea, and how expensive and unlikely that is?
There is no avoiding the fact of the amount of ENERGY that you would have to impart to a fighter pilot and his weapon system to put it into orbit and bring it down again.
Consider the X15. That gets a high-altitude bomber launch and a top speed of 5,000 mph, some 12,000 mph SHORT of orbital velocity. Not only that, the X15 cannot re-enter because its titanium skin would melt. So it would need to be a sort of TILED X15 with a BOOSTER ASSEMBLY strapped to it, air-launched by a B52.
That makes for a really RAPID RESPONSE fighter, does it?
How many remotely-operated drone aircraft could you get for that, do you think?
Wow…It appears that someone has become quite unhinged.
Please correct me if I’m wrong…I thought this website was created to simply explain that the lines in the sky don’t have to contain chemicals in order to persist…THE END. Of course, they DO contain some “chemicals” in the form of combustion gases which have nothing to do with persistence other than providing some condensation nuclei.
SOMEONE here isn’t effectively articulating his/her position.
I’d say he was in a meeting about the F-35 Lightning II, the “Joint Strike Fighter”, and that someone mistook hyperbole for specifications.
@ Suntour
Sure, but my anecdote is, well, a true one!
It is a true story! Not made up at all. I asked him for more info, that was all he would tell me.
7 countries(obviously US is one) working on a fighter with air to space and back capabilities.
@ Faithinscience:”SOMEONE here isn’t effectively articulating his/her position”
What position? This isnt even a debate. There are no clearly defined terms to the debate~!
I am an environmental activist and UNCINUS is an Am-Pilot and “contrail enthusiast” who
obviously doesnt like “chemtrail theorists” for some reason.
(as if it were a BAD thing to be concerned about air pollution! can you believe that?)
Coming from Socal I’d think UNCINUS would care even more.
I think he’s a liar, just SAYS he cares. Just another OC or westside los angelino.
If he’d at least give us a little info on his daily life you’d begin to understand the agenda of this site.
But he’s afraid the “chemtrail conspiracy crazies” are going to track him down! ha~
Agenda’s are always caught up in the personal lifestyle.
I EXCLUSIVELY ride a bicycle and primarily eat locally grown organic produce.
(are you beginning to piece together what MY “agenda” is?….good!)
If each one of you gave me a breakdown on your family background, job, interests, a “day in the life”…
I’m pretty sure I could pick apart your agenda(worldview) too.
@UNCINUS “I’d say he was in a meeting about the F-35 Lightning II, the “Joint Strike Fighter”, and that someone mistook hyperbole for specifications.”—
Why must someone always “be wrong” with you? Is that how you go about normal conversation?
Do you just start having conversations with people and say “no I think you’re wrong about the color of your toothbrush”…???
I went through the wiki on your fighter. Couldnt find anything that matches what I said.
So why do you assume,”you must be wrong, it must be this…. or that..or whatever”?
Thats a PROBLEM you have UNCINUS.
Thats why you’re not very good at being objective.
My cousin doesnt make jokes or stretch the meaning.
Also I have a fantastic memory. And pay very fine attention to detail. I remember very vividly
asking him about the Pentagon gig. What a day in the life was like, and what EXACTLY he did there.
What he told me was precisely what I wrote.
And mind you he was part LINGUIST so part of his duties in this “special project”.
I’m not in the least bit against people with anti-pollution views. It think pollution is a bad thing. If all the chemtrail theorists are are people who think contrails are pollution, then I’ve got no problem with that.
What I do have, is a problem with some very specific claims – that some contrails are being deliberately, and consistently, in large numbers, modified to affect the weather, or for some other purpose. That’s what I say there is no evidence for. To that end I point out the science behind contrail formation – and how they act the same now as always.
That is what the debate is about. It’s not about normal pollution. It’s about deliberate contrail modification with specific intent.
I’m not sure I follow your point about the jet. No, someone on the internet saying their cousin once told them about a jet that could go into orbit does not automatically make that jet real. Now if there were a bunch of scientific papers, newspaper reports and many eyewitness accounts, then that’s a much stronger case.
All you said was:
I provided you with a link to the F-35, about which you said,
Which is quite frankly wrong, as the page says representatives of multiple countries were working together on a fighter/plane. Not one that gets into orbit though (which is also different from “air to space and back”, so you might want to clarify exactly what you remember there)
The details are perhaps beside the point. Can you explain what was the point you were trying to make with your anecdote about the plane?
