Home » contrails » How to Debunk Chemtrails

How to Debunk Chemtrails

While the title of this post is “How to Debunk Chemtrails”, the actual debunking depends on what version of the theory needs debunking.

The most common version is simply that “normal” contrails should not persist, so the persistent trails must be “chemtrails”. The simplest way to debunk this is to note that all known books on clouds and weather say that contrails sometimes persist. As seen in this video:


With discussion and reference here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunking-contrails-dont-persist-with-a-study-of-60-years-of-books-on-clouds.3201/

After that, there’s a variety of common claims and variations on those themes. The best approach is to debunk the individual claim (such as contrails only last a few seconds), rather than trying to debunk the entire theory.

I’ve tried to arrange each section in the order of most useful links first.

Contrails Through History

Theorists claim Contrails used to dissipate in a few seconds, minutes at most.

But they didn’t. There’s a huge amount of evidence (in addition to lots of people remembering persistent contrails). It dates back to 1918 and continues up to the present day.

Contrail photos through history – Fifty photos of persisting and spreading contrails from 1950 to 1995. Taken from people’s old photo albums, and old books. Also links to other similar collections.
Life Magazine Contrail Photos – Eleven photos that appeared in Life Magazine from 1940 to 1998 show persisting and spreading contrails.
WWII Contrails – A large collection of photos showing persisting and spreading contrails from WWII in the 1940s.
Pre WWII Contrails – The History of contrails dating back to 1918, with the first persistent spreading contrail observed in 1921
Some more WWII Contrails – A WWII contrail photo I found in an old photo album uploaded to Flickr.
Thirty Contrails, Forty Years Ago – An impressive photo of a sky full of contrails from before 1967.
Clouds before Planes – Cloud Studies 1905 – A 100-year-old book showing photos of clouds that some chemtrail enthusiasts think must be man-made.
Memphis Belle WWII Bomber Contrails – 1944 – A 1940s film that shows planes leaving contrails, including with gaps in them.
Fighter and Bomber Contails, 1940s – Video and photos of wartime contrails over London and the English countryside
Twilight Zone Contrails – Contrails show up in a 1959 episode of The Twilight Zone
Chemtrails were Contrails – A video of some old newspaper accounts of contrails.
Contrail Confusion is Nothing New – Accounts from the 1950s of people being confused by contrails – taking them to be something else.

Chemical Tests, Aluminum, Barium, Etc.

Theorist claim: Chemical tests reveal aluminum and barium have been sprayed

In reality, the tests all show normal levels of chemicals. They were often very badly performed (testing soil instead of water, and confusing the level, or using the wrong units of measurements).

What In The World Are They Spraying? – An explanation of the mistakes in the popular chemtrail video.
Barium Chemtrails on KSLA – A very popular “chemtrail” news story where the reporter gets his figures entirely wrong.
Chemtrail Non-science Air analysis from Phoenix that shows levels so high we’d all be dead. They did it wrong.
Chemical Analysis of Contrails – Clifford Carnicom claims high levels of some chemicals, but they actually show lower than normal levels.

Photos and Video used by chemtrail theorists

Theorists claim: Photos and videos show spray planes.

Reality: all the planes have been identified. Most have non-controversial uses, and the rest are demonstrable fakes.

“Chemtrail” Aircraft Photos – The inside and outside of various supposed “Chemtrail” planes. Explained.
Fake, Hoax, Chemtrail Videos – Some of the more obvious hoax videos.
Germans Admit They Used Düppel!
– A German news story about chaff interfering with weather radar is deliberately mistranslated.
History Channel, That’s Impossible, Weather Warfare & Chemtrails – a look as some of the claims on the Discover channel show on chemtrails.
Contrails In the Movies – A look at a couple of contrails in some animated movies.

About the Chemtrail theory

Theorist claim: Lots of people believe in chemtrails, and it’s mentioned in a government bill, so it must be true.

Reality: Not really. Lots of people believe in all kinds of things, and the mention in the bill was inserted by some UFO enthusiasts.

A brief history of “Chemtrails” – How it got started in 1997, who started it, and how it developed.
Chemtrail Myths – Five common myths about “chemtrails”
How many people believe in chemtrails? – just how popular is the theory? Not very.
Kucinich, Chemtrails and HR 2977 – The supposed outlawing of chemtrails. What really happened.

