Home » chemtrails » Persisting and Spreading Contrails

Persisting and Spreading Contrails

Do contrails sometimes persist and spread out?

Yes, see the Encyclopædia Britannica article on vapour trails (contrails):

Contrail, streamer of cloud sometimes observed behind an airplane flying in clear, cold, humid air. It forms upon condensation of the water vapour produced by the combustion of fuel in the airplane engines. When the ambient relative humidity is high, the resulting ice-crystal plume may last for several hours. The trail may be distorted by the winds, and sometimes it spreads outwards to form a layer of cirrus cloud.
vapour trail. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica.Retrieved May 4, 2007,from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9074829

(The above quote is from the current EB. However, a Google books search dates the inclusion on the EB back to 1983)

Also see “A Field Guide to the Atmosphere“, by Schaefer and Day, 1981:

Sometimes [contrails] are ephemeral and dissipate as quickly as they form; other times they persist and grow wide enough to cover a substantial portion of the sky with a sheet of cirrostratus (Page 137)

Are spreading contrails a relatively new thing?

No, it has been exactly the same for decades, the only change has been the size of jet engines (producing bigger contrails), engine technology  (burning fuel more efficiently in high bypass jet engines creates cooler exhaust which is more likely to condense before it mixes with the surrounding air) and the amount of air traffic (producing more contrails). Spreading contrails have been mentioned consistently through the history of aviation, including in the popular press. Like Sports Illustrated , Nov 6th 1989:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100521104422/http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1068997/4/index.htm

Now, late in the afternoon, the hatchery explored and the fishing over for the day, Crooks points to the sky. Blue all day, it has now turned hazy. “Contrails,” he says. “The haze is caused by aircraft contrails that have gotten spread out till they cover the sky. This is a major air route from the East Coast to the West.”

For scientific discussion, see, for example, all these articles on contrails. In particular the one from 1970 titled “Airborne Observations of Contrail Effects on the Thermal Radiation Budget

The spreading of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight. Often, when persistent contrails exist from 25,000 to 40,000 ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge into an almost solid interlaced sheet.
[….]
Contrail development and spreading begins in the morning hours with the start of heavy jet traffic and may extend from horizon to horizon as the air traffic peaks. Fig. 1 is a typical example of midmorning contrails that occured on 17 December 1969 northwest of Boulder. By midafternoon, sky conditions had developed into those shown in Fig. 2 an almost solid contrail sheet reported to average 500 m in depth.

Airborne Observations of Contrail Effects on the Thermal Radiation Budget
Peter M. Kuhn
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 27, Issue 6 (September 1970) pp. 937–942

(Click on any of the images in this article for a larger view)

Then a few years later, in 1975, we have the article : Multiple Contrail Streamers Observed by Radar, which again has photos (taken in 1971) of spreading and persisting contrails, as well as extensive discussion of these observations.


Multiple Contrail Streamers Observed by Radar.
Konrad TG, Howard JC (1974)
Journal of Applied Meteorology:
Vol. 13, No. 5 pp. 563–572

Here’s a description from 1970, from a local newspaper, the Arcadia Tribune, April 29, 1970:

Aircraft contrails begin to streak the normally bright Arizona sky at dawn. Through the day, as air traffic peaks, these contrails gradually merge into and almost solid interlaced sheet of cirrus cloud – an artificial cirrus cloud that is frequently as much as 500 meters deep.

One of the earliest reference to contrails covering the sky is from the Mansfield News Journal, August 11, 1957, Page 29:

“Within the past few years, the weather bureau has begun to report the trails as actual cloud layers when there are sufficient trails to cover a portion of the sky.”

Here’s a description from 1955:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=SosSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=pvYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=851,1486793

An extremely persistent con trail might stay in the sky all day

But even earlier, and with a perfect description of what “chemtrail” theorist claim cannot happen comes this account from 1944:

The News, Frederick, MD, March 7, 1944

Contrails frequently have a tendency to cause a complete overcast and cause rain. In Idaho I have seen contrails formed in a perfectly clear sky and four hours later a complete overcast resulted

Below is the entire top of the page of that newspaper, in case you want to look it up.

And from the book “Flight To Arras” by Antoine de Saint Exupery, written in 1942 about a military mission in 1940:

The German on the ground knows us by the pearly white scarf which every plane flying at high altitude trails behind like a bridal veil. The disturbance created by our meteoric flight crystallizes the watery vapor in the atmosphere. We unwind behind us a cirrus of icicles. If the atmospheric conditions are favorable to the formation of clouds, our wake will thicken bit by bit and become an evening cloud over the countryside.

Another from 1958

723 thoughts on “Persisting and Spreading Contrails

  1. I try to address the arguments, focus on the facts, and avoid ad hominem arguments. If you’d like to point out more specifically where you think I’m in error then please do so.

  2. sheeple#9 says:

    uncinus says:

    I don’t get paid to maintain this site. It’s a hobby.

    I’m doing this because it’s interesting, not for a social life. This is blog where I write about contrails and the “chemtrail” theory. That’s it.

    My question is:
    What makes your “contrails” suggestion any less of a theory? You say it as if your explaination is proof and all claims to chemtrails are false. Yet you have provided nothing that proves what people are wittnessing are not what they claim. How do the photos of what you claim to be contrails prove that the photos submitted as chemtrails are not chemtrails? What makes your claim credible and all the other claims theories? How do you know more about what people are physically wittnessing and experiencing when they are at ground zero and you are far away sitting behind your computer? Are you God? This so called “hobby” of yours seems more like an obsession to debunk all chemtrails at any cost, no matter how utterly ridiculous some of your explainations are.

  3. SR1419 says:

    Rudedog…

    your lack of cognitive reality is simply stunning…

    After all the published, peer reviewed, scientific papers that have been posted here…that unequivocally show that what people claim are “chemtrails” are more than likely persistent contrails…and that these contrails have indeed been known, observed and studied for over 50 years (whether you remember them or not)..

    …and you claim that Uncinus has presented no “real” science…wow. simply stunning.

    Are you really that blinded by your own feverish emotions that you block out reality?

    You clearly cannot interact on a rational and logical level.

    Good luck with that.

    PS: Uncinus never “discredits” people…only their theories and logic or lack thereof. He does not attack the person…unlike yourself.

  4. JazzRoc says:

    This article seems to describe your motives and perspective pretty well. http://www.rense.com/general30/deby.htm What is your day job again?

    Jakeability, I have addressed this nasty piece of work under “Penrod” in my blog at

    http://jazzroc.wordpress.com

    Seeing as Uncinus addresses just the contrail/chemtrail question, perhaps you’d like to work through those points with me?

  5. Jakeability says:

    Thanks Rudedog,…we just want the truth. Uncinus is very shady, which only fuels speculation. Maybe he doesn’t understand this,…although he does believe in the “science” of “thermal expansion”, so perhaps he is incapable of understanding. Although I’m still not sure chemtrails aren’t simply more persistent contrails, this in no way is because of Uncinus’ “contrailscience”. I’m actually leaning towards JazzRoc’s point of view. He accepts the truth of 9/11 and the ongoing banking fraud, and sees chemtrails as a “red herring”, distracting from more serious issues. From that perspective I lend him ALOT of credibility. I will keep digging though.

  6. rudedog says:

    Jakeability,
    the difference between me and people like uncinus and SR1419 is, I am not here trying to convince the public that there is no such thing as persisting contrails. However, although persisting contrails can form under permitting conditions, it is perposterous to claim that all of the video and photographic material that has been documented and presented are nothing more than jet contrails. I have literally wittnessed the deliberate saturation of the air take place and watched it slowly sink to the ground many times under hot dry weather conditions. Day after day after day. I have seen more aircraft fly over in one day than there would be in a weeks worth of scheduled flights, mutulating our sky with so called ‘condensation nuclei.’ I have been an avid skywatcher since I was a toddler. I remember actually watching jets leaving contrails and trying to find the ones that would last the longest before dissapating and even the most persistent contrails would not evolve this way. It simply would not happen no matter how much I wanted them too. When people like uncinus tell me that this is just not true and I am not remembering it correctly because it has been this way all of my life, well, it pretty much confirms to me that this website is more than the reslults of an ‘ordinary guy persuing his hobby because he thinks clouds are interesting’. In addition, the debunkers on this blog are constantly trying to convince people that are truly concerned about their futures and well being that they are not actually seeing what they think they are seeing, yet they have no way of actually knowing that. It is because of this determination to deceive the public with irrevelent information that gives me reason to be even more concerned. The fact that there is a deliberate campain to discredit the testimonies of ligitimate, sound minded citizens is why you should be concerned and why revealing the truth must never be allowed, whatever it may be. The persisting contrail ‘theory’ simply cannot account for what I have been physically subjected to living in the northwestern USA where prevailing winds conveniently carry the poison over as much of the population as possible. When I say poison I am talking about the staggering levels of aluminum and barium being and other elements being reported from test results of samples taken from our local lakes, rivers, ground samples, snow pack etc…..
    I can literally see the strange material floating to the ground after an onslaught of jets have saturated the air with so called ‘contrails’. Give me a break. Fortunately, it has not been able to dumb me down enough yet to accept these ridiclulous explainations of what I am seeing and experiencing.