Exactly
CTYForg, do you believe there is “deliberate contrail modification with specific intent”?
Evidently he does, according to his web site:
http://ctyforganization.blogspot.com/
So it’s a little disingenuous to try to twist the argument around to just “I’m against pollution”.
Those ARE water crystals. That looks exactly like a cloud from 100 years ago.
Wow, his website is just…panic central.
OH. Ok.
What I forgot to mention was that they “were not merely water vapor crystals” of course.
I’ll make a bet with you.Gentlemens bet, or cup of coffee, new bike, whatever.
Very simple.
Here it is.
There IS more to this “chemtrail hoax phenomenon” that what you propose.
But I’m sure of how you see it, based upon “lack of ENOUGH(in your opinion) evidence”
that there are, were, or could be such operations/experiments etc..
Black ops are black ops and I’m calling our lovely military industrial complex’z bitch ass out on this bluff.
For the 9/11 wtc building demolitions to have been, to this day still not made public record as an undeniable fact, anything is possible. Please, turn off your TV’s and really take a look at the world around you. Dig deep
and you’ll see the obvious connections in everything that is for lack of a better word, evil. the deliberate kind.
Ever heard of a guy named Edward Bernays?
I’m going to bet on there definitely being something up in connection with what you call “normal”
and “not all that often occurring persistent contrails/cirrus aka artificial cloud cover”. The phenomenon happens here in los angeles far more often that you make it seem. Total cover. Its not like old “smog days” in the late 80’s early 90’s …now its “white out” days with strange type of almost nuclear radiation like, flourescent sun glow masked by pure white mass of cloud/haze from horizon to another.
Thats just my opinion, and as a lifelong fairly accomplished visual artist, traveller and naturalist, what I have
noticed coupled with mountain of red flags just doesnt add up. The smoking gun evidence for or against is rather elusive. My collection of photos is beyond words to anyone who never thought to notice whether the “weather” was artificial (augmented by man) or not!
There seems to be something going on. Its not JUST the increase in air traffic (which still doesnt account for what we’re seeing).
If this is only a part of the reason for persistent NEVER-DISSAPATING ICE+POLLUTION FAKE CLOUDS
http://www.carbon-black.org/safety.html
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0102.html
then this is a big issue regardless of whether you care that I think its deliberate or not.
Is war deliberate? Or Is is a Given? Is it a by-product? Or a necessity?
Theres all sorts of nanotech shit floating around out there and being sold in supermarkets as we speak.
Give up the fight, go read a Kurzweil book and snap into it. Thats the sort of future those with the power to do so
WILL lead humanity down.
Perhaps its the earth that is changing in dynamic ways for any number of reasons?
It might as well BE the US military that left the trail in that picture.
My expression is what makes it good art. Trully effective. Thought provoking.
There is more than just water-vapor.
And you dont really know, for a fact.
The only evidence IS my photo.
So i’ll keep gathering the evidence.
Three words come to mind…
“Ignorant paranoid alarmist”
And it isn’t an insult, if it’s true.
You don’t really mean that, do you?
You mean turn off your TVs and get brainwashed by the internet instead.
Your views are obviously not born from taking a look at the real world.
Can someone please explain to me why it’s up to to those of us that believe the trails are nothing but persistent contrails to “prove they aren’t full of chemicals”?! I keep finding folks on the internet who DEMAND that I prove them wrong. We are on the DEFAULT side… Our side has already BEEN proven to be the truth. Then the “internet educated” folks come around and demand that we prove them “WRONG” when they haven’t even BEGUN to present a decent case for “chemtrails”.
It’s up to THEM to provide some evidence that the explanation that has existed for 70+ years is somehow, in error. I have yet to see ANY evidence that is not circumstantial or an outright (paranoid) assumption/speculation that comes REMOTELY close to “proving” the trails in the sky are anything but a normal byproduct of aviation within specific atmospheric conditions.
And “The government has done X, Y and Z in the past, so I know they are doing this now” Is JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH! Yes, we get it…there are “special operations” and clandestine groups out there doing all sorts of things…but PLEASE provide EVIDENCE (also PLEASE read the definition of that word) to prove “they” are doing anything to harm us (or save us, for that matter) with the trails in the sky. The burden of proof is on the “chemtrail” believers.