General Discussion of Chemtrails

Theorist claim: People don’t remember lots of contrails like this, so it must be new.

Reality: Many people DO remember. But most people still don’t pay any attention to contrails. You see things more when you are interested in them.

Hazy Memories of Blue Skies – What do people remember about contrails? It varies.
Where are all the Chemtrail Photos?
Chemtrails: The Best Evidence
People Don’t Notice Contrails

The amount of air traffic, grids, and contrail patterns

Theorist claim: grids and X patterns prove they can’t be contrails

Reality: grids and X’s are inevitable results of air traffic, and winds and weather conditions.

Britain From Above – Air Traffic
30 Years of Airline Travel
Contrail Grids are not Chemtrail Grids
There are a lot of jets in the air

Contrail Information

Theorists claim: “chemtrails” are not contrails, because contrails don’t act like that

Reality: Contrails sometimes persist and spread, it depends on the weather at 30,000 feet (and not on the ground)

Persisting and Spreading Contrails
Contrail Forecast
The opposite of contrails
Measuring the height of contrails
How Long do Contrails Last?
Contrail to Distrail
Contrail Simulations
Why do some planes leave long trails, but others don’t?
Chemtrail Plausibility Study
Why Planes Make Vapor Trails

 

Unusual contrails explained

Theorists claim: odd looking contrails prove they are not contrails.

Reality: all can be explained if you do a bit of research.

Hole Punch Clouds in Los Angeles
Contrail Gaps and other Questions
Broken Contrails
Contrails, Dark Lines, & “Chemtrails”
Contrail of the Day
Very Unusual Short Tapered Contrails
Early Contrails
Voodoo Contrails over Los Angeles
Contrails Above and Below
Racetrack Contrails
Short Sunlit Contrails Look Like UFOs
Aerodynamic and Rainbow Contrails
Identifying a Curved Contrail
Contrail Season in Los Angeles
Ground Level Contrails

The Los Angeles Mystery Missile Contrail, and similar

New Mystery Missile, Padre Island Texas. Debunked
Did Chemtrails Cause the Beebe Blackbird Deaths
Manu Ginobili’s Santa Monica Silver Surfer
Los Angeles Missile Contrail Explained in Pictures
Contrails are Usually Horizontal
A Problem of Perspective – New Year’s Eve Contrail

Other random stuff

Procrustean Science
Contrails and Chemtrails: The IFAQ
Volcano Clears the Skies of Contrails
AC-130 Flares and Chaff
A Very Unusual Contrail
Modern Contrail Confusion
Cirrus Uncinus and Contrails
Things are not as they seem

 

669 thoughts on “How to Debunk Chemtrails

  1. Helen Godman says:

    I have two relatives who are both Federal Air Traffic Controllers. They have said that the “persistent crossing, U-turns etc. contrail patterns are NOT commercial traffic. They are military and are filtered off the radar screens which the FAA tracks. Regardless of what they are doing, these contrails make me and a lot of other OLDER and INFIRM persons very ill with respiratory airway irritation. If you are younger and healthy great, They won’t bother you.Five years ago they didn’t bother me either. Now I don’t have to look up to feel the burning in my throat and lungs. It comes in the windows. On the few days when they don’t fly over all day, I start to feel fine. I know what I see and how it makes me feel. I want to know why the military has to waste so much money and fuel, burning up the taxpayers money and polluting the air. Why doesn’t the EPA monitor military aircraft emissions?

  2. MikeC says:

    How do you think air traffic at high altitude affects your health more than road traffic at the same height as you?

  3. AnonymousATCO says:

    The FAA does control and track military aircraft. They are responsible for all aircraft inside controlled airspace military and civil. I suggest you dont have relatives who are air traffic controllers because what you say they have told you is just plain wrong. There are procedures for military aircraft to declare Due Regard or MARSA. I will quote from straight from the FAA if you like

    “o. Flight operations in accordance with the options of “due regard” or “operational” obligates the authorized state aircraft commander to:

    1. Separate his/her aircraft from all other air traffic; and

    2. Assure that an appropriate monitoring agency assumes responsibility for search and rescue actions; and

    3. Operate under at least one of the following conditions:

    (a) In visual meteorological conditions (VMC); or

    (b) Wthin radar surveillance and radio communications of a surface radar facility; or

    (c) Be equipped with airborne radar that is sufficient to provide separation between his/her aircraft and any other aircraft he/she may be controlling and other aircraft; or

    (d) Operate within Class G airspace.”