    The dubunkers on the other hand, are determined to convince the public at any cost that chemtrails do not exist and the people that claim that they do are conspiracy theorists. Typical. A perfect example is the opening statement by SR1419 in response to a previous post of mine when he says: “your lack of cognitive reality is simply stunning”. What exactly is he trying to imply with that statement? That I am not cognitive and I have no sense of reality?
    He also says: “Are you really that blinded by your own feverish emotions that you block out reality?” and “You clearly cannot interact on a rational and logical level”.
    These are the sort of tactics you will see throughout this website. Simply because my interpretation of my experiences does not fit his agenda, I must be ‘irrational’ with ‘feverish emotions’ with no sense of logic or reality.
    Thats a pretty serious diagnosis from someone that I have never had any contact with. Is SR1419 the one of us that is being rational and logical here? Perhaps his feverish emotions are getting the best of him. You be the judge.

  7. rudedog said:

    I have literally wittnessed the deliberate saturation of the air take place and watched it slowly sink to the ground many times under hot dry weather conditions. Day after day after day. I have seen more aircraft fly over in one day than there would be in a weeks worth of scheduled flights

    You also claim there is a lot of photographic evidence. So where is the photographic or video evidence of this sinking to the ground? I’d like to see that.

  8. Jakeability says:

    Were these the doctors and scientists you mentioned before?

    http://proliberty.com/observer/20060504.htm

  9. Anonymous says:

    Uncinus,
    Show me where I said that I have photographic or video evidence of the material sinking to the ground. What I said was I have watched it sink to the ground on several occassions. In other words, I was describing something that I have personally wittnessed but once again you have attempted to twist it into something else. Anyway, this is not something that is easily photographed or recorded on video. To the untrained eye it simply looks like fog, especially when video taped or photographed. However, if you were unfortunate enough to be here during one of these events, you would not have a doubt in your mind that what you are seeing is not fog. In addition, if you can manage to capture it under the right lighting conditions, it is possible to capture it on video. I have seen video of it and it is exactly what I have seen. In fact I have seen video of it from a link that someone posted on one of your threads. As usual you were quick explain it away as something else or accuse the blogger of trying to generate some kind of hoax or something. But you have demonstrated that it is to be expected here so I was not surprised at all.

  10. Jakeability says:

    I like the line in this story that suggests “military activity”

    http://www.holmestead.ca/chemtrails/soilradar.html

  11. To the untrained eye it simply looks like fog, especially when video taped or photographed. However, if you were unfortunate enough to be here during one of these events, you would not have a doubt in your mind that what you are seeing is not fog.

    What do you mean by “the untrained eye”? What does it take to be able to recognize it?

    Perhaps if you can’t photograph it, you could draw a diagram? What exactly is going on? How long does it take for the contrail to reach the ground? How high does it start? What else it going on in the sky at the same time? Can you take a photo and explain what is going on in the photo? Do you know anyone else who saw the same thing as you did? What is their description?

  12. Ross says:

    rudedog, could you give the date and location of what you saw? We could then obtain the atmospheric sounding near that location and check if something drifting down from 6 and a half miles overhead would reach the ground right there.

    The atmospheric soundings are available from this site:
    http://weather.uwyo.edu/upperair/sounding.html

  13. Jakeability says:

    Uncinus-In a previous conversation about contrails didn’t you say;

    “The sunspot theory does not have many supporters (or any real evidence)”

    22,000 scientists [with credentials] are all wrong?

    http://inpursuitofhappiness.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/22000-scientists-disagree-with-un-global-warming-push/

  14. 31,072 now. But that’s an anti-Kyoto petition that says:

    We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December,1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

    There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

    http://www.petitionproject.org/index.html

    The petition says nothing about sunspots, nor does it deny that carbon emissions cause global warming. It’s also a self-selected sample of people with degrees, not a representative cross-section of scientists actually investigating climate change. How many people with degrees did NOT sign it?

  15. JazzRoc says:

    I have literally wittnessed the deliberate saturation of the air take place and watched it slowly sink to the ground many times under hot dry weather conditions. Day after day after day. I have seen more aircraft fly over in one day than there would be in a weeks worth of scheduled flights, mutulating our sky with so called ‘condensation nuclei.’

    Rudedog, the saturation of the air may well take place, but it isn’t really caused deliberately.
    Increasing addition of water by regular civil passenger transport flight is temporarily exceeding the stratosphere’s capacity to absorb it.
    Whenever that happens IT IS INEVITABLE that the conditions you observe take place.
    If you REALLY count up the number of flights (as found in flight explorer) that take place above you, you’ll find (in your worst scenario) slightly less than the number of flights that you have seen.
    The rest will be Canadian and Mexican (and a few others) which will make up the number – EXACTLY.

  16. Jon says:

    Hey Uncinus,

    I’ve read a couple of your exchanges with the chemtrail believers. I can see what you’re trying to do here, but I feel bad about the time you must be spending trying to answer these inane questions. I’m an aerospace engineering undergrad and the things you have on your website are great. I was led here by my search for an explanation of the shuttle shadow intersecting the moon.

    Really the problem here is the lack of conformity or the lack of belief in the scientific method. Claims are easy to make but they should never be taken seriously without evidence. I can claim that my coffee is being spiked with chemicals from the government. However, unless I do a spectral analysis of the chemical makeup of the coffee and come up with conclusive numbers showing a unusually high concentration of an unusual chemical, the claim is bogus and should not be taken seriously. I plead of everyone who believes in these conspiracy theories: if you accept “innocent until proven guilty”, should you not accept “false until proven true”? You cannot do it the other way around (i.e. “true until proven false”) because that would mean you had to accept EVERY POSSIBLE IDEA as true until some disproves it. That would mean, yes, I can fly around like superman and shoot lasers out of my eyes and you would simply accept it as true until someone proves me wrong. But how can someone prove me wrong? I can just tell them I never feel like flying around and shooting lasers out of my eyes. Not only that, but evidence for claims must be peer reviewed. To simply claim evidence by yourself is insufficient. It has to be shown by other people scientifically in order to be accepted. Please, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method .

    Anyway, great work Uncinus!

  17. john hicks says:

    Well i don’t know about you guys but we must have some of the dumbest, directionally dysfunctional pilots in all the world here in Florida because i watch the planes on a daily basis spraying this crap and they will fly almost out of sight do a big u-turn come back and spray some more, sometimes 2 planes sometimes up to about 6 at a time doing the same pattern over and over all day, now i’m thinking maybe these pilots need to get mapquest on board or something??? Their altitude doesn’t change ( i know because sometimes they will fly right through the chemtrail they just sprayed) and i’ll be darned if those trails don’t appear in a nice little grid area..kinda like turning a switch on and off?? Now i am 42 years old and have never seen trails like this growing up nor do they act like “normal” contrails and you don’t need a frickin PHD in physics to clearly see these are not normal, but then again i guess anything is possible..hell Uncinus may actually even wake up one day!! NOT!!

  18. Hi John, I think what you are seeing are just regular scheduled flights flying overhead. They fly in both directions, so it’s quite common for one to fly off one way as another is coming the other way. You live near Orlando, which has a lot of flight’s overhead on the way to Miami. Notice the directions of the trails? All towards (or away from) Miami, right?

    The grid is just due to the wind.

    Did you grow up in that location?

  19. Addie says:

    I see. Nothing has changed.
    Some good common sense folks, who trust their eyes, and say it like it is, and then, there is Uncinus, who doesen’t see a thing ! Wow !

  20. Addie, sometime “common sense” needs to have a sprinkle of science added to it. If you just used common sense, then would you not think that the earth was flat? It certainly looks flat? Why do you trust those scientists who say it is shaped like a ball? Why not trust common sense there?

  21. James Seguin says:

    Uncinus = teletype newspeak (plain and simple as the unclear blue sky!)