I’ll take the bet! Let’s say $100. You demonstrate that there’s “something up”, and I’ll give you $100.
First of all, you might want to define the terms of the bet. I take it you mean you’ll demonstrate that a significant percentage of the trails you see over Los Angeles are being deliberately modified in a way that makes them more persistent for some specific reason unrelated to engine efficiency, that this is something new, and that it’s deliberate. (I said deliberate twice, as it’s the important factor here).
That sound about right? I’ll give you five years in which to do this. If you don’t do it in five years, then you owe me $100. You may choose a different time period if you like.
I’d love to get a piece of that action!!!!!
Then again, how would we verify the evidence? So far, they (the “chemtrail believers”) are under the assumption that the evidence they have NOW is air tight.
How would we find an independent party to make the final decision? They would want Carnicom to be the judge and we would want someone with actual knowledge of the subject.
Oh well…it’s an interesting idea.
Good luck getting a running bet going. It seems that when it comes down to it these people just don’t believe enough in Chemtrails to actually involve money. On numerous occasions on this site I’ve offered to STOP spraying in exchange for a fee but so far no one has accepted. Consequently I’ve continued sraying all over the country. Today I sprayed Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and Arkansas. I got Texas a few times actually. Many of my coworkers were spraying Arizona and New Mexico today I noticed. I bet we’ll cause a system to go through there soon. Texas gets sprayed again on Sunday to set up for the rain on Monday.
I’m actually quite serious though. I find the prospect of having to quantify your ideas in terms of betting $100 on them will greatly help in clarifying your ideas. And in the case of conflicting ideas, the specific language of the wager will help clarify exactly what the area of disagreement is.
So CTYF, what would you like to bet $100 on? What claim can you make that you can verify over the next five years?
in 5 years 100 bucks might not be worth a damn thing.
(you know they are merely symbolic representations of debt right? and not actually “worth” anything, unless the group of people who use those notes used by enough people by social conditioning without questioning the premise on the monitary SYSTEM itself)
You should re-consider the bet i think.
You dont seem to be well rounded enough individual to understand the implications of this MASSIVE pollution
problem that this is. Its just as brutal as war. I’m as much of an alarmist about war as i am deliberate or uninteded weather modification, so what makes any of you think I give a FUCK what your opinion is? Thats the funny part.
The president lies, all these politicians lie, the military lies, the “religions” lie…and you think I’m going to
give 2 shits as to what Uncinus thinks? sucker!
The other irony, Uncinus, is that you havent begun to fathom what radical changes might occur on earth in
5 years time. On any level you can imagine.
You’re the one who thinks you pretty much “know it all” right?
I’m beginning to think there certainly strange is occurring, and that that its not entirely in the grasp of the mighty war-machines. Thats why you, and most of the other geeks up in this place are really putting your emphasis where it
doesnt need to be.
Man CTYForg, you are taking allllll the fun out of this for me.
only I get to have the fun!
Well, I’d be happy to take the bet in gold if you like. Say 0.1oz? Or maybe a 500 9mm Luger rounds. You choose. The point is that you actually put something behind your assertions. I’d even be willing to take the chance that $100 will be worth pretty much the same in five years and stick with that.
So what are you willing to bet about contrails? And on what facts exactly?
um….I’ve got a multimedia performance to put on at the Museum of Contemporary Art on Saturday night, so…
I’m really far too busy for your petty nonsense Uncinus. We’re going to be imparting a message to at least 500
teenagers from the Socal area on the dangers of…chem, er….persistent contrails. Just to start with.
total mindblowing MoCAburger “panic central” extravaganza. sponsored by Clearchannel outdoor.
See you there! exactly 7:30 we perform for 25 minutes. If you have any teens in your social circle bring them out
7 to 10pm, free.
thats this Coming saturday night March 13th.
So you dodge the question?
Put your money (gold/bullets) where your mouth is.
I just saw some more chemtrails today..alot of activity.Trails everywhere.None of them were water vapor! This is a solid material that expands rather than evaporates.Any layman with two eyes can see that this is not normal.The skies are so messy that alot of people dont even go outside anymore.Atmospheric modification IS happening,no matter how much you scientific rationalists would like to deny it.And the plausibility for such an operation is abundant.I attended a clifford carnicom lecture in new mexico,and he had me well convinced that the chemtrail threat is real.And this is a man with credibility.