    MARSA is Military Assumes Responsibility for Separation of Aircraft. Basically aircraft operating in formation. So Helen ask your “Air Traffic Controllers” about due regard and MARSA.

  4. tryblinking says:

    If someone could make sure there is a presence for reason at the Earth Fair, was it, on the 22nd? I really think it would be great to fight the fire at the source, not to mention the opportunity to have video documentation questioning motivations and conscious denials of disproofs.

  5. Carrie says:

    I don’t care what you call the trails. That is not the point with me. I am tired of seeing the blue skies obliterated by whatever is coming out of the planes, whether it be contrails or chemtrails. I don’t like my windows covered with an oily slime when it rains, and I don’t like to have my throat become congested every time I go out of doors on one of those “chemtrail/contrail” days. If this is normal traffic, why have there been periods of time, actually for months back in the spring of 2008, where there were no persistent trails at all where I live?

    During the 2010-2011 winter we hardly ever saw the sun. I was at a gathering of children in February 2011, and the sun came out, and everyone was just ecstatic about it. They oooh’d and aaah’d because It was so unusual.

    Why are we arguing about what the trails are or how long they have existed? It is obvious what is happening to the sky, and it isn’t natural or normal, and it can’t be healthy any way you look at it.

  6. JFDee says:

    Carrie, rain is usually coming from altitude levels well beyond the trails. The first drops are collecting all particles they meet on the way down – dust, soot, anything man-made or natural.

    There are so many sources of pollution right on the ground around us. It’s hard to see how the trails – which are obviously staying high above – can have any measurable influence on rain water.

  7. tryblinking says:

    Uncinus, I think it might be useful for CS to have a basic presence on Facebook (unless CS is on there already, but I couldn’t find it). All discussion can be directed here or to Metabunk, with the Page simply copying this article, links and all. Facebook isn’t going anywhere for a while, and those people might not visit CS or MB directly, so it could help answer their questions.

    What do you (all) think?

  8. Sonds like a good idea. I get quite a bit of traffic from Facebook already, but adding this page might be a more friction-free way for people to arrive here.

    I’ll look into the best way of doing it. Thanks.

  9. simon says:

    Came to this late as a friend just sent me the link to “what in the world, etc”. I’d just like to say that when I was a kid (around 9, I’m now 58) we used to bet each other sweets on how long the contrails would last. That was 1964. In general they lasted from half an hour or so up to 2 hours. We used to get bored if they lasted a long time, and just checked them out now and then. Frankly, I’m more concerned about the current financial meltdown (I live in Europe!) than any supposed contrail poisoning ! Good work on the common sense/critical thinking front, one of the few weapons we have against b/s whether from the governments, corporations, politicians or new-agers/ conspiracy fans 🙂

  10. geoengineering ›

    ETC Group’s Geoengineering Map
    1 post by 1 author in geoengineering

    Mick West Join group to reply

    May 1 (7 days ago)

    Released today: an attempt at providing a comprehensive list of
    geoengineering programs by ETC group. It’s somewhat misleading,
    including weather modification, like precipitation enhancement (cloud
    seeding) as geoengineering. It also gives the impression for many
    things (like various forms of SRM) that they are active projects,
    rather than preliminary research (SPICE) or theoretical ideas (space
    mirrors). But it’s an interesting perspective.

    http://www.etcgroup.org/en/geoengineeringmap

    troll

  11. I don’t think that’s inaccurate. Do you?

  12. No I dont . But why are you so busy with Geoengineering Google Groups ? Makes you look more like you work for them then just a debunker ? Plus my friends in New Zealand said they werent on the map .

  13. Why should I not post there?

    New Zealand is on the map. But you’d have to take up any problems with the map with ETC Group.

  14. “Why should I not post there?” If you are honestly trying to debunk chemtrails going to the heart of the conspiracy makes you look like your working for the geoengineers which I believe you are , Takes away from any credibility you had .

  15. MikeC says:

    New Zealand is on there, with “Reduced precipitation”, “Biochar”, “Ocean Fertilisation” and “Algae Schemes” indicated next to it.