    I’m 56 now and have remembered the sonic boomer that flew above in the late 50s in San Antonio and early 1960 down in the Rio Grande Valley where I reside currently. So I had a fascination for the traffic in the skies, which on some occasions, day or night an occasional UFO witnessed by me alone and at other times by several of us. However, never did I see long lasting white lines in the sky after the sonic jets or any other jet-liner, be it commercial or military, especially when Randolph Air Force Base, headquarters of the Air Education and Training Command; Brooks Air Force Base, home to the School of Aerospace Medicine; and Lackland Air Force Base, a major training center for recruits and which when I was a kid were all once very active in their aerial strategic pursuits. Today we here nothing of their aerial manuevers. But I can honestly say that there has been more astonishing samples in the sky that make me wonder what in the heavens is going on.
    I was asked last year in a general letter addressed to me by Senator John Cornyn about my concerns for the state. I wrote back via email about my regard to the white lines in the sky. Two weeks later an attorney from his office called me on my private number to investigate what I have been witnessing in the skies day and night (stealth vehicles that fly very low without a sound or vibration after dark). He took note and said nothing to the effect, nor was I promised a reply or resolution. The only event that has occurred over my community a couple of months since my conversation with the Texas senator’s office is the audacious increase of spraying of white lines overhead that are definitely not contrails. They are too persistent and ugly to think otherwise. And again during the day and night.

  22. Hi Jame, I was wondering what year it was when you first noticed these persistent trails? And where were you?

    Remember that persistent contrails will usually only form at a high altitude (where it is cold), so if you lived in an out of the way place, like Harlingen, Texas, then you might not have got much in the way of overhead flight between distant cities. But looking at the map now:

    http://flightaware.com/live/airport/KHRL
    (click the small map in the top right to expand)

    It looks like you get quite a few high level flights overhead going to Mexico. AAL22625 (KORD Chicago – MMPR Puerto Vallarta) , COA871 (KIAH Houston – MMAA Acapulco) and BTA2831 (KIAH Houston – MMBT Huatulco), all flying above you right now, at above 30,000 feet. It seems quite plausible that these flights were not happening 20 years ago, but they are now. Hence you noticed them at some point.

  23. Uncinus (teletyped Niccolò Newspeak) has ignored the gist of my message. Simply speaking Orwellian but more Machiavellian in character. I can read between the lines Nic; perhaps senator Cornyn was on one of those flights to Mexico.
    Try this for your perusal: What is round and bright aluminum in color, flying about an altitude of 6,000 feet or less (I use to fly in a Cherokee Piper at that altitude, mas o menos)but this vehicle has no wings nor has a tail, and it pours, yes pouring and not spraying, a powdery-like substance that simulates a persistent contrail? I thought it was a helicopter but it had no sound to distinguish its model. It was totally sinister in its appearance and stealth in its approach, and yes it was flying 10 o’clock high over my neighborhood in the middle of the afternoon. I give you my Rotarian honor.

  24. I’ve flow a Cherokee at that altitude too, more or less.

    Anyway, what you describe sounds very unusual. Did you happen to take photos? Given that it flew over you neighborhood in the middle of the afternoon, you would think someone would.

    Are you sure you were not just looking at and A380, or similar, that was somewhat higher? Photos would settle the matter. Not hard to take.

  25. I’m not Japanese, Nic! Is photos your best answer??? Than you either have no sixth sense or your minds eye is somewhat foggy with too much double speak.

  26. Photos would be the most direct evidence of what you are describing, and they should be VERY easy to take, given what you say. The absence of photos detracts from your claims.

  27. Addie says:

    James again, I just wanted to tell you ( hope u are reading this ) that I saw this very same thing a week ago. It went from horizon to horizon in such a short time, it was unreal. And it left a thick grey trail that went right over my home and it stayed there.. for the rest of the day. The only thing that changed was.. it got wider and ended up looking like a huge spiderweb that had ” dripping ” fringes, is best I can explain it.
    Something very very scary is going on, and no one answers my inquiries. Real nice for this to happen in this great US of A..
    Freedom et al…

  28. Photos can be very deceiving, Nic. My memory is sufficient and eye witnesses are my confirmation; besides, do you plan to publish any photos I may upload to you via photoshop? Just look up in the sky, compatriot, and see the white lines above you! They testify enough that an investigation merits a soluble answer. Quit you like men and stand up for the right, to God (or in the name of science so called), and to your country!

  29. You choose memory and eye witness over photos as your evidence? Well, perhaps you could post a photo, and in addition, explain what you saw, to augment what the photo shows.

    You see, right now, it just seems like you are misinterpreting what you are seeing. If something at 6000 feet with no wings pouting out “a powdery-like substance that simulates a persistent contrail” cannot be photographed, then perhaps your perception is wrong?

    I’ll publish any photos you send me of this object. Either put them on the web and post a link, or email them to [email protected]

  30. rudedog says:

    Same old never ending dis-info garbage. How long can you continue on telling these people not to trust their own physical experiences?

    Addie, I wish there were a way to contact you outside this mockery of of a website. I could provide you with some real insight which I choose not to divulge here for obvious reasons. This site was created for one purpose only and it will never provide the truth. Any information I provide here will be quickly attacked and become tarnished by the monsters that exist here.

  31. How long can you continue on telling these people not to trust their own physical experiences?

    You also need to be aware of the limitations of your physical experiences. Sometimes things are not as they seem. Are these lines parallel?

    It’s an illusion. There are lots of them. You need to be careful in trusting what you eyes tell you. Verify it with science (like in this case, use a straight edge to check the lines are parallel).

  32. Addie says:

    rudedog,
    I would love to hear what u have :
    Write me please : [email protected]

  33. Anonymous says:

    uncinus says:
    It’s an illusion. There are lots of them. You need to be careful in trusting what you eyes tell you.

    Another typical response. Divert the readers attention to some off the wall drawing of an illusion as if this somehow proves that whenever someone reports about chemtrail activity, it is only an illusion.

    In other words, dont trust your own eyes. Instead, trust the person who was not there and had no visual observation of the activity that you observed. He has a drawing of an optical illusion, therefore, your observation was also an illusion.

    That is so weak! Unfortunately, so is the mind that succumbs to it.

  34. The picture of the illusion was not intended as proof of anything. It was simply something to think about.

    Can you always trust what your eyes are telling you? Always?

  35. Addie says:

    Yesterday.. I watched ” them” laying trails all day, and NO they were not ” contrails ”
    I even took pics, but: Meanwhile I understand that we will never find out who’s doing it and why..ever !
    So, I decided to let it be, I can’t live my life upset over the evilness of certain ” elements” who are living amongst us mere humans.
    There are many groups now, that actively are trying to fight this terrible phenomena, but.. see above: it will be to no avail.
    Waste of time and energy.

  36. Virga says:

    Addie, are you educated in meteo? If no, then how can you claim they were not contrails?

  37. billybob says:

    Anyone who does not think the Government has their best interest at heart is a FOOL,
    I mean look, they take care of our teeth by putting flouride in our water..Oh wait….that does nothing but harm us?? Ok well that’s a bad example. Ok how about how there is an actual patented cure for aids. http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=7&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=5676977&s2=aids&OS=5676977+AND+aids&RS=5676977+AND+aids but oh crap, wait….our government actually created Aids.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDxZ7PX8YGI ,ok well i’m sure there is a perfectly good reason why we haven’t heard about this cure?? Ok well look, it’s not like our own gov has done anything in the past to actually cause HARM to it’s own citizens.
    http://www.geocities.com/athens/oracle/4809/gov.html And even if they did it’s not like they would EVER do it again?? Well i seem to have been ill prepared to defend my government, but i know in my heart of hearts that my government loves and cares for me and only has the best intentions for it’s citizens. Well i have to go, i have some tea brewing sweetened with aspartame 😉

    Tootles

  38. billybob, assuming for the sake of argument, that all that is true, then what evidence is there that some persistent contrails are actually chemtrails?

    Sure, maybe the government is evil and conniving, but why exactly do you believe in chemtrails?

  39. billybob says:

    Well Uncinus, we can start off with 7 U.S. patents for weather modification. Seems like they have been very interested in owning the weather for quite sometime, Here is an actual research paper presented the the United States Air Force by 7 Air Force officers on owning the weather by 2025. http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch15.pdf

    And here are 2 links that will take you to 7 US patents on weather modification.

    http://conspiration.ca/brevet_chemtrails/United%20States%20Patent%206,315,213.htm

    http://www.lightwatcher.com/chemtrails/patents.html

    Check them out.