“None of them were water vapor! ”
PROVE IT!
And who says “atmospheric modification” isn’t happening?! My position is simply that the lines in the sky aren’t linked to weather modification through “fact”, only through assumption.
The assumption being that since weather modification happens in the sky, the trials “must be” related to such programs. I have yet to see ANY evidence to support this claim. Those who believe in “chemtrails” SHOULD require more evidence to support their beliefs. It’s sad that they don’t.
Quite right, none of them were water vapor.
They were all a solid material, which expands rather than evaporates.
They were ICE CRYSTALS, just like any cloud is at that altitude. They expand when the weather is right, as it was yesterday.
Your argument is cyclical and pointless. And you dont even have a question.
This is just a ping pong volley.
I lead by example not by gambling. Thats what the powers-that-be do against humanities will.
Wow, Captain Presumptuous Asshole to the rescue again!
The “anonymous” person who just posted yesterday…how exactly do you know the weather conditions when
they didnt even mention where they are~?
You just sound like a prick.
…as opposed to you???
So says the guy who has to insult and swear rather than discourse in a civil manner.
…and you wonder why you are taken for a fool.
You suggested the bet. Comment 143.
Feel free to suggest terms that are acceptable.
“I lead by example not by gambling.”
Yeah, it’s SO obvious that you are a “leader”. Please lead us to some EVIDENCE that supports your claim that the trails are being “sprayed” deliberately. Wow, talk about a pretentious asshole!
If the trails form and persist…the weather conditions are “right”. I would LOVE to see a single bit of evidence to support the claim that trails are appearing when the conditions aren’t “right”. Funny how no one has been able to present such evidence….ever!
There is OBVIOUSLY a very good reason why.
No uncinus,they were NOT ice crystals.Not in a flight altitude humidity range of less than 50%.You guys need to quit pushing this ice crystal crap.Ice crystals cannot occur under the conditions which most chemtrails occur because the moisture levels are too low.Most ice crystals would form in the middle of the troposphere,along with clouds,not higher up where the aerosols are being sprayed.Remember,we are talking man-made aerosols here,not jet exhaust.When you see how messy the skies become following heavy jet activity,it becomes evident that these trails are NOT predominately water vapor from exhaust,they are aerosol plumes coming from somewhere else on the aircraft.The photos taken of these aircraft definitely bear this out.
BTW I do not “agree” with the anon posting here.
I dont agree with the anon nor do I agree with UNCI.
I think the truth is somewhere in between the “knows” and “what we don’t knows”….
The “more air traffiic” doesnt account for this major increase in TOTAL contrail cirrus cover that happens…
and there isnt one of you that can tell me EXACTLY the altitude/temp/humidity of any of these regions/times when contrail/aerosol barrage occur. and PERSIST, INDEFINITELY.
lets say in LA, CA far more often than 2-3 times a year. Its far more frequent than that.
I’d say at LEAST 10-25% or MORE of the time. YEAR ROUND!
Lets just say, so often that even alarmists (like myself i guess?) get totally bored with the redundancy of these
WHITE OUT days.
Ok numbnuts. If you know how to read. Go back a re-read everything I’ve written here.
What I just posted was this:
“I’ve never seen a plane go and get up and start flying by itself…unless its a drone.”
By definition, every piloted plane is piloted DELIBERATELY. right? Could someone pilot a plane by accident?
Earth to numbnuts!!!!
Do people deliberately spew exhaust out of their cars? Looks like its deliberate to me.
Its your choice to turn the key!
SO ONCE AGAIN Faithinscience. Get lost!!! or ask an intelligent question.
This is why you are a dis-info agent, you’d actually rather talk about a stupid bet instead
of focusing on the investigation.
READ….this is why I keep calling you an ASSHOLE.
its because you folks dont actually READ.
I said, GENTLEMENS BET!!! a cup of coffee, a new bike whatever..!!!!
You’re so concerned with what is not related one bit to the issue at hand.
My issues are with WEATHER MODIFICATION AND POLLUTION.
Thats what a Chemtrail is to me! So you lost, asshole!
“chemtrailers” as you call them are far less politically significant as, lets say EVANGELICALS…?
so…if you’re so concerned about the tin-foil hat camp, why dont you start debunking
EVANGELICALS political beliefs? Surely you’d get somewhere, and actually do some good.