    All of which are news to me, as I have lived there for many years.

  16. “Why should I not post there?” If you are honestly trying to debunk chemtrails going to the heart of the conspiracy makes you look like your working for the geoengineers which I believe you are , Takes away from any credibility you had .

    That, of course assumes there is a conspiracy. Which I don’t see any evidence for.

    And did I really have any credibility with you before? I think the fundamental point here is that I disagree with you, and point out flaws in the chemtrail conspiracy theory.

    These flaws are not based on any credibility. I don’t have any. I’m just some guy. The flaws are simply facts. Facts that stand alone.

    Check the facts yourself.

  17. Tony says:

    Chemtrails real ? disinformation ? Imagination ?
    Whichever you prefer we’re better off frying bigger fish anyway. The USA is on the brink of civil war, pretty soon we’ll see mass rioting, looting etc as soon as the global bankers finally pull the pin on the US economy. At the moment they’re barely holding it together or waiting for the optimal moment when they can cause the most damage, drain the last dollar and ensure the strongest reaction from the American people once the “Bank Holiday” is called. Once they’re brought down by the Fourth Reich [which has been chipping away at them since WW2] then the 4th Reich can start of us or rather, ramp up what they’ve already started. I suspect that many of similar theories have been utilised so that we waste time and energy on them and miss the real plot against us.

  18. JFDee says:

    Tony,

    how do you know about what you call the “real plot”? Can you show us some evidence?

    Do you know who (which entity) brought up the chemtrail conspiracy?

  19. killuminati says:

    I love this site because it’s so obvious that it is a “debunking site” the way it is setup this site is designed to breed ignorance instead of finding truth…. Not finding out if chemtrails are real just finding out truth.

    If chemtrails “were real” and btw they are LOL towns have banned them the NOAA admits to them and the easiest way to tell is ot JUST LOOK UP IN THE SKY you will be able to notice the difference if you look up enough –

    IF chemtrails were real = what would they look like? IF we follow this website Chemtrails could exist and we’d never know because they appear “simliar” to contrails – If they did exist, how would you know? Could you be able to tell the difference between a natural formation and a non-natural one? Many people can!

    What this guy is doing is searching for a certain answer instead of searching for truth – its obvious by the way Unicus and the other registered names talk to people Unicus or whatever usually tries to appear all smart and reserved and all but either he’s completely convinced they are not real which is insane or he is getting payed to run this.

    NOBODY has this much free time in the world today to run this site for free LOL it’s hilarious and its FUCKED UP what they are putting into kids cartoons…. It’s classical conditioning. Damn it’s not rocket science it’s “contrail science” bhahahaha okaay so MARTIAL LAW is possibly days away from happening here’s my website devoted to finding truth and light: http://bit.ly/KVGmeb

    Here’s my facebook.com/jayblazzletooth
    DONT DRINK THE FLUORIDE WATER OR USE FLOURIDE TOOTHPASTE ESPECIALLY FOR CHILDREN!

    Love all, Peace~!

  20. MikeC says:

    What towns have banned them, and where does the NOAA admit they exist??

    If you bothered to read Mick’s biographical information he has provided on here you would know that he has plenty of time to run a low cost website & forum. But then research into facts has never been a strong suit of chemtrail believers 🙁

  21. Anonymous says:

    I have observed the skies.. and everyday no matter what time of the day I will find about 5 or more in the air spraying. I have seen up to 10 at one time. normal airplanes don’t criss cross one going straight down and one going across.. or stay in the same area for long periods of time going in circles.. 5 or more at one time. not normal.

  22. Should be quite easy to demonstrate then. Maybe some video, and high definition of the planes “spraying”?

  23. Hey Mick try debunking Man Made Global Warming and the effects of Co2 on the climate . Iv been trying to post on Geoengineering Google Groups and they refuse to post what Iv found . Seems they are one sided over there . Cosmic rays cause the climate to change not Co2 . Co2 and climate change is a conspiracy . Debunk it , watch this first Henrik Svensmark’s documentary on climate change and cosmic rays.http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ANMTPF1blpQ# if not ill know that you are just a payed shill . 🙂

  24. Thanks for the reply but I said debunk man Made Global warming not cosmic rays . The problem with cosmic rays is there is no way to make money off of his theory , No cosmic ray tax ? Man made global warming is about as believable as unicorns , And you call us conspiracy theorist ? Unicorns not unicus 🙂 good day !