  40. But what evidence do you have that the long trails you see are not contrails?

    Do they act any different to contrails? Do they look any different? Do they last a different length of time?

    Can you show me a photo of something that is not a contrail (and not a known form of spraying, like mosquito control, or crop dusting)?

  41. billybob says:

    I could show you HUNDREDS of photos and videos and documents Uncinus, but you have proven that no matter the evidence shown to you you still refuse to believe.
    And quite honestly the only thing you have to offer here is your usual,
    SPIT, RINSE, REPEAT theme which has become quite tiresome.

    Later.

  42. And I’ve provided explanations for all the photos, videos and documents. I must admit though it is getting a little repetitive – constantly having to explain the same thing over an over again.

    Perhaps instead of me debunking your explanations, you could try to debunk one of mine? Any one of the pages on here? Anything wrong on this site? Feel free to point it out.

  43. Addie says:

    Uncinus, what’s ” wrong” here is a typical human thing.
    People will believe what they want to believe, for one.
    Now take a person who belongs to some crazy cult or something and you sit down w. him/her… and try to convince them, that they are wrong. It won’t matter what facts you bring up.. even proof.. they won’t hear a word u are saying. They have chosen to believe what they believe, and it is their comfortzone. No one likes to leave their comfortzone.. not even for the truth.
    Facts are facts.. like math is math. Some people can’t grasp math.
    You know.. like 1 + 1 = 3. See ?
    So, when I see what I see and I know it’s something bad, but you don’t want to step out of your comfortzone and admit or see. then you will insist, it is NOT bad.
    We can go on forever.. but really, it’s beginning to be pretty boring, I agree w. you.
    And how long we want to go on w.: me saying ” Something isen’t right up there “…. and you will say :” It’s normal”, is a matter of this:’When o when will you be open to see, that 1 + 1 = 2 ???”
    I know I am not very good w. English.. but eh.. gimme ” E” for effort please.

  44. Addie, I’m not saying that what you see is not bad. That would be hard to do, as I don’t see what you see.

    What I’m saying is that YOU have provided no evidence that it is bad. No evidence that it is even in the slightest bit unusual. You describe things that sound EXACTLY like persisting spreading contrails, and then say that’s bad.

    You imply there is some difference between what you see, and persisting spreading contrails. So what is the difference?

  45. Addie says:

    .. the difference is : They linger all day, They are ” painting” designs.. like grids. They draw lines.. and go back to criss cross them , yes, I watch them do this. Why.. are they playing, and if they are.. who’s money are they using to ” play”?
    Contrails don’t haze up the whole sky 24/7
    Contrails don’t try to look like clouds, contrails are long lanes.. that vanish after a certain time.. depending on the weather, but never stay all day, ever,
    They are faking clouds.. but it doesen’t work real good.. it always ends up like spiderwebs.. contrails don’t look like spiderwebs or grids.
    Contrails are straight lines.
    Another thing is: I have watched the grids and plumes appear, w.out seeing a craft that did it. Like an invisible stealth or something.
    Even with binoculars.. I saw the developing formations.. but not the craft doing it.. that’s real weird.
    Oh.. Unic, I just don’t know how to explain it any better.. and I am not good with play on words.
    I know what I know and what I see… and you know what you know and see..
    Can we start another subject please?

  46. Addie says:

    Just now….. I counted about 50 of those ” Puffies..” that appeared poof poof right one after the other.. w. no visible craft doing it !
    And.. long lanes.. like traffic lanes.. real close together.. from horizon to horizon. The latter.. I have watched since this morning, they are not going away either.. as contrails would.. today.. they really have it in for us again.
    I think, it’s originating in Lompoc.

  47. Addie, if you can’t see the craft, then that’s because it’s too small and high. A neutral colored small jet at 40,000 feet will look pretty much like the sky due to Rayleigh scattering.

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

    On contrail does not look like a grid. But lots of contrails would. They do also “haze up the sky”, and always have.

  48. ijostl says:

    What’s really interesting seems regardless of what these things are that they are, unarguably, affecting the weather. The patterns are sown, the drifting occurs, and the blue sky is turned to an ugly haze which most often persists for the remainder of the day.

    This can only be refuted by one method, highly scientific, and very conspicuous: denial. Simple as that. The voices of denial on this board can methodically calculate responses in any which way, but the fact remains, that whatever this stuff is, it is most definitely affecting the weather.

    Now of course would be the time to pooh-pooh this simple fact by saying something like oh well of course it is, nobody is denying that…. etc., etc.

    So, my question for the man of the board who appears diligently, desperately, seeking the solace of fellow rationalists is thus: Are you aware of how intelligence operatives work in the pyramidal pecking order of rank and file, where in order to achieve desired results from an individual within the order, that person is revealed only enough information to garner their appreciation and dedication to the project?

    And have you noticed that despite your advancement of intellect over the common class with respect to reason, that you are still subject to the same emotional gratification of one-upping your own class?

    It is the foundation of fanaticism. You build a construct in your mind, like the atheist or any other religious fanatic, and you worship the construct as the final word.

    I don’t see how that helps you or anybody else. But then again, having a better reference point, I haven’t understood that sort of pecking order mentality since.

    Peace to all good people and I sincerely hope by now anyone reading this has figured out to omit animal products from their diet.

    ijostl

  49. ijostl, I’m really sorry, but I don’t know what you are trying to say there, regarding contrails. Could you perhaps point to some specific statement on this site that you disagree with? Or failing that, could you say, using you own words, what exactly it is you disagree with?

    I’m not building a construct here, I’m using science. I’m examining the evidence.

    Where exactly did I go wrong?

  50. SR1419 says:

    What’s really interesting seems regardless of what these things are that they are, unarguably, affecting the weather.

    Jostle- indeed- persisting contrails covering the sky in a haze of man-made cirrus clouds does affect the visible weather…

    …and atmospheric scientists have oft wondered as to their effects on the climate- such as this paper from 1980 suggests:

    http://tinyurl.com/dmo6bt

    and this one from 1997:

    http://tinyurl.com/cwhkyn

    and 2000:

    http://tinyurl.com/66qouz

    However, that is in no way an indication that the trails were deliberately put there…much less “sprayed”…

    …and thus, as Uncinus so politely put it….what is your point?

    The final word is, in fact, testable, repeatable, provable science…

  51. ijostl says:

    Greetings,
    I’ll reply to both here, thank you for your replies.

    Of course the trails are deliberately put there; someone controls an aircraft, it soars, and leaves a wake of haze that obliterates an otherwise beautiful blue sky. Who, what and why remains speculation by all, including those who are directly involved with the aircraft. The degree of understanding is likely understood well by very few.

    The construct referenced is simply this endless “science, science, science” posturing that, like many unfortunate scientists, seems to omit the historical revelations of scientific achievements. Meaning simply that history proves that the revelations of science have been progressive, and for some reason many professors and or scientists seem to position themselves under a pretense that we are at some sort of plateau. Obviously there is much yet to learn, and it may be in fact that the human species has limits to what can be understood. Seems self-evident yet I’m often hearing professors and scientists using phrases like “can’t” and “impossible” when scientific thinking should construct phrases with “seem” or “probable”. To do otherwise suggests unfamiliarity with scientific “thinking” and perhaps points to some sort of personal issues.

    Besides the time and efforts you both put into this site, your asserted “hobby”, it seems to me that this is more an intellectual exercise for you both. Un being the obvious stronger of the two and SR14, question for you please: what is it you find objectionable about being polite? Did you take my post as some sort of challenge and therefore equate that with an insult? If so, please accept my apology. It’s true that it does somewhat peeve me at times when encountering pseudo-scientific posturing through definitive declarations when it’s obvious that long term effects of such weather modifications would be unknown. And because of this peeve sometimes I come across a bit harsh, and excuses are lame but for the life of me I can’t figure out how anyone who champions science can make concrete definitive declarations about a subject that has not been concretely defined. Which seems to be what you two have been doing for what appears to be most of this thread if not all. Especially SR, no offense man, but most of your posts sound like cheer leading. Go Neeb High! Maybe work on that, politeness always seems worthy.

    Anyway, the simple introductory post was stating the fact that whatever these things are, they are changing the weather, at the very least. This alone should raise a red flag for any thinking mind. Trying to calm the populace by dismissing these occurrences as hogwash and or advocating dismissal is downright rude, and unscientific. Period.

    Another point I’d like to add is; knowing how some of our species are entirely delusional and let’s not mince words, stupid, it would make sense to many that if there were some sort of problem threatening our species or life in general on this planet, that it seems to make sense that the information should have to be controlled simply to avert the destruction some of these stupid people would undoubtedly inflict upon each other. Concrete worshiping of one’s own ineffable infallibility to discern fact from fiction sure does cause a bunch of trouble.

