Home » contrails » Fake, Hoax, Chemtrail Videos

Fake, Hoax, Chemtrail Videos

Most of the supposed “chemtrail” videos out there are simply videos of persistent contrails that the video maker somehow has decided are part of a giant world-wide conspiracy involving spraying something for some purpose.

But some videos are actually deliberate hoaxes, either by pranksters poking fun at the chemtrail community, or by people looking to promote the theory for one reason or another.

The above video comes from TankerEnemy, an Italian chemtrail proponent.  It very clearly shows aerodynamic contrails coming from the wings of a KC-10.  The pilots on the cockpit are heard joking about it being “chemtrails”.  TankerEnemy, not being a native english speaker, misses this and thinks they are being serious. He then goes on to “analyze” the video, and points to the flap mechanisms as being nozzles.

The original video was posted by USAFFEKC1OA as a joke (on July 14th 2010, under his original account USAFFEKC10, see here).  He later updated the description to read:

USAFFEKC1O | July 17, 2010

It was fun playing with all the chemtrailers but you guys are way to gullible!! 🙂

And commented:

You guys who keep saying “TOO LATE” need to think before you open your mouth…I don’t care that the videos are still out there and going viral. THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE PRANK!!!! …for all of you chemtrail idiots to get all excited as if these videos are the holy grail of chemtrail videos and for me and my friends to laugh at you while you spread them. The more passionate you guys are about this, the more entertaining it is for those of us who live in the real world. Keep on spreading!!

The video has indeed “gone viral”, at least within the chemtrail community. This means TankerEnemy will ether have to admit he was wrong, or continue to assert that the video is real evidence of spraying, even though it’s painfully obvious that it is not. Unfortunately he’s chosen the latter.

He later uploaded the original video, commenting:

This is the original unadulterated video that started all the fuss. It is completely authentic and no camera tricks were used. It is simply a couple of KC-10’s in formation and the audio you hear is just us poking fun at all the “chemtrail” conspiratorists. I knew when I shot the video that this would be catnip for all the conspiratorists out there. Yeah, the contrails have an odd way of “starting” and “stopping” but that is easily explained with physics. It’s no different than the lenticular clouds that form over a mountain or the fog that flows from an open freezer. So, stop being so gullible, kids. There are truely bad things in the world but this isn’t one of them!

Air Force Pilots Chatting While Filming A Chemtrail Being Sprayed

This is an interesting one. It’s NOT FAKE, but it just shows a plane leaving contrails. The pilots are chatting, but just about some test they are taking.

The reason it’s even listed as a “chemtrail” video is the unusual perspective of the shot. It looks rather unusual, and impressive. So some people think it’s either chemtrails, or a fake. But it’s just contrails. That’s what they look like when you are closely following a plane.


This one is less popular, perhaps because it’s more obviously fake. It shows some video from inside a cockpit (looks like an Airbus A321) with someone flipping a switch labeled “CHEMTRAIL ON/OFF”. The video then intercuts the cockpit view with a variety of shots of contrails, implying that the switch created contrails.

It’s hard to take the video seriously. The “chemtrail on/off” labels is obviously hand made, and simply stuck over the existing “Foot Warmer” switch on the switch panel on the right size of the Airbus panel.

Germany becomes the first country to admit chemtrail ops


That’s a real news story about chaff interfering with the weather radar. However the english subtitles have been faked to make it look like it’s a story on “chemtrails”. See full explanation here:


Ultimate Proof – Chemtrails



Those two are clearly just jokes by PogoPoint99, but are amusing takes on the whole chemtrail culture.

People are just posting these videos for their own amusement. It’s a bit unfortunate that they then “go viral” and are used to support the chemtrail theory. But the silver lining here is that the videos are very easily demonstrated to be fake, and I would hope that any chemtrail believer that gets initially taken in my them might pause for a few moments after they discover what the videos actually are.

If you so quickly and easily believed these videos, then how many other things are there that you have quickly and unquestioningly believed in the past? Perhaps it’s time to start questioning things?

510 thoughts on “Fake, Hoax, Chemtrail Videos

  1. Marcel says:

    I remember both long AND short contrails in the West of Scotland in the 60’s. Not too many of them mind you, as the skies were not as busy then.