YOU ARE THE ONE WHO SAYS THERE IS ‘nothing’ to this whole
issue? right?
I say you havent even come close to beginning to understand what could be going on.
And you’re IGNORANT enough to assume you think you “know it all”.
Thats not a scientific position at all.
That’s it? You don’t think the government is deliberately spewing trails filled with more chemicals than normal exhaust?
In that case, you want a “contrails are pollution” site.
Actually its aready been pointed out by UNCINUS on this site many times
that PERSISTENT CONTRIAL CIRRUS aka MAN MADE CLOUD COVER
is weather modification, or lets rephrase…it modifies the weather.
So yes, according to NASA “persistent contrails” which create “lasting contrail cirrus over 100’s of kilometers” are
weather modification. One of the biggest sources of weather change.
Sure I do think that the “gov’t is spewing trails filled with chemicals”.
But that doesnt mean that persistent contrails and other “spray operations” arent going on
in tandem does it? Theres alot going on in the world that you dont know about.
Can persistent contrail cirrus and gov’t weather modification not exist at the same time?
There is no good reason for me to NOT believe in
weathermod/experimental spraying/stratospheric/ionospheric/scalar etc etc tests!!!
Personally I think that these massive “spray days” have something to do with the earth/sun/solar system…
climate changes. I think its beyond the powers that be and that they are barely able to understand what
could be the real scientific truth.
I think those who have the power to do these “tests” really are just madmen!
Just like the bomb. same old story. Madmen. Anti-human.
I have faith in science and scientific rationality too,but I also know what i`m seeing with my own eyes,and it is NOT water vapor.And,in fact,its sound science(along with common sense)that tells us that we are seeing the result of aerosols,not water vapor from engine exhaust.For example,sound science tells us that real clouds and persisting contrails both need high moisture levels and that when these high moisture levels dont exist,that there must be another explanation.
I can. But I have to be a part of the operation to do so. Next time I’m spraying I’ll give you all the numbers. Our boxes will tell us that and much, much more about the air.
I’m starting to get confused regarding the semantics of this argument.
Please clarify- are you saying that simply by its natural makeup and existence that persistant contrails are naturally modifying the weather and spreading pollution (both visual and traditional)? Are you further saying that this is effect is intended?
Are you also saying that, in conjunction with the persistant contrails there is a seperate operation to lay down different chemtrails to accomplish something elicit?
I think we’re all in agreement here that persistant contrails are modifying the weather and that they are contributing pollution to the atmosphere and that the aircraft that are creating them are flying deliberately.
Am I right?
Argghhhh…
There is a huge difference between a byproduct of aviation affecting the weather and a deliberate “spraying” of the byproduct to deliberately affect the weather. You have no evidence to support your position. Well, aside from “they were bad men in the past, so they must still be bad men….” Of course, that was paraphrasing….but represents the gist of your whining. CTYForg, you are just a typical ignorant paranoid alarmist chemtard. And that is all you will ever be. Please stop pretending that you arguing this from a knowledgeable platform. You couldn’t be more ignorant if you wanted to be. Science has EASILY explained these trails and there is NO REASON to believe the “gov’t is spewing trails filled with chemicals” without a single shred of evidence to suggest any such thing.
Anonymous, HOW are you so sure that these trails aren’t the result of water vapor being deposited in varying atmospheric conditions?!? And how are you so sure these conditions don’t exist where these trails are being deposited?!
I challenge you to provide EVIDENCE to prove this ridiculous claim you keep making about the conditions where these trails are deposited. prove the temp is too warm, or the air too dry. And don’t think for a second that we will accept “it looks too warm and dry from down here” as legitimate evidence. If ONE of you people could provide proof that the EXACT location that a trail is deposited couldn’t possibly have the proper conditions, then you would have something! But, since it has yet to happen…and never WILL happen, I’m sure you will be happy with continuing to ASSUME you know the conditions and whining about it online.
OK anonymous- if you have knowlege of humidity, what IS the “moisture” level inside a cloud?
Yes to the former and
how should I know?, maybe, probably, not really?…etc… to the latter.
And to the third, most likely.
Most of the “evidence” that is most damning are the policies, patents,experiments and legislation which so eerily
seems to correlate with this “chemtrail”/persistent contrail phenomenon.