    What I was attempting to communicate with the latter part of my first post is simply that there is a hierarchy that exists in the animal kingdom and so within our species. Consciousness itself is not yet understood by any science, yet there are functional and practical methods of manipulating it and if you know anything about this branch of science you know that the mind under the influence of post hypnotic suggestion is fully capable of reasoning why it may or may not be doing a particular thing. All the while completely, and utterly, unaware of the real motivation behind their actions.

    Disclaimer: I’m sometimes an idiot. But I’ve at least figured out to be kind to animals and certainly not support tyranny or violence. What can I say, I’m optimistic.

    Gentlemen, thank you again for your replies.
    ijostl

  52. Anyway, the simple introductory post was stating the fact that whatever these things are, they are changing the weather, at the very least. This alone should raise a red flag for any thinking mind. Trying to calm the populace by dismissing these occurrences as hogwash and or advocating dismissal is downright rude, and unscientific. Period.

    But then you said that if we agreed with you (that contrails change the weather), then we were somehow being evasive? So my question would be: Has anyone EVER denied that contrails have an effect on the weather?

    I know I have not. No have scientists. Nor has anyone, a quick Google search will confirm this:

    http://www.google.com/search?q=contrails+effect+on+the+weather

    So, while your theories regarding hierarchy are interesting, that’s not really what we are discussing here. What is your point regarding contrails?

  53. SR1419 says:

    J-

    The trails are not deliberate. They are an unintended consequence of air travel.

    Who, what and Why is not open to speculation as the flights are known, who is flying is known and why; travel- is known…

    Moreover, the science is not “pseudo”. The laws of physics define and explain the behavior of the trails formation and persistence.

    If you disagree, please expound.

    Nobody has said these “occurrences” are “hogwash” – only that they are not evidence of global, clandestine “spraying” operation of unknown origin and intent.

    Again- nobody is (or at least I am not) saying that there are not possible climactic effects of persistent contrails…as previously shown, a lot of scientists are studying just that. However, their effects are not fully understood- some blocking of sunlight, some trapping of heat…the results are inconclusive…and thus, you are correct, no definitive declarations about the possible long term effects of persistent contrails on the weather can be made.

    However, definitive declarations CAN be made about the formation, persistence and spreading of contrails as a result of benign intent air travel.

    Obviously, science is progressive as you suggest and built upon the findings of others. That is why the last 40 years of atmospheric science regarding contrails is so strong in its evidence that contrails that persist and spread are a known result of air travel and thus that visible sighting of a persistent trail is not necessarily evidence of a global “spraying” operation.

    I did not state objection to Uncinus’ politeness. I was merely being more direct. Feel free to point out any instance where I was, in fact, impolite…and of course, try to do it without the ad hominem attacks- neeb high indeed.

    Moreover, speculating as to my motive (or others), critiquing the writing style and waxing loquaciously about the relative intelligence of our species and the hierarchy therein is really a pseudo-intellectual attempt at redirecting the discussion away from the topic at hand. Contrails.

    Definitive declaration: Contrails, as a result of “normal” air travel (of which there is a great deal in this country and elsewhere) can persist and spread and cover…er…”obliterate” the sky in a haze of man-made cirrus clouds…and thus, seeing one is not prima facie evidence of a “spraying” campaign.

    Its really quite simple.

  54. Addie says:

    Heavy spraying here today.. huge “X” es in the sky.. and lanes running from horizon to horizon. No way.. contrails.
    Meanwhile I checked around for more info and was told, that this is a “classified” happening, and no matter what anyone does, we will never find out who’s doing it or why.
    This much I do know: It’s nothing good ! But that’s all I know.
    The sheeple have no need to know.
    I have done my part and am still doing it. I call people’s attention to it, where ever I am and can. But this seems to be all anyone can do.

  55. SR1419 says:

    Addie…

    Why can’t they be contrails?

    Who did you “check” with?

  56. ijostl says:

    Its really quite simple.

    LOL! 🙂
    uhem…
    Gentlemen, the simple point that seems to have thus far eluded you is that by presenting through your arguments and rebuttals, pointing to other people’s research, that it appears you have reduced your arguments to a matter of your personal faith. Which was why I was pointing out the relationship to fanaticism earlier on.

    Because no matter what you write, or which links you provide, there is absolutely no way either of you could possibly give any definitive answer on the subject without providing your very own research and offering the results coupled with your opinions on the matter.

    That would be scientific. Not this ludicrous posturing that by providing other people’s research and offering your faith and wit that somehow seals the deal.

    Now if you were to examine multiple instances of this phenomenon and present your own detailed analysis and the results thereof, perhaps not only would your readers listen to what you have to offer, but they may actually HEAR it. Are we trying to understand something or are we, like most of human history, attempting to backup preexisting conclusions?

    SR, the loathing and anger in your tone is self-evident, thus suggesting that this is not about investigating a particular phenomenon but rather something perhaps personal. This does not lend credibility to your assertion of advocating science.

    Yet if you are actually interested in attempting to gain some sort of understanding, since by claiming that every report is “normal air travel” you assert that you have full knowledge of every flight in this country, perhaps you can provide us with the next month’s daily flight plans over Portland Oregon and through diligent observation and record keeping, we could at least check to see if your master commander’s list of the Portland area flight plan matches what is actually overhead?

    By the way, how is it that you happen to know every flight plan in The United States of America let alone the world? I would think at least some flight plans would be unavailable to common citizens.

    Which of course you can’t, because you don’t have this master commander’s list of flight plans, which means that you couldn’t possibly claim every flight is “normal air traffic” without sounding like a fanatic.

    Gentlemen, thank you for the intellectual exercise. I must continue to warn you that I am and admitted idiot, and yet it often baffles me that such illustrious men such as yourselves are often found making proclamations that appear to be completely silly. My humble advice is to reformulate your assertions to omit making proxy declarations such as the “all normal air traffic” error.

    Best wishes to you and your loved ones.
    ijostl

  57. ijostl says:

    for Addie

    Dear Sister,
    How does it do anyone any good whatsoever to dehumanize our fellow citizens by using the term “sheeple”? Of course it does nothing good and more likely the opposite.

    Please do consider omitting using this term or better yet even thinking in this vein; for in my opinion the best thing we can do is work towards bettering ourselves. We are all flesh and blood and thus animal by nature. Unless and until we are something more, which in the realm of infinity seems entirely possible is it not is it not?

    Thank you,
    ijostl

  58. By the way, how is it that you happen to know every flight plan in The United States of America let alone the world? I would think at least some flight plans would be unavailable to common citizens.

    Which of course you can’t, because you don’t have this master commander’s list of flight plans, which means that you couldn’t possibly claim every flight is “normal air traffic” without sounding like a fanatic.

    You raise a straw man argument, ijostl. Nobody has claimed any such thing. At most it has been claimed that the contrail patterns are consistent with normal air traffic. Which indeed they are. Very strong sources of data have been given for this – particularly the timetables of flights from sites such as Expedia (which also you give a rough estimate of the number of flights between cities, and hence over certain areas), and then also the web site flightaware, which provides real-time tracking of flights over just about any area.

    http://www.expedia.com/default.asp
    http://flightaware.com/live/airport/KLAX

    Now, of course this does not account for ALL aircraft, and nobody says that it does. However, it does give a very good representation of the planes in the air. Of course there are other planes as well – for a start there is no such thing as a “master flight plan” – as flight plans change constantly, and do not always represent the final tracks of the aircraft. There are also military and private planes that do not report their flight plans.

    Just as I cannot claim with absolute confidence that every person I meet is a human being, I cannot also claim that every contrail is a “normal” contrail. I can however state with total confidence that they certainly appear to be normal contrails, and there is nothing to suggest they are not.

    Now, perhaps you could be more specific in what exactly you believe, and what evidence you have to back it up? And further, if you wish to accuse someone of error, then perhaps you should quote their error, rather than making up an exaggerated representation of their position.

  59. SR1419 says:

    Jostl…

    indeed- I did make a generalization about flight plans- for that I am duly sorry…and yet the vast majority of flight plans are freely available…

    Moreover, the fact that a flight plan is not available is not -in and of itself, evidence that the contrail is somehow part of a clandestine “spraying” operation.