  2. Jay Reynolds says:

    Not a video but at one time someone using the name Ziyad Haik hoaxed Brian Holmes of Canada with some pictures Holmes believed were chemtrails.
    The original page got a lot of attention because the photos are very high quality air-to-air shots.
    Here is a zombie webpage still likely trolling in folks that don’t know any better:

    Holmes still displays the pictures, but calls them “plumes”, and removed the references about Haik and evidence that he was hoaxed, but does link to the original source photos at airliners.net.
    Brian Holmes isn’t the most honest chemtrail believer.

  3. Such hoaxes should be harder now we have sites like http://www.tineye.com/ to quickly find the original sources of photos.

  4. Lots more videos you guys can debunk… Go for it…
    [img]https://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/chemtrailsmap-banner (1).jpg[/img]

  5. Brian, that’s a cool map you made. But it seems to be mostly photos and videos of contrails and clouds.

    Is there on in particular that you think is a “chemtrail”? Can you explain why?

  6. [img]https://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/Pilots Cry by Chemtrails isbad20.jpg[/img]

    This is a commercial flight? Teardrop entry into holding? Looks suspect to me. This site has lots more info for you guys to de-bunk… http://www.cthepower.org/chemtrailstudyguide.htm


  7. That’s unlikely to be a commercial flight. But then not all flights are commercial. So why is it suspicious?

    Can you find something on that site that has not already been debunked here?

  8. MikeC says:

    Cyhemtrail kook said:
    “This is a commercial flight? Teardrop entry into holding?”

    Such a pattern might be unusual, but why is it suspicious?

  9. Unicus and Mike C

    “So why is it suspicious?”
    “Such a pattern might be unusual, but why is it suspicious?”

    – Well – 1) If it is an entry turn into holding it is at an unusually high altitude to be able to create a “contrail” Holding is typically the lower strata. 2) Most a/c fly in straight lines – it cost lots of $$ to make loops in the sky – unless $$ is no object. 3) Assuming this is a westerly looking shot – the a/c approaches from the west, turns south for 270 degrees then proceeds North – why not just turn 90 degrees left? (no other traffic visible that might cause atc to order such a turn.) 4) The pilots made a “support our whatever” cause sign – and THAT is suspicious all in itself…

    How bout you two come back with more than a one liners?

    How bout an explanation of this photo?

  10. Stupid says:

    I don’t think that photo can be explained with any certainty, without knowing more detail about the particular situation. To attempt to do so, would be speculation at best.
    Do you want speculation and guesses ?
    If you think it is “suspicious”, then you yourself are just guessing as to what it is.

    They could be “sampling” their own trail…..that’s speculation.

    They could have a right-turn rudder failure……so….
    “2 wrongs don’t make a right, but 3 rights make a left”…lol

  11. Stupid says:

    (left turn rudder failure) i mean.

  12. It’s an unusual looking contrails shape. But probably just some high altitude practice, training or research.

    Consider: if this was how chemtrails worked, then why is this the only instance ever recorded of this particular maneuver?

    Why is every single odd thing in the sky taken as evidence as a wide-ranging conspiracy? Do the conspirators deliberately set out to do something different every day?

  13. Ross Marsden says:

    Do you know the date, time and flight number?

  14. Alexey says:

    The picture of “teardrop” contrail appears to be taken from a Utah-based site:


    The caption suggests it was taken in December 2003. However, there are two more pictures, dated November 2003, of apparently the same trail, taken from different points at different times and described as “bowtie” and “figure 8”.

    “Figure 8” is a textbook pattern; seeing a trail from it shouldn’t be surprising. Actually, I’ve found it puzzling that there so few picture of such a trail, compared to those from “racetrack” pattern.

  15. MikeC says:

    As others have said – what is to explain? It is a contrail of an aircraft that turned 270 degrees.

    That other a/c are not visible in a photo taken from ground level is hardly significant.

    The facts are that neither of us knows more – unless you have detailed info on the particular flight that you’re not letting on – everything about the nature of the flight is supposition.

    So what are the suppositions hat you are making that lead you to conclude that there is something suspicious about the flight?

  16. I see many posts on this site looking for authority speaking on chemtrails – non tin foil hat wearing authority preferred by most “rational” members on the de-bunk squad –

    Take a look at this video posted recently to satisfy that appetite – http://youtu.be/hb6BpBm-F8Q

    Also – take a look at these photos – 1) Taken in Edgewater Maryland by a friend of mine a couple of months ago at 7 am.
    [img]https://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/003.JPG[/img] – No airways directly over this area – I’ve checked the charts.

    2) Here is another one –
    [img]https://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/Chemtrail_Sattelite_California.jpg[/img] – What is “suspiciuos” is that there are NO airways out here in the pacific running North South – Hmmm – explain that.