  25. I think man made global warming is happening, 99% of climate scientists agree. Solar variation has been show to play a small role.

  26. MikeC says:

    Treasurecoastskywatch – you said to watch “Henrik Svensmark’s documentary on climate change and cosmic rays” so it was precisely cosmic rays you weer interested in – how can you now claim otherwise??

    Don’t blame me that it was debunked agesago.

  27. Just what I thought shills , It was never debunked Mike only ignored , Unicus Wow and Its 97% government paid scientist that are paid to come up with an excuse for Carbon Taxes like in your moronic bankrupt state of communist California with Jerry Brown as your leader . 69% Say It’s Likely Scientists Have Falsified Global Warming Research . the weather channel founder http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ffgUxIFnNWM#! Man Made Global Warming is a hoax and a conspiracy

  28. Mike what kind of car is that in your pic ? just curious .

  29. It was debunked. It was not ignored. Mike gae a link to one debunking. Here’s some more:

    http://thingsbreak.wordpress.com/tag/henrik-svensmark/

  30. Jay Reynolds says:

    Joe,
    I admire the fact that you have been a repeat visitor to this site, and that you seem to be able to look at some things and derived different conclusions based on information given.

    My question to you is in regards to the Mt. Shasta rain water sample data showing aluminum in rainwater, which averages 489 over 33 samples, yet is being called extremely high.

    Read this posting carefully, and note that the data from 1967 shows the mt. Shasta samples are easily within the range seen in 1967, forty years before.
    http://metabunk.org/threads/135-Chemical-Composition-of-rain-and-snow?p=1411&viewfull=1#post1411

    In your opinion, who is correct, the folks from Mt. Shasta, or my conclusions that what they found were simply ordinary levels of aluminum in rainfall?

    Bear in mind that my conclusion is not based on just the 1967 study alone, the same was found in 1973:
    http://metabunk.org/threads/135-Chemical-Composition-of-rain-and-snow?p=8556&viewfull=1#post8556

    Joe, I’d like your true feeling about this, who do you think has the truth nailed down in this particular case?

  31. Jay Im still trying to debunk the chemtrail thoery myself .. Living in sunny s florida its been anything but that lately . also reading up on geoengineering schemes makes it harder to believe it isnt happening .Some of the theories out there are a little far fetched like mind control morgellens ect , But Solar Radiation management makes too much sense .. Ill look into it Jay . I believe its sulfur not aluminum . Thanks for your reply .

  32. Jay Reynolds says:

    Joe,
    The data does not show any solar radiation management underway, earth’s aerosol thickness remains within the range it has been for forty years, and definitely nothing like Post Pinatubo which it would if SRM was ongoing.:

    http://metabunk.org/threads/111-Historical-Aerosol-Thickness-Debunks-quot-Chemtrails-are-Geoengineering-quot

  33. MikeC says:

    The car is a Triumph Stag – a derivative of the Triumph saloons made by that company in the 1960’s and 70’s in England, and powered by a unique 3 litre V-8. About 26,000 were made until 1976, of which something over 2000 were LHD versions imported to the US (but mine is in New Zealand so has the wheel on the right (sic) side :)). fun to drive like most convertibles, much more reliable now than when it was built (best of British Leyland!) and quite affordable both to purchase and for parts & servicing.

  34. Thanks Mike Nice car . I also appreciate the debating 🙂

  35. This was one of Micks statements :If I were a hoaxer, I’d suggest that the clean air acts were so effective that the decrease in aerosols was warming the planet, and that the chemtrails have simply reduced the rate of the decrease . Here was a recent story linked from GG Geoengineering .::: EPA regulations cause global warming ?
    Reduction in air pollution from coal fired power stations due to environmental regulations since the 1980s has increased regional global warming in the Central and Eastern United States. Climate scientists from the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS) found that particulate pollution, particularly from coal fired power stations, caused a global warming hole, or a large cold patch reducing temperatures by up to 1 degree C in the region, particularly lowering maximum temperatures in Summer and Autumn. So The Clean Air Acts are responsible for Global Warming ?