    …and yes, I have not sampled a contrail myself…and thus, I am running on faith…faith in the scientific process…faith that the 100s of scientists who HAVE sampled contrails, studied the physics of their formation and persistence- presented their findings for their peers and others to critique and repeat and indeed repeated the findings of others, tested hypothesis’ and tested others’ hypothesis’ and built up an accumulated knowledge base over time…I have faith in that process. Do you?

    …and yet, I *have* observed many multiple examples of the phenomena and determined that the aircraft from which the persistent contrails emanated appeared to be “normal” commercial aircraft shuttling their passengers to and fro…Is that definitive? No- without observing the craft closely I cannot determine if it was disguised to look like a commercial aircraft but it correlates with what others have observed and the available data. …and thus, your point about my declarations being solely based on other’s peoples research is, in fact, inaccurate.

    If you disagree with any of the findings of the atmospheric scientists who have labored toward these conclusions then I suggest you present your research and findings for us all to review.

    Moreover, I implore you to find any “chemtrail” believer who, in fact, has done any research comparable to the body of knowledge presented on contrail behavior. Talk about “faith”. Does the same dialectic also apply to the them?

    Indeed, to suggest that one cannot glean any merit from scientific data unless the research is done personally is seemingly outlandish and renders your credibility highly suspect.

    If I came across as loathing you or angry in any way…I sincerely and humbly apologize. Perhaps I was irritated at being accused of supposed lack of politeness, all the while having my motives questioned, being the subject of ad hominem attacks, being lectured to under the guise of the pseudo intellectual and all together ridiculous argument that none of my assertions based on available scientific data mean anything because I did not do the research myself.

    …again, my apologies 🙂

  60. Addie says:

    How do I know these things are ” sprayed” into the air?
    Is my 20/20 vision good enough? I see it all the time, yes: spraying.
    Then, curving around, crossing their own trails, making Xes etc etc.
    Finally it all broadens and covers the sky completely. This is what I see, and I don’t need science for this.
    With ” sheeple ” I mean people who never question anything, and even though things are ongoing right over their heads, they don’t see a thing, worse yet, they don’t want to see anything, it just might crowd their comfortzone.It’s ” sheeple”, who don’t stand up for what is fair, right and moral. ( Yes I know that even morals are relative )
    But we do have laws. And no one tells us who is paying for all those things, many would not agree with, and lastly : Those who only care about themselves, never mind someone elses pain.
    Lest I stray from the subject, I want to say something here.
    Uncinus has been incredibly patient and kind to me, even though we disagree. I so appreciate this.
    If nothing else, this blog has been interesting to me.. and I thank everyone who has bothered to listen to me whine about those chemtrails, I am scared, and maybe I will have to ignore them in the future, if I don’t want my BP to go thru the roof.
    Thanx again Uni…. and a few others 😉

  61. Addie says:

    Uncinus, I lost your e mail, I wanted u to please google:
    “Systematische Zerstoerung der irdischen Naturgrundlage”
    This I understand better, and it is very interesting, even though not in English, u will get the gist of it.
    It is what my friends sent me.

  62. Jakeability says:

    SR1419-What is your professional background?-if you don’t mind me askin. Your spelling and punctuation is perfect,…you may even be able to challenge JazzRoc.

  63. Addie, I think what you are seeing are contrails.

    Could you explain the visual difference between a contrail and a chemtrail, because what you describe sounds just like contrails. Is the difference purely in the way the jets fly? If so, then how can you tell they are spraying? Have you ever tried to identify the planes with FlightAware?

  64. Addie says:

    Unci, the differences are : contrails: stripes , straight.. that vanish w.in minutes.
    Chems: billowing puffy lanes that cross eachother, spread out, cover the sky, HUGE diff.
    When I can see the craft…. the trails come out of the back, usually 2 lanes. parallel to eachother. Then plane returns.. crosses it’s own path.. to do it all over again. Contrails do not do either.
    Best I can do Unci. One more thing, Chems: planes make puffy, billowy things, that imitate clouds.. then they stop, and resume a bit down the path.. stop again, then resume. This sorta looks like clouds but it’s not ! Usually those Puffs.. look like spiderwebs.
    It’s always done when a rainstorm comes in.. right in front of the storm.. results as far as I noticed.. instead of the good downpour we need.. we get sprinkled only.
    We are told water will become rationed and expensive.. need I say more ? ( Big Money, Companies… pharmaceuticals profiting ?)

  65. Unci, the differences are : contrails: stripes , straight.. that vanish w.in minutes.
    Chems: billowing puffy lanes that cross eachother, spread out, cover the sky, HUGE diff.

    Addie, you are just describing two different types of contrails.

    How exactly do you think you know that planes don’t make contrails like this? Did you read it somewhere?

  66. ijostl says:

    Addie – With ” sheeple ” I mean people who never…

    Addie, it seems you have discounted my advice in favor of some excuse to justify your use of dehumanizing common folks by employing this term. Teenagers seem to do this often and come up with any reason to disregard the criticism or advice and offer their “reason” or excuse as I call it to justify the behavior. Perhaps some meditation where you stand with your nose in the corner for an hour or two might help you calm down and think what it was I was suggesting for your benefit as well as your neighbors. Just kidding 🙂 about the standing in the corner, don’t freak out. Yet it might help, dunno.

    Un and SR

    Gentlemen, you have both been very kind with your replies and I want to thank you both for taking the time to reply to my posts.

    First I’ll address your questions about what I believe: I believe that there are many things going on which I and many others don’t have any knowledge of. And I am aware of how there exists circles within circles and in any organization there are degrees of understanding and shared information.

    Yesterday in Portland it started out fully overcast and later in the afternoon the clouds broke up and we were left with patchy cumulus clouds and a gorgeous deep blue sky and bright sunshine. Days like these put the love in my love/hate relationship with Oregon; Winters are cold and wet and that’s the other side. Air traffic yesterday was less and those had seemingly normal contrails that dissipated shortly behind the aircraft.

    More importantly, Uncinus – regarding your remark “claim with absolute confidence“, this is what I tell folks with similar considerations: First, that there is no proof that human beings are native to this planet, and second that when we take advantage of other animals such as cows, chickens, pigs, buffalo, etc., we embrace the exact same line of tyranny that we would wish to avoid if we were in such a position. Consider the cow, if translated to a language we could understand we would hear something like all I want to do is eat some grass, why are these human beings doing this evil against us? So in that vein alone unless we treated other species with kindness and benevolence how could we expect any class to treat us any better? I think the best course is to at least try to be something better than this, even omitting the fact that we sweat through our pores, have long intestinal tracts and flat teeth, it just makes sense we should treat other species on this planet with all the respect we would want to be treated with.

    Are you and SR vegans or vegetarians?

  67. I’m sorry, ijostl, but I’d prefer to keep the comments section constrained to the discussions of contrails. So if you’d like to discuss that then feel free. But I’m not interested in veganism.

    Why do you think that normal contrails dissipate quickly? Science, and observation, seem to indicate otherwise.

  68. Addie says:

    jostls, I am calm, don’t meditate.. don’t need your help, did not dehumanize anyone, and am standing behind everything I say.And indeed, I discounted your ” advice “, cause I have no need 4 it.If I would take your ” advice” I would act like a typical Sheeple, and u know how I feel about those .
    Unci…
    The only thing I can say is, that contrails don’t cross their own path, with the same plane flying thru the ” lane” he just made.
    Passengers would get upset, if their plane would fly in circles ;o)
    Did not know how to express myself any better.

  69. ijostl says:

    I’m sorry to hear that you have not yet figured out this related and very important issue of stepping out of the long line of tyranny with respect towards other Earth dwellers.

    Good luck and thank you for your time.
    ijostl

  70. The only thing I can say is, that contrails don’t cross their own path, with the same plane flying thru the ” lane” he just made.

    Yes, contrails do cross their own path, if the plane crosses its path. If a plane flys in a circle, then it will make a circular contrail. Like this:

    http://contrailscience.com/voodoo-contrails-over-los-angeles/

    You live out in the desert. Maybe what you are seeing are just military pilot practicing maneuvers?

  71. ijostl says:

    jostls, I am calm, don’t meditate.. don’t need your help, did not dehumanize anyone, and am standing behind everything I say.And indeed, I discounted your ” advice “, cause I have no need 4 it.If I would take your ” advice” I would act like a typical Sheeple, and u know how I feel about those .

    Actually using the term “sheeple” *is* a dehumanizing term for it reduces those you cast your venom towards as something less than you. In my opinion it’s an illness that has been rampant in our species for a long time, this name calling done in order to make the person casting the remarks feel better about themselves (sort of like the church goer who secretly hopes for something bad to happen to someone they loathe for the sole purpose of saying “I told you so!”).