I mean really, which military of the world should I site? Which policy making think-tanks?
Give it up already. What are you defending? What side are you really on?
I’m unclear as to Kucinich’s real position on HR2977, there are 2 conflicting reports. one says yes, the other no.
(pop quiz:
Without doing an internet search…try to tell me why “Santa Claus” wear’s red and white….
take a guess if you don’t know.)
If we know its a “big issue”(climatechange…and climateFARCE) it seems to me
that deliberately orchestrating persistent contrail operations , even of commercial craft could be of “experimental/mitigating/modifying” potential. So yeah, its possible. And sounds like the sort of
nutso thing “they’d” want to try.
Think about it….if weather/ionospheric/techtonic etc etc warfare Wasnt an interest of the military, then
we’d only assume somewhere there would be some other “foe” interested in these technologies.
(thats what the US military says, on record)
Nomatter what you say, “they” are going to come up with this stuff whether you think me to be foolish or not.
The problem is wasting your energy and time arguing with people like me over trivial, but obvious things like environmental pollution.
You should be spending that energy trying to figure out where the 2.3 trillion dollars went
missing from the Pentagon budget announced by Rumsfeld ON SEPTEMBER 10th 2001.
Do you get my drift yet?
I really dont care about your opinions until you demonstrate to me that you are not brainwashed and socially programmed to think in certain ways. Only free-thinkers can be truly objective.
Your arguments are unessential.
If people are concerned about their sky turning from blue to white haze
day after day, then LET THEM BE CONCERNED!
Who cares if people get all worked up and come up with
silly names for it. Its still very dramatic, not necessary and IMPACTFUL. am i wrong?
people SHOULD get worked up.
I think people should be pissed about the state of the world we’ve let corrupt people build and enslave us with.
OK- so it seems we’re in agreement as to point one. Aircraft are visually and, traditionally through particulates, polluting the environment as well as altering the weather.
Point two is a toss up and I might be convinced that someone, somewhere is pleased that persistant contrails are altering the weather somehow for some means.
So point three is where we split. Do you contend that there are some planes producing persistant contrails and some planes producing chemtrails? Or do you contend that sometimes the same planes produsc “normal” contrails, sometimes they produce harmless persistant contrails and sometimes they produce chemtrails?
And I’m not sure why you’re so unconcerned with my opinions. I’ve confessed on numerous occasions here that I am one of the one’s who have sprayed chemtrails from my plane. Wouldn’t you want to ask me all sorts of questions? For instance, at the end of the day I go back and wipe down my engines before we put the engine covers on. The paper towels I use are ALWAYS covered in a thick dark oily substance after I’m done. Do you want one to test? Is it that you don;t believe me? I’ll give you my tail number and you can track me. Sometimes I ask for a special chemical be added to my jet fuel- you want to know what it is?
It just seems like, for someone who is truly interested in this theory, you would be really interested in my opinions.
And I imagine Santa Clause is red and white because of some commercial influence. Like maybe that’s how Macy’s portayed him in the late 1800s and it just stuck. I don’t know but I’m about to find out! To the interwebs!!!
Well,all I can tell you is that chemtrails repeatedly occur in very low humidity conditions(on the order of 30-40%)This would seem to exclude water vapor or ice crystals as the likely source of the persisting trail.You know,I dont know why it is so difficult for you people to accept the chemtrail/aerosol phenomenon.After all,it isnt so implausible.There are a number of military applications for deliberate and systematic aerosol dispersal into the atmosphere.
“Well,all I can tell you is that chemtrails repeatedly occur in very low humidity conditions(on the order of 30-40%)”
So, you have evidence to support this claim I’ll assume. I mean, no one would make such a ridiculous claim without being able to support the claim without proof. I’d ask you to stop making the claim, but that would be a waste of my time. You do understand that the atmosphere is a fluid and that conditions can VASTLY differ from one area to another due to thermal activity….right?! How can you say “30 to 40%” when you have NO WAY of measuring the humidity in all areas of the visual sky simultaneously. Your claim is ridiculous!
On a side note, for anyone who is interested, this new flight tracking site looks pretty cool. Casper – http://casper.frontier.nl/ Unfortunately it doesn’t work over the US, but you can see how airplanes stack over Amsterdam in almost realtime. With Casper, you can mess with the date and playback time to see all kinds of deadly curved contrails, X’s and grid patterns being formed in front of your eyes. Mouse over the airplane and it shows you a picture of what the jet looks like!