    Here is the proof – Screenshot of all Jet Airways West Coast USA… http://screencast.com/t/LlRcnZBeU

    Grids – Off airway trails – patterns that are inconsistent with commercial routes – direct evidence that aircraft make 180 degree turns and backtrack over parallel space as seen in the California Satellite image uploaded…

    OK – so if you are pilots – explain some of this “suspicious” evidence offered here …

    And just remember folks – I am on your side – if you have family, children – they are breathing this air too. Chart the correlation with rise in Alzheimer rates – dot dot dot – picture starting to come into focus as you get some altitude on the subject?


  17. I have yet to see this site debunk anything with real data?
    only idiots believ this is not going on
    which dept of the goverment do you debunkers work in?
    anyone that sees chemtrails and watches it long enough they become clouds, YOU CAN’T DEBUNK THAT!

    and with NASA’s new release of cloud charts…..duhhhh
    this means they are covering up the chemtrail cloud formations that are not real or so you say.
    new clouds my ass!!!

    be sure to watch my link, it is the first scientific report on chemtrails, what they are, what they do.

  18. The video shows someone with a degree in art history.

    Edgewater Maryland is under the busiest airspace in the country.

    The photo of the pacific is of ship tracks.

  19. captfitch says:

    What do you mean there are NO airways running North South over the pacific??? I fly Q routes in that area that go north south all the time! How in the heck do planes go from Seattle to SoCal? Besides- where were the trails in that picture originally left? Is there no way that they were created somewhere and blown somewhere else?

    If you had spent any time on this site you would have read some things written by me about “off airway” routes. I won’t repeat them here.

    Alzheimers is on the rise because the population is aging.

  20. ok I did a quick search this site is owned by Regus, who is Regus?
    Regus is the world’s largest provider of workplace solutions, offering the widest range of products and services that allow individuals and companies to work however, wherever, and whenever they need to.
    Regus plc is incorporated in Jersey with registered number 101523 and registered office at 22 Grenville Street, St. Helier, Jersey, JE4 8PX. It’s central administration (head office) is at 26, Boulevard Royal, L-2449 Luxembourg and accordingly is registered in Luxembourg as a societé anonyme under RCS Luxembourg B 141159.

    the board of directors reads like a who’s who of elite corporations, with connections to such companys as ebay, skype,
    Mark Dixon wants to create a new google or a new microsoft…lol
    no this isn;t a corporation with power.
    gimme a break and take your fake website down, it’s too easy to debunk this whole site.

  21. captfitch says:

    You got me. I”m a corporate suit bent on internets domination through chemtrail disinfo disemination!

    Besides- I think the only two people here who claim to be pilots is myself and Unc. And as far as I know he doesn’t even have an instrument rating;)

    If it’s so easy to debunk the site why are you having to resort to personal attacks on those who post here? I would think your evidence alone would be proof enough.

  22. ok I did a quick search this site is owned by Regus, who is Regus?

    Regus is a supplier of virtual offices, basically mailboxes. It’s a mailing address of WhoisGuard, which is just the privacy protection on my whois records.

    This site is owned by me, Mick West. I’m just some guy.

  23. captfitch says:

    Dang it Uncinus! I post too fast out of frustration and then you come along and have the real answers with ship tracks. I think I’ll shut up now but I still stand behind Q routes.

  24. if your a pilot you should be leading this charge for the trith
    I’m ashamed of all of you

    any pilot that doesn’t see chemtrails spread to clouds is not watching the sky and should have their pilots license revoked

  25. nice try mick, I have over 30 years in computers and networking you can’t hide behind the “who is”

    try another response the next one might even be believable

  26. @capfitch

    LOL – yeah – I know all about off airway routes – flew them alot in my military days… but you fail to address the main points in my post. Specifically:

    The grid patterns in Edgewater Maryland at 7 am?

    The satellite image off west coast of CA?- in this image the captain obviously made multiple decisions to turn around – 180 degree turns – at 35N. Perhaps he had a “terrorist” onboard – and then planned to return to base – then got him/her under control – continued back – then the “terrorist” got feisty – RTB again – oops – he’s under control again capt. keep going – naaah – turning around again…

    Re: Alzheimer’s – don’t just spout off with no research – a quick google query for “Alzheimer’s in young adults” results in over 108K results – the top ones linked here – since you are probably too lazy to look into this in any detail…





  27. I ‘m waiting for you to debunk the video in my link

    I can only say you need to get informed, quoting one side of an argument with only 1 side of the information is worthless.

    you need to see the science behind chemtrails and their effects.
    there are many videos on the subject like the one from the carnegie institute, where they explained “what they want to do…..it’s in plain english, if you watched it you know they are doing it already.

    as I stated only fools talk without knowing all the information.
    ask I will provide any links you need, if I can’t prove it to you no one can.