    If you took my advice to omit using the derogatory comments towards your fellow human beings this would in fact produce the opposite effect since a common beef-wit does the same sort of name calling. Thus, in my opinion you end up just as those you cast your remarks towards, there seems no difference whatsoever.

    What appears exemplified by your unwillingness or incapacity to consider sound advice, seems that you are more interested in your personal stress and perhaps in the large scale of things may deserve what you get, dunno. Sort of like the vegan issue, if aliens decided you were their property, what argument could you put up for not being used like cattle, or sheeple if you prefer? Understand? I somehow doubt it.

    Regards,
    ijostl

  72. Addie says:

    ok Uncinus, I give up.
    You either refuse to ” see”, or you see it all yourself and are looking for a reason, any reason…. to have it not be true, because you are as baffled and scared of the whole phenomena as the rest of us are.
    But this ” discussion” is over, as far as I am concerned, because it has become utter “talking in circles”. Let me know, if or when u make a new blog, w. a diff subject.. ok?
    Then, if u want me to, I’ll be back !

  73. NearHome says:

    When I recently moved to a home in a town with 100,000 people living in it I was dismayed to learn the airport was 25 minutes away. This large power company is now putting up 45 foot tall poles about 20 feet behind my home. I can see the highway behind the nature preserve next to my home. I usually hear an airplane about every 10-15 min. I later realized the large amounts of airplanes flying over my home was caused by a city 25 miles from my home. I later developed an unexplained coughing and a great amout of headaches. I think it might have to do with contrails.

  74. Addie doesn't listen to Science says:

    Addie, please check this out. Most of what you are describing are contrails, and this website has pictures of them forming. Contrails that “haze out the sky 24/7” and can “create clouds over 20,000 kilometers”

    http://artificialclouds.com/

    contrails can grow to HUGE sizes due to pressure and the saturation point of the atmosphere. Some die out in minutes and some can persist for weeks. I wouldn’t call this normal due to the impacts on climate change though

  75. ijostl says:

    “scientists” on this board don’t listen to Science either

    The weather alterations appear a secondary consideration.

    The “fight global warming” sub-propaganda doesn’t make sense.

    Nope.

    Something else going on here…

  76. Such as? And by what evidence exactly?

  77. Stars15k says:

    “Actually using the term “sheeple” *is* a dehumanizing term for it reduces those you cast your venom towards as something less than you. In my opinion it’s an illness that has been rampant in our species for a long time, this name calling done in order to make the person casting the remarks feel better about themselves (sort of like the church goer who secretly hopes for something bad to happen to someone they loathe for the sole purpose of saying “I told you so!”). ”

    I have always thought that the term was derogatory to sheep. What have they ever done against anyone? They just eat grass, grow wool, go baaaa, and make more sheep. (Don’t do mutton, and don’t eat baby animals, I am a spinner and a knitter)

    I have also always thought that the people throwing that term around are the actual blind followers. There is evidence, test results, scientific method, scientific “law”, common sense, and clear thinking in NOT believing in chemtrails. There has been absolutely zero irrefutable evidence for chemtrails, just words, supposition, speculation, and ignorance. Whoever first thought up the theory just found the right audience.

  78. Stars15k says:

    Okay, back to the matter wholly. I haven’t seen this applet anywhere on the site. I probably just missed it.
    This link will take you to an interactive model of contrail production based on temp and RH. You move the red dot on the graph, hit the “fly” button at the top and the plane will fly producing the “right” contrail for those factors. It’s very cool, very visual, very clear….which means CT probably will find fault, but hey, we can still try. I’m getting sick of people insisting what a contrail can and cannot do. Now if only everyone could be trained to more accurately gauge altitude and distance from ground level, life would be easier, people could once again enjoy the wonder of clouds, and the EPA, NASA, and any other government agency barraged by CT questions could spend their time and our money really doing something important.

    http://profhorn.aos.wisc.edu/wxwise/AckermanKnox/chap15/contrail_applet.html

  79. Suntour says:

    “scientists” on this board don’t listen to Science either

    The only science I’ve seen being ignored is the science being presented by people like Uncinus. Hopefully that’s what you’re referencing.

    The weather alterations appear a secondary consideration.

    Which weather alterations would these be? The way in which persisting, spreading contrails may escalate global warming?

  80. ijostl says:

    Suntour,
    For one skilled in the art of argument ANY argument can be won.

    The simple fact is that air traffic is irregular and there is unarguable evidence that at the very least weather is affected by some air traffic.

    For example, here in Oregon, we have Spring days that are bright and blue, and what appears to be normal air traffic is seen overhead with what appear to be normal contrails that dissipate quickly behind the aircraft.

    On other days, there are dozens of clear patterns laid out that in parallel which do not dissipate but spread to cover the entire sky as far as can be seen. As they spread and cover the sky they form cloud cover that sometimes, like yesterday turn into rain.

    All the sock puppets on this board as well as others in denial can continue to promote the idea that this is all just “normal” but clearly anyone who witnesses these events can see what appears to be deliberate cloud seeding at best. And since this is not reported publicly by definition it is clandestine.

    The problem with deceit in my opinion is that it creates more and more deceit as well as suspicion and paranoia.

    I realize this simple report is going to be pooh-poohed with evidence of this and that, but the fact remains that when the patterns are laid out, the blue sky is completely obliterated and instead we’re left with either a hazy sky or rain – all directly from this “normal” air traffic.

    Why anyone ignores this obvious effect and continues to shout that it’s all well and good is another question.

    Folks, it is not my intention to promote paranoia or even suggest that the rulers of this planet have bad intent, but rather to propose that people consider that deceit itself, in this day and age of such profound technological challenges facing our species, is a poor method from the outset.

    Thank you,
    ijostl

  81. ijostl says:

    Stars15k

    Regarding the term referenced above; personally I don’t have a problem with any people that are sometimes referred to derogatorily as “sheeple”, it simply seems to suggest people who trust others and do what is expected of them and are basically non-violent, somewhat like children one may suppose. So in that light what some might hope for would be shepherds with integrity, dignity, wisdom and kindness. Because without kindness all the wisdom in Universe seems pointless.

    ijostl

  82. Nobody is denying that contrails sometimes persist for a long time, and that they sometimes spread out to cover the sky. Nobody has EVER denied this. In fact, we’ve talked out it a great length, as have people for decades. Like in 1944:

    See, at the top of the second column, his description is just like yours.

    What I don’t understand is why you think it’s deliberate, rather than a natural byproduct of air-travel.

  83. ijostl says:

    In my very first post I noted that the obvious rebuttal would be to agree that the weather is affected, and so it has been used now at least twice. It’s certainly not “normal”, and should be a concern to any person intending to live on this planet, simply because we do not understand the long term effects of such weather modification.

    The deliberateness is suggested by the irregular traffic and the patterns set forth. A layman could take notes on the patterns and offer them here for review but you will not find myself offering these notes simply because I’m not interested enough to do so. And that is because since this is all outside my control and also because I simply have better usage for what time I may have left here.

    I suppose my main objective in posting here was to test your responses.

    Gentlemen,
    Thank you for your time.
    ijostl

  84. So you have no interest in a scientific discussion then? You just want to make some vague points, and then leave?

    The traffic patterns that have described are all perfectly explainable with very little thought. Yet you seem rather suspicious of explanations.

  85. ijostl says:

    My apologies if that’s how I came across. It’s not that I’m uninterested in scientific discussion but rather skeptical of the seemingly unscientific sentence structuring found in many of your replies.

    For example the statement by SR1419 about “all normal air traffic” when a common citizen couldn’t possibly know all air traffic and your statement above that the traffic references above are “all perfectly explainable” when in fact no definitive patterns have been presented other than a casual reference to the patterns.

    So your answer appears as uninterested in the patterns themselves but rather attempting to lump every event into a pre-conceived conclusion; for how could you know what the patterns mentioned are unless you were to examine them yourself? See? I was at first under the impression that you might actually be interested in what appears to be occurring rather than dismissing all accounts as “normal” and “not to worry” type events. The general blanket statements here don’t seem to make sense except as faith based positions.

    Never the less, I appreciate your diligence here and wish you the best regards.

    Thank you very much,
    ijostl

  86. It’s really much simpler than you suggest.

    There is a lot of air traffic, that cannot be argued with.

    This air traffic is most between major cities.

    These cities are all over the US

    Hence the resultant traffic pattern in basically a grid.

    So, what exactly are you saying is odd? The above image is a plot of all the traffic for one day. Hence we DO KNOW the traffic for a day. So we can say with a HUGE degree of confidence that grids of contrails are likely to form.