I’d say that if someone can’t answer a simple question like “what is the moisture level inside a cloud?” then we can’t believe any of his claims of knowledge of humidity levels ANYWHERE!
Capfitch, I agree. I’m just trying to get Mr Anonymous to admit he has NO IDEA what the level of humidity is and is making claims based on nothing but assumption. It’s funny how these people convert ignorant belief into “fact” in their own minds and expect the rest of the world to accept it as fact. I just can’t do that!
Go back. Again. Read what I wrote. AGAIN.
In order to further dialogue with the lot of you I made the distinction that
PERSISTENT CONTRAILS are “CHEMTRAILS” by obvious reasoning, weather modification/pollution.
Go back and read again if your memory is too feeble. Accept and move on.
Also, if there is ANY OTHER operation at all, whether it be cloud seeding, ionospheric manipulation or any
other fathomable EXPERIMENT or ACTUAL “DELIBERATE EXPERIMENTAL” operations then yes.
There can, will be, and ARE different types of weathermodification “experiments” probably using planes
as well as any other method. If I was alive when they were setting off “the bombs” you bet I would’ve
been pissed about that too.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s601rs.txt.pdf
CaptFitch, if you want to be forthcoming then do so.
If you insist on using the term “chemtrails” satirically then just state your
true learned opinion.
Yes I read your post some days ago about the extra chemical you use to make sure the fuel doesnt freeze etc….
right? thats what you’re referring to, correct?
Well, you keep flying so you obviously must not see anything wrong with it correct?
I think the biggest issue surrounding “chemtrails” is that most people never thought of the massive effect planes could have on the worlds weather. I didnt, until I started studying these artificial cloud white out days.
Chemtrails is a very effective slang tem because It conveys the important factors, a)pollution b)weather .
And yes, I was in LA in the days post 9/11. And yes, I do recall being blown away at the display of stars in the very dark crisp sky. I had never thought of the Air-traffic either!
It would seem obvious that had there been a more noticeable PERSISTENT CONTRAIL phenomenon, then I would have discovered this longer ago.
note: “purposeful or inadvertent changing or controlling”
right? am I right here?
yes. i am.
more from the link I posted:
(3) RESEARCHAND DEVELOPMENT.—The term
‘‘research and development’’ means theoretical anal-
7
ysis, exploration, experimentation, and the extension
8
of investigative findings and theories of a scientific or
9
technical nature into practical application for experi-
10
mental and demonstration purposes, including the de-
11
velopment of experimental models, instrumentation,
12
materials, and processes.
13
(4) WEATHERMITIGATION.—The term ‘‘weather
14
mitigation’’ means the purposeful or inadvertent
15
changing or controlling, or attempting to change or
16
control, by artificial methods the natural development
17
of atmospheric cloud forms or precipitation forms in
18
the troposphere.
19
You seem to be willing to “win” the argument on pure semantic grounds, rather than on something meaningful.
EVERYONE AGREES that contrails modify the weather.
EVERYONE AGREES that jet exhaust contains pollution.
EVERYONE AGREES that there are deliberate weather modification programs, most notably cloud seeding.
EVERYONE AGREES that pilot “deliberately” fly their planes.
But where we disagree is if the end result – long trails and overcast skies- is A) Unexpected, based on history, science, types of engines used, the weather, and the amount of air traffic, and B) deliberate, in that either the overcast skies are the intended result, or they are a side effect of, something other than air travel (like spraying).
Please, by all means state your case, and PRESENT YOUR EVIDENCE.
Convert ignorant belief into fact? Well,faithinscience,what I see you people doing is no better.I see the repeated claims of ALL chemtrails being nothing more than vapor contrails or ice crystals, regardless of atmospheric conditions.That is more absurd,in the face of just pure common sense,than anything I or any other “believer” has said.I`m a hairdresser,I have no scientific background whatsoever,and i`ll admit it.But,i have common sense and a discerning eye.And I know that i`m not looking at ice crystals or water vapor when i`m living in an arid and drought-ridden area.I also know i`m not looking at water vapor when i see several jets lay down trails over a clear sky and it becomes hazy and lasts for hours.And this is a very dry climate,remember? No ice crystals or supersaturated air here.I dont have to have a scientific background to know that what i`m seeing is NOT what you people claim it to be.My claim is ridiculous? No,you peoples repeated claims that chemtrails are the result of ice crystals or saturated air,even in the driest conditions.Thats ridiculous.