  28. Air traffic on the West Coast:

    There is some North/South traffic out to sea, but not that far. Looks like it’s mostly San Diego to S.F for the southern and northern, and some LA-SF in the North half.

  29. @Unicus and “Ship Tracks” – LOL – you are a funny guy… – Ooh – I found some more “tracks” … see below… I love the last one myself…

    Capt/ Hazelwood – Ship track below….

    Saddam Hussein’s brother – the “ship” captain laying tracks for mom to see…

    Best tracks ever…

    C’mon guys you will have to do a little better – this is not little league…


  30. CyberKnight, you mean this video:


    What claim in the video do you think would be hardest to debunk. Pick one.

  31. Your other photos are of an AWACS contrail, and then miltary planes doing racetrack holds over Iraq.

    You first one still looks like ship tracks to me. Why do you think it’s not?

  32. SR1419 says:


    with over 30,000 flights per day in the US why WOULDN’T you expect to see a grid pattern over the one of the busiest air spaces in the world?

    Watch 24hrs worth of flight traffic- see any grids??:


    Here is a paper where they study specific persistent contrails from identified flights also over maryland- look familiar?

    Planes can go in circles for any number of reasons…physics still dictates the behavior of the exhaust:

    lots of examples on this thread- see the comments for more data:



  33. MikeC says:

    Cyberknight wrote:

    ” have yet to see this site debunk anything with real data?”

    You obviously haven’t read all eth pages yet then – here’s a quick link to one of het easiest to comprehend…at least it was for me – I hope it is for you: https://contrailscience.com/barium-chemtrails/

    “only idiots believ this is not going on
    which dept of the goverment do you debunkers work in?”

    what is with “THE govt”?? I’m not American – I’ve visited the US twice for a total of about 5 weeks in my 52 years of life…..

    “anyone that sees chemtrails and watches it long enough they become clouds, YOU CAN’T DEBUNK THAT!”

    Actually it’s contrail that expand to become clouds – since both clouds and contrails are just water – so if “chemtrails” expand to become clouds then they must be just water too – and so they are just contrails after all!

  34. JFDee says:

    captfitch wrote:
    I think the only two people here who claim to be pilots is myself and Unc
    Not so fast, please! My rating is even lower than Uncinus’ but I may legally call myself a pilot. “Just” gliding but nonetheless.

    My longest flight so far was around five hours – on a plane with no engine at all. For me, the scientifically sound knowledge about the atmosphere and the weather is not just an interesting issue for theoretical discussion.

    It’s actually keeping me up there.

  35. John says:

    Cybernight – Every single person on this page is AGREEING with you.

    You would have seen that if you’d bothered to read ANYTHING on here before posting.

    Contrails do turn into clouds. We all see that.

    That’s the point. A contrail turns into a cloud, BECAUSE IT IS A CLOUD. I.E. JUST WATER VAPOUR.

    You could have saved yourself from looking like a total idiot by opening your eyes,
    which is ironinc dont you think?

  36. captfitch says:

    Well JFDee- I forgot about the glider flying on your part which certainly qualifies you as a pilot and deserves a lot of respect! No engine= real flying!

    I flew a glider once- but it didn’t start out as one. Anything can be a glider when the engine fails.

  37. JFDee says:

    captfitch wrote:
    “Anything can be a glider when the engine fails.”

    Very true. The fine difference lies in the glide ratio (distance:height). A typical club glider can do 40:1, the typical airliner ranges between 15:1 and 20:1, which is not bad at all and may be sufficient to reach the next airport, if not for circling in thermals …

    Now, what about a corporate jet?

  38. captfitch says:

    We were just looking at those numbers the other day and it looks like we lose about 1000 feet per 1.5 miles. So that’s a 9 to 1 which is pretty awful. But we have especially short stubby little wings that only work well with lots and lots of thrust- which we also have. The plane goes up alot better than it goes forward.

    We have fun and kill both engines in the sim alot and see if we can make it back. She really comes down like a brick when the wheels come out.