  36. The clean air acts are responsible for a decrease in global dimming, which will have a net warming effect.

    But global warming has several causes, the main one being CO2.

    There’s a range of uncertainty as well, with all these things.

  37. Billions of people exhale CO2 what to do with them ? Co2 causing global warming is an excuse to have a carbon tax to fund The NWO . Man Made Global warming is a Hoax . But I guess we all can have our conspiracies ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sE9mnwGZuM&feature=related

  38. Maybe we could stick to contrails and the chemtrail theory? I’d suggest metabunk.org if you want a wider discussion.

  39. I Thought the scheme of geoengineering what many call chemtrails are to fight global warming ? I know there is carbon capture technology and of course dumping iron in the ocean . Chemtrails are just part of the scheme , Its all about money . they are all connected . So its ok to call chemtrailers conspiracy nuts but those who believe the lie of Man made Global warming are not ? My opinion is that man Made Global warming is conspiracy and there is no proof that it exist , Hockey Stick theory . Chicago Climate Exchange Al Gore . Is this you Unicus ? http://intensedebate.com/people/marcus_sappus

  40. I signed up for metabunk see ya there . 🙂

  41. Well since i cant log on at metabunk for some reason pass this message to Stupid “and death was brought about by these prior guns. Firearms “walked” by the ATF have been found at violent crime scenes on both sides of the Mexico – United States border, and have been found at the crime scenes involving deaths of many Mexicans and at least one U.S. federal agent, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Debunking is one thing but outright lying when you can find info on Wikipedia is Stupid .

  42. Jay Reynolds says:

    Joe, I’m disappointed you wouldn’t answer my question directly.

  43. Sorry Jay got sidetracked with politics . Ill get back as soon as I read your link and do my own research . have a nice memorial weekend 🙂

  44. Heres a site Jay sent me to a year ago . When I typed chemtrails in there was a tread discussing chemtrails .Well they are no longer there . I saw Unicus trying to debunk the thread I guess he succeeded sort of unless you type in contrail spotting . http://www.luchtzak.be/forums/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=44779

  45. You never gave this guy a answer Unicus ? why ? Re: Help debunk chemtrails
    by PiperPA19 on 25 Apr 2011, 00:47

    Why putting all your energy in that? You have good meanings, but some people will just never learn and stick to what they believe. People have admitted they made crop circles, the Santilli Brothers have admitted they faked the alien autopsy movie, but it is still all believed to be true by a lot of people.

  46. JFDee says:

    treasurecoastskywatch,

    I have wondered before why it seems suspicious for chemtrail proponents that debunkers can be as passionate as they are sometimes …

  47. JFDee says:

    Xenrelic,

    the trails in the video you linked are looking like smoke / skywriting. There is a formation of at least three planes, probably doing training or something.

  48. JFDee shills are just disinfo agents . Skywriting Training ? LOL .

  49. MikeC says:

    Why wouldn’t people train to be able to do skywriting?

    alternatively it might be a display team practicing.

  50. Noble says:

    There are no “shills” when it comes to “chemtrails”. That’s just an ignorant and paranoid copout.

    I don’t believe in “chemtrails” because I understand what I see in the sky, and I understand that the advocates don’t understand what they see.

    That doesn’t make me a “shill” for disagreeing with them.

  51. Thats funny Mike cause I guess they must be training over my house all the time because I see the same exact thing all the time .Lately but not so much or at all before Jan 2011 ?? Guess we are all blind ?

  52. Oh so we are ignorant and paranoid because we disagree but your not a shill ? Sure in sunny south Florida we have always had aircraft causing a complete haze on a daily basis ? Right ? As a Surfer who has spent plenty of hours in the Ocean with nothing other then the water and the sky for 2o years in Florida I would say you dont look up much or spend anytime outside . also growing up In S California would pretty much say the same . Riding My bike to LAX at 11 because my love for aircraft which I still have , would say Im pretty sure I know what I see . I dont use the word chemtrails because it is geoengineering .

  53. Thanks Unicus for banning me without any notice Guess I didnt read the rules if there were any posted ? I will be back when or if you un ban me . and thanks for letting me post . Even though we may disagree on everything I do have some sort of respect for you and others on This and metabunk .