    If you like, you can very easily track every single plane in real time as well. You can match contrail to plane. It’s really very easy. The observations match the data. Can you point out where they do not?

  87. ijostl says:

    Dear Uncinus,
    Rather than leave here with what may appear a smarmy or disrespectful demeanor please allow me to summarize my visit to this site:

    When I first arrived here I was looking for information regarding the vast amount of air traffic effects and perhaps info on at least the weather affecting issue. After reading through the posts, it seemed to me that if this site was intended to respect science as is noted predominantly throughout the board and the results of your investigations show that this traffic appears normal then the reasonable tone throughout should be to notify the public that the massive amount of air traffic is causing what should be considered alarmingly weather changes. One would think that scientist would be advocating that the general population needs to be aware of this and advocate traveling by air as little as possible since we don’t know what the long term effects would be. That is what I would expect from scientists acknowledging the affect on the weather.

    Instead, it seems that instead of advocating public responsibility in traveling less the tone throughout the board appears to be dismissing concern in general.

    Hence my addition of comments about levels of awareness of any given role. Meaning no matter what the rank, very, very few probably know what is really going on.

    Let me now thank you humbly for allowing me to post on your site and also for your kind and thoughtful replies. I am but a layman farmer type with the majority of my ancestors undoubtedly illiterate, and I am also without doubt sometimes a giant fool.

    If it is ok with you, I shall continue to visit this site sometimes and with your permission may even chime in again on this board. Yet if you feel my contributions will not add value and prefer I no longer post I will humbly comply. If you do give me permission to post again I shall do so sparingly and will attempt to offer more respect than my layman’s mind has thus far been able to muster.

    Thank you again very much,
    ijostl

  88. Feel free to post. I’m happy to discuss all points of view regarding contrails.

    Regarding the effects of air travel, one might also bring the same arguments to car travel, or any other carbon emitting activity. Contrails have an obvious visual effect, but their practical effect on temperature and weather is not really clear at this point. It certainly does not seem to be alarming, especially as the effects last only a few hours, compared with the effects of carbon emissions which last for decades. There is a LOT of discussion about contrails’ effect on the climate (and there has been for decades), but one might be better focussed on reducing other, more obviously harmful, forms of pollution first.

    Some reading on the subject

    http://www.google.com/search?q=contrails+climate+change

  89. JazzRoc says:

    For one skilled in the art of argument ANY argument can be won.

    This doesn’t apply to scientific arguments at all.

    The simple fact is that air traffic is irregular

    The simple fact is the converse of that.

    at the very least weather is affected by some air traffic.

    That we can agree on.

    For example, here in Oregon, we have Spring days that are bright and blue, and what appears to be normal air traffic is seen overhead with what appear to be normal contrails that dissipate quickly behind the aircraft. On other days, there are dozens of clear patterns laid out that in parallel which do not dissipate but spread to cover the entire sky as far as can be seen. As they spread and cover the sky they form cloud cover that sometimes, like yesterday turn into rain.

    And that is natural (once contrails are created). Your ignorance leads you to believe otherwise. Educate yourself.

    All the sock puppets on this board

    Your ignorance now leads you into mindless insult.

    anyone who witnesses these events can see what appears to be deliberate cloud seeding / clandestine.

    Anyone who doesn’t understand the science of the atmosphere does this.

    The problem with deceit in my opinion is that it creates more and more deceit as well as suspicion and paranoia.

    I suggest to you that it is deceitful of you to pronounce on scientific matters when you are too ill-informed to be of any use.

    we’re left with either a hazy sky or rain – all directly from this “normal” air traffic.

    Yes. The traffic creates water in the skies. It will consequently appear in later scenarios.

    Why anyone ignores this obvious effect and continues to shout that it’s all well and good is another question.

    Well – water IS well and good. What’s YOUR question?

    deceit itself, in this day and age of such profound technological challenges facing our species, is a poor method from the outset.

    Yes. So educate yourself and quit slandering those that understand what is happening.

  90. Stars15k says:

    ijostl,

    “One would think that scientist would be advocating that the general population needs to be aware of this and advocate traveling by air as little as possible since we don’t know what the long term effects would be. That is what I would expect from scientists acknowledging the affect on the weather”.

    What they are working on instead is perhaps changing flight plans around sites with “contrail outbreaks”, which is what you described is called. It’s been much studied, in length, peer-reviewed, multidisciplined, and published. There is much to read about the subject, and it’s fairly easy to find. Google “persistence in contrails”. Here’s a link that covers quite a lot of your concerns:

    http://www.airliners.net/aviation-articles/read.main?id=85

    So the matter is being addressed, but the verdict is still out. The newest weather guide I read contain a chapter about contrails with the general consensus that contrails block UV rays during the day, and reflect heat back toward earth at night, so the effects cancelled each other out. Sorry I can’t give you an exact source of that; I chose the guide with the most clouds and phenomena (ie. pictures, I’ll admit it), even though it was copyright 2006.

  91. Jakeability says:

    These Germans are obviously ill-informed, slanderous, fear-mongerers! How can so many weathermen be soooo ignorant?

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

  92. Jakeability, that video is a deliberate mistranslation. The weatherman there is concerned about chaff. He’s on record as saying the “chemtrail” theory has no basis.

    http://contrailscience.com/germans-admit-they-used-duppel/

  93. Jakeability says:

    I C

  94. Jakeability says:

    What do you think of this Battelle, ‘indirect, semi-direct aerosol campaign’.

    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AGUFM.A23A0274S

  95. I think it’s great. What do you think?

  96. banger says:

    Anyone who says that persistent contrails are normal is part of a coer up.

    Demand a Congressional investigation!

  97. Stars15k says:

    Banger,
    One of the reasons I pursue this topic in the name of science is just what you stated above. Our government agencies do not need to spend money going after an imaginery conspiracy. Every time I see “call your congressman” or similar other entity, I fume (if flying at altitude, large plumes would be seen coming out my ears). You can’t prove chemtrails exist because they don’t. There will always be people who will believe what they want, no matter how much information and fact is laid out before them. Your first comment shows you are one of those.

    Look for proof, with actual hard facts. Look at the extent such a conspiracy would need, in people, money, and equipment. Expect answers to questions, and expect those answers to be the same, no matter who is doing the testing (this is called repeatability, and is a hallmark of proper science investigation). All of this is out there on the web. If you don’t take the time and effort involved, you will never be happy with anything presented, no matter the source. Why spend money we don’t have?

  98. cb says:

    I’m open minded in this debate. My main query is; why is it that when i was younger (between 1985-2000), i did not witness ANY sustained contrails like i see today? I used to watch planes all the time and these are the same QANTAS jets they fly today (largely a 15 year old fleet).

    Furthermore, when i called the Bureau of Meteorology in my state and queried them on it; the gentleman said that the planes leaving trails were part of a science experiment tied in with Flinders University and the ARM Project (Atmospheric Radiation Measurement). All the info he provided matched the ARM’s website info. These were commerical planes.

    When you add to this the scientists who are skeptical, the data collected on barium levels etc and official government documents regarding weather modification then there is a strong case for the existance of chemtrails or at the very least, we cannot discount the potential existance of chemtrails.

  99. cb says:

    P.S. Obama spends money we don’t have i.e. banker bailouts bills, military etc.

    Also, in science there needs to be some sort of consensus, or a peer review of some sort. In the case of chemtrails, as with global warming; then there would be neither. Again i am open minded to chemtrails/contrails, but the information i have been given (my encounter with the Bureau official and government documents etc lead me to be somewhat leaning towards the existance of chemtrails. And trust me, i don’t want to believe it. On the global warming debate however – that is an obvious fraud – but i’ll leave that one to another forum.

    Thanks

  100. cb says:

    And one last comment. Scientists have a habit of being too narrow-minded in the sense that they fail to look outside the square, at the political and historical aspect (but i can’t blame them, it’s not their field of expertise, but it is the duty of humans to be critical of governments). The truth of the matter is we need to question things. Governments have a long history of lies and deception and performing biological experiments on people – much of which is declassified. You can also checkout the United States Code Title 50: War and National Defence – Chapter 32 Chemical and Biological Warfare (very disturbing). This is the tip of the iceberg. History repeats unless we learn from it!

    “The difference between complete idiot scientists and intelligent scientists is that idiots are not willing to abandon their existing dogmatic beliefs when faced with new, contradictory evidence. Intelligent people, on the other hand, adapt and evolve their ideas when faced with new information or evidence.”

Comments are closed.