  39. Alexey says:

    Chemtrail Kook said:

    “How bout an explanation of this photo? [#409]”

    Using Google Earth and Google StreetView, I have deduced from this and three other photos of the same contrail found at http://www.aliendave.com/chemtrail_photos.html

    (SLC “teardrop”, http://www.aliendave.com/files/Photos/Chem/Contrails.jpg
    “figure 8”, http://www.aliendave.com/files/Photos/Chem/Chemtrail_figure8.jpg
    “bowtie”, http://www.aliendave.com/files/Photos/Chem/Chemtrail_bowtie.jpg and
    “fantail”, http://www.aliendave.com/files/Photos/Chem/Chemtrail_fantail.jpg),

    that the turn question was made above the US Air Force Utah Test and Training Range near Wildcat Mountain 75 miles west of Salt Lake City. Therefore I have concluded that this contrail was almost certainly left by a military aircraft on a practice flight. The contrail was blown by wind in ESE direction with speed of about 100 miles per hour, passing to the south of Tooele and SLC, UT, where the photos were taken.

    If anybody is interested in my analysis, I’ll be happy to present it in more detail in a separate post elsewhere on this site.

  40. MikeC says:

    JFDee do airliners really get 15:1 – 20:1?? I seem to recall WW2 glider transports got in the region of 12-14:1, and a DC-3 without enigines (someone was trying to see if the airframe could be used as a combat glider) was 14:1.

  41. captfitch says:

    yeah- airliners are awesome gliders. Those old planes aren’t designed as well.

  42. JFDee says:

    There was a time when gliders were light but not aerodynamically optimized due to the building materials used (wood/metal frame with textile covering). We have still have two planes from the Sixties in our club, and I think the hauling gliders from WW2 were made in the same way.

    Only with the rise of composite materials (epoxy resin/fibers) it was possible to optimize the frame, reducing drag and turbulence (induced drag). Today, weight is not a central consideration when it comes to glide ratio.

    Obviously, the same applies to airliners. You literally have to pay for each source of drag, so a lot of thinking goes into optimizing the aerodynamics.

    Minimum speed is also a consideration. Airliners might use smaller wing area which reduces the drag, but consequently they would need longer takeoff / landing stretches due to the higher speed. Small jets can shrink the wing area and make use of the long runways designed for the big irons … but: small wing area, bad glide ratio.

    Sport gliders also don’t want to have a high minimum speed; after all, they are designed to use thermals that have limited extension. When circling in a thermal we are going between 70 and 90 km/h (40 to 50 knots) to make best use of the rising air packet. This also limits the possible wing area reduction.

    You could say it’s always a balance between speed and usability. For airliners, glide ratio comes as a bonus.

  43. Richard says:

    I have a question for the people who are certain about, that there are no chem trails.

    I saw a video this day, where you see a plain flying with a contrail. Then the contrail disappears but the plain is stills fly at the same altitude. Like 30seconds later the contrail is coming back.

    You can’t tell me the air in these 30seconds didn’t have the conditions to make a contrail…!
    Just curious how you would explain it, because I’m having trouble with it..
    I am not someone who already is screaming; They are spraying us!!!! But i do think it is an possibility.(but i am only looking into this for a couple of days)

    Just trying to find an answer for this question that makes sense!

  44. 30 seconds at 500 mph is 4 miles. So yes, the atmosphere can easily change quite a lot in that distance.

    In fact the atmosphere can change over as little as 100 feet. Consider that the inside of a cloud is wet and the outside is dry. What’s the distance between inside and outside a cloud?

  45. Jay Reynolds says:

    I recently watchd some film footage of a World War 2 film called “Memphis Belle”, showing bombers making contrails during the war. Watch the footage and you will see the contrail behind one of the planes briefly turn off- then-on due soley to atmospheric differences. Have you ever flown in a plane and felt turbulence? This would be air that is rising or falling that causes the plane to ‘bump’ or ‘fall’. This is quite certainly due to an air mass with different characteristics from the air mass you had been flying through, and at a small scale. The air above us isn’t always the same, and it often changes constantly. That is why clouds sometimes have edges, because one part of the air mass is different.
    Watch this to see a brief footage from ‘Memphis Belle”:

  46. captfitch says:

    Everyone- don’t forget about changing power settings as well.

  47. Richard says:

    @Uncinus, hmm yea you got a good point there with the inside and outside of a cloud.

    @ Jay Reynolds, No never felt turbulence but i understand what you are saying and it is actually very logical. I’m going to watch the video later.

    I do kinda feel a bit dumb now haha, cause the explanations you both just give me is just so simple and logical. Now that you both explained, I am also like ahh yeah that is just basic knowledge, how could I forget.
    Thanks for explaining to me!