Until a SINGLE trail is proven to contain “chemicals” (other then combustion gases and water vapor) then it’s a NORMAL assumption to believe that none of them do considering the fact that science easily explains the trails. I COULD “claim” that these trails are made of marshmallow fluff and act just like you people! I could make up ridiculous and unsupported nonsense and there is NO WAY you could prove me wrong. That is the problem here…Science has already proven what they are, all you people have is a claim…it’s now up to you people to prove it. I don’t see even the slightest bit of evidence to prove that these trails are part of a deliberate “spray program”.
“I have no scientific background whatsoever,and i`ll admit it.”
DUH!
“But,i have common sense and a discerning eye.”
Your eyes have failed you and your “common sense” doesn’t factor into this, at all. Without knowledge, common sense is nothing more than belief.
How do you “know” the air isn’t saturated over your “arid” area?! That is a CLAIM that you can’t support with evidence. Do you even understand where the moisture COMES from?! Do you understand “the water cycle”, evaporation, weather movement/frontal systems?! Your common sense is USELESS because there is NOTHING “common” about this knowledge! It has to be learned and understood! Yet, you just “assume” (big surprise there) that you understand it all simply because you “believe” you do. THAT is hilarious!
You have NO IDEA that the ground conditions (moisture and temperature) are NOT an indication of the conditions at altitude…and you argue against that fact even after admitting that you don’t have a scientific background. Yet, you have just proven that you couldn’t be MORE ignorant about your own atmosphere if you wanted to be. Thanks for the laughs!
none of you are giving specifics, dates, times, location…really pointless without it…
AND TAKE PICS/VIDS!!!
Faithinscience:
We need those to balance the tears and frustration brought about by exposure to this stuff. There has to be a little shaft of sunlight peeking through the gloomy abyss of ignorance.
Yes, whenever you provide them, thanks very much.
Don’t forget temperature and humidity at altitude! Not a SINGLE video I have seen provides that information. And because it doesn’t, is USELESS in claiming that the trail shouldn’t persist where it’s deposited. In other words, I have yet to see ANY evidence that the trails in the sky are not persistent contrails….I’m waiting…and will be forever. How can people be so sure these trails aren’t normal when they don’t even have this information?! They GUESS! They ASSume! They SPECULATE! They jump to conclusions based on 100% ignorance. Chemtrails are a myth and those who believe otherwise are very entertaining.
“FAITHINSCIENCE” why are you arguing with me>?
I’ve made it clear time and time again on this particular website that, according to my definition,
Persistent Contrails ARE “chemtrails”, which isnt a “Scientific” term, but popular slang used to describe a multitude
of things.
Your issue is with people who you think don’t understand what they are looking at.
I understand but think theres alot more to the CURRENT situation. Thats why even NASA states that it is important
to study. And I am.
So what’s the problem?
Chemtrails are a myth? What are you people trying to put over? I`m more convinced by clifford carnicom.And he DOES have a scientific background.We arent guessing or assuming or speculating..we are using our own eyes and the expertise of others who DO know that this phenomenon is real,because they`ve studied it for over a decade.You people are still evading the real plausibility of these “aerosol operations” and their military and other applications.I also think you people know the “evidence” is there and have seen it,but prefer to pretend otherwise.We believers,or “chemtards” as you people like to say,dont have to provide the evidence,because it is already there,it is public domain.And like I say,I think you`ve already seen it but stubbornly reject it in your pursuit of a scientifically “rational” explanation for everything.Well guess what?,the same science that you people claim has disproven chemtrails has also done just the opposite.Clifford`s analysis going back to 1999,has convinced me that chemtrails(or aerosols) are real,and represent a bioaccumulative danger to people and the environment.
Could you provide some links to the evidence?
try carnicom.com or googling “aerosol crimes”.There is also a video produced by carnicom in 2005 called “aerosol crimes”(aka chemtrails)that is viewable online on at least one free documentary site.Dont recall which one.Carnicom is considered the most credible authority on the subject to date.He is a new mexico-based independent researcher and the founder of the carnicom institute.Naysayers get curiously quiet when his name is mentioned.Perhaps because he and his assertions are not easily discredited.