  54. Agenda 21 Zoning vs. Eminent Domain: How Ventura County Shut Down The Pine Mountain Inn http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwjqJPr84Zc&feature=player_embedded#!

  55. It’s just a 24 hour ban. Cool down a little. Consider how you would feel if someone just posted six random looking youtube links on your site?

    Use your own words to describe a link when you post it, and people will listen a lot more.

  56. Im cool . What do you think of the agenda 21 Video ?

  57. Noble says:

    I’m certainly NOT a “shill”…by definition.

    There are many chemtrail advocates who consistently prove their ignorance about aviation and atmospheric science…and then prove their paranoia by making statements about who is out to harm them…despite a lack of evidence. I am using the English definitions for the words I use.

    There is ABSOLUTELY no evidence that I’m a “shill” of any kind. Just because I disagree with the advocates…and accept the science and principles of aviation as I have learned them…does NOT mean that I’m “shilling” for anyone. I’m sorry, but that is just more evidence of the paranoia I mentioned earlier. It’s not MY fault that chemtrail advocates exhibit such behavior.

    There is no evidence that the trails in the sky have anything to do with any “geoengineering” program whatsoever. That isn’t to say that in some ways these trails don’t affect weather and/or climate on some level. But, the trails are a normal byproduct of hydrocarbon combustion within varying atmospheric conditions. There have been some changes in engine design which produces more water vapor, and saturates the air where older engines were incapable.

    I have been to Florida many times…and I saw persistent contrails. They are nothing new. I have to wonder why so many are just noticing them recently. Could it be all the hype on the internet that pushes people to “look up” more often than they had in the past? Could there be more traffic than there was in the past? There are certainly more airports and flights than there were 20 (or even 10) years ago.

    I just think that “chemtrails” and “geoengineering” have nothing to do with the trails in the sky..To many are making assumptions and speculating about things they know little about. Googling a word…and accepting everything you find as truth, is NOT “research”. To believe one can filter the garbage from the facts based just on their beliefs is foolish…and there is a LOT of garbage about these subjects on the internet.

  58. Noble says:

    Says you…

  59. MikeC says:

    they look exactly like contrails – what is it about them that makes them chemtrails?

  60. Yeah, they look exactly like contrails. Obviously a somewhat busy route, there’s about five contrails, maybe laid over an hour or two, based on the oldest one.

    http://contrailscience.com/skitch/Google_Earth-20120531-183247.jpg

  61. I think there are way more then 5 Unicus I count at least 11 some of them already spread out . Yea real busy. But is the most Ive ever found on Google Earth , You should call Google and tell them to clean it up a little 🙂 If you go to street view you can also see more .

  62. Cool. Normally Google make their images from cloudless satellite photos, so it’s quite rare to see contrails. You see plenty on normal images though. Have you looked at the MODIS images much?

    http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?area=na

  63. Yes id have . Fact is I do everyday look at Modis.. You would think on Google earth there would be a lot more of these ?

  64. No. Do you see any clouds on Google Earth? It’s not made from photos taken on the same day, they stitch together photos from different days with no clouds (pr as few clouds as possible). So you hardly ever get contrails. The aim of Google Earth is to show the surface of the earth, not clouds.

  65. Alexey says:

    I’d add to the above comment by Uncinus that in Google Earth there are still many areas without a decent resolution. Therefore they add there available bits and pieces with a little cloud/contrail coverage, if they show the ground details better.

    The area in the treasurecoastskywatch movie is a good example of that. The best bit is a strip 75 miles long and 11 miles wide. It is not a single snapshot, but a composite image; the double plane images at the ends of young trails probably resulted from combining images of the same spot taken with two cameras, focused at slightly different distances.

    There are quite a few contrails cross this small strip. It is hardly surprising, as it lays across a very busy route between Europe and the US East Coast. Note that it would take less than two minutes of the jet flight to cross this stip at a given angle.

    The strip image has a date: 7/6/2011. One could check the MODIS images of the date and see the bigger picture:
    http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=USA4.2011187.terra.250m
    or to download KMZ file for GoogleEarth from the link on the above page and compare the Terra image with the GoogleEarth one, they are taken at about the same time, within minutes. He or she could also check the Aqua image, taken two hours later:
    http://lance-modis.eosdis.nasa.gov/imagery/subsets/?subset=USA4.2011187.aqua.250m
    and see how the clouds around had moved into the area.

  66. They spend less on the unpopulated areas. If you look at the north coast of Canada, you’ll see lots of clouds, but you won’t find a single cloud in all of Florida.

    Interestingly the current dataset has this single cloudy area in the Tennessee/North Carolina area:

  67. I just drew a lin between London and Seattle, look at where it crossed North Canada, and bingo:

  68. Alexey says:

    “Interestingly the current dataset has this single cloudy area in the Tennessee/North Carolina area”

    One can zoom on these clouds and find high-resolution aerial images underneath. But the area to the east of it is not so well resolved. It seems to me that now Google Earth automatically adjust its selection of the ground images of a given area to the scale, but their old quilt-style maps still can be seen in the Time Machine. Click on the clock image in the menu bar above to see the difference.

  69. I believe they were blocking the identity of the aircraft much like they do with tags on cars now . The northern aircraft does however have a extra set of contrails where the one just south of it doesnt .

  70. I don’t see any “extra set” of contrails.

  71. looks like a shadow or double image on Zoom

  72. MikeC says:

    Shadow on the ground IMO

  73. MikeC says:

    As for a/c identification – by 1 Jan 2020 ADSB will be required on almost all a/c in the USA, because its broadcasts will be the basis for the next gen ATC system – instead of radar.

    So the position of each aircraft in the sky will be know by GPS systems on board the a/c, which then broadcast that information to ground stations for ATC, and other a/c for collision avoidance.

    It might pay to understand what it is you are talking about before suggesting that it is being blocked –

    http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsid=8145

    the implementation plan is here – it’s a 6.6mb pdf – http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/implementation/media/NextGen_Implementation_Plan_2012.pdf

  74. Well we had another one of those days today in Sunny S Florida . Persistent contrails no clouds complete haze out . grey skies all day and of course rainbow around the Sun . Inconsistent flight patterns .. Call them Contrails or Chemtrails it doesnt matter because they SUCK .

  75. MikeC says:

    And that is fair enough – lots of people don’t like the visual pollution of contrails.

  76. Noble says:

    Inconsistent flight patterns? Please explain.

  77. Inconsistent flight patterns? East to West ocean to the east bombing range to the west { restricted airspace} flights not showing up on flight aware .

  78. Noble says:

    Not on flight aware…

    OMG!!!!

    And at what altitudes are the bombing range and ocean restricting flights?!

  79. Noble says:

    Nice pictures of contrails at your link…

  80. No restriction over the ocean Noble not sure of the bombing range . Whatever it is aircraft shouldn’t cause complete overcast .

  81. MikeC says:

    Why do you conclude that aircraft did cause complete overcast?

  82. Noble says:

    Of course contrails can cause (actually contribute to..the air is already close to saturation) overcast conditions. To believe otherwise only shows that you are misinformed.

  83. Noble says:

    The smoke trails that you “like” contain more chemicals than the ones you don’t.

  84. No I dont conclude I witness it all the time including today . Florida until recently doesnt get overcast as the day goes on . We also dont get the marine layer like we did in LA and Orange county CA in June . As you can see in todays photo the contrails spread pretty fast . When they launched the Space shuttle which is 60 miles North of here it dissipate within 10s of minutes .The contrails linger for hours and hours as they spread out causing the haze . Come on Mike you heard it all before ?

  85. Maybe they do Noble but they dont block the sun and they are Not everyday .

  86. Guess Im blind was born yesterday and senile too Noble ? Get real !

  87. Noble says:

    I never said you were blind, senile, or born yesterday.

  88. Noble says:

    Oh no! they block the sun?!
    Who do complain to about natural clouds?

  89. Noble says:

    The reason the ails linger is because the,air is saturated and very cold at altitude. On the days the shuttle launches..maybe te air is drier and warmer.

    What you have presented is not evidence that the trails are anything more than contrails.

  90. Yes and what you have presented is nothing . It is SRM Geoengineering not chemtrails .

  91. Noble says:

    Sure it is…because you say so…no evidence required.

    It’s not just assumption and speculation.

    Again, because you say so. I get it.

  92. MikeC says:

    TCSW wrote:
    “Florida until recently doesnt get overcast as the day goes on . ”

    Data?

Comments are closed.