  48. Richard says:

    Just watched video Jay Reynolds pointed to me. That was just what i was looking for and took away all my doubts. Especially the clouds part, cause i was sometimes looking at clouds and wonder how can they form like that. Thanks a lot! Chem trails are NOT real:)

  49. captfitch says:

    Richard- I would encourage you to follow through on the information you learned here and go investigate more for yourself. Don’t just take the word of a few anonymous posters here. even if we are right 😉

  50. Kook says:

    Geoengineering: Our Environment Under Attack

    Written by Paul Watson

  51. Jay Reynolds says:

    Kook, I’ve been going through that article. At first sight, you might be thinking it does your side some good, but there is so much falsehood that it will be a millstone for you people’s necks. Lies are ties that hold you down, imprison you. Interesting, yes, that Alex Jones’ forum is called Prison Planet, this is exactly what he is creating for you people. You forge your own prison and carry the heavy chains you create wherever you go.

    Why Paul Watson would put out such nonsense amazes me, but the fact seems to be that Alex Jones ordered him to do so, so he went and did it no matter how much falsehood he had to include..

    Here is when the order was given:
    see: 3:25

  52. Kook says:

    Watch this one – I like the beginning part when he talks about all you nay sayers…



  53. captfitch says:

    I can’t get over those cymbol crashes! Too many mistakes in that video anyway. I’d bother to point them out but nobody will return the favor regarding this site soooo…

  54. Jay Reynolds says:

    Kook, you offer a six year old video by Clifford Carnicom. I have known of him for over 12 years, and researched his background. You may not know, but he has a batchelor of Science degree in Photogrammetry. The subject is basically the identification of properties of distant objects through photography.

    With that sort of background, he should have mastered the identification of each and every airplane he claims is spraying him, and should have created an international team to document through photogrammetry the exact identity of the planes, tracked them through space and time to their destinations, and made inquiries into exactly what they were doing.

    But he did no such thing.

    This is the best that he ever did with his University degree:

    This is what he was and still is capable of:

    Kook, please let me know your thoughts about a man whose training and career was based on identifying distant objects by phtotography never apply that skill towards what he calls “Aerosol Crimes”?

    I’d like to know what you have to say about that.

  55. Kook says:

    Lets talk about Barium – any comments on this subject video? http://youtu.be/YptxBFP6d0k

  56. The test referenced showed normal levels of barium in blood, see discussion here.


  57. Jay Reynolds says:

    kook, why change the subject? What do you say about Carnicom?

  58. Jay Reynolds says:

    Kook, If you went to a brain surgeon because you had been shot in the head,
    and all he gave you was a pedicure, how would you evaluate him?

  59. Kook says:

    I just had a pedicure yesterday – was quite nice.
    Sorry – you want a response re Caricom – you want me to defend him? I know he has awakened many people regarding the chemtrails issue – not sure about his academic credentials. If he were to produce photos you would come up with some bs reason to denigrate them. So what qualifies you to be a “contrail” scientist?

  60. Kook says:

    A Veteran Pilot Evaluates the Above Photographs as Follows:
    “These latest two aerial pictures are the most brazen, overt and
    outrageous examples yet that confirm some sort of unpublicized high
    altitude(above FL 400) spraying activity. As an active pilot for over 35
    years (7,000 hours+) flying Civilian, Military, and Commercial jet
    airplanes and helicopters, I can unequivocally state that the aircraft
    emissions in these pictures are in NO WAY just engine exhaust contrails”.
    Guy N. Bacon,Jr.

    I have to agree with Guy – and I have a military and civilian pilot background as well – something is going on and there is nothing you can post, say, or do to change my mind…

  61. Guy is quite correct about that not being engine contrails (at http://www.carnicominstitute.org/articles/newspray.htm ), those two photos show aerodynamic contrails. See:


  62. there is nothing you can post, say, or do to change my mind

    Would you consider yourself to be open-minded, and always searching for the truth?

  63. Jay Reynolds says:

    You did exactly as I expected you would, Kook.
    Bow down to the almighty Carnicom and kiss his ring my son!

  64. WATCHA says:

    Hey, I was reading your articles, and as a conclusion I wanna ask you if it’s nice to being payed by the government to give false informations. get a life seriously

  65. Strawman says:

    So point out what’s “false information”, please. This site is very open to debate and factual discussion.

  66. WOW says:

    Why do you care to disprove this theory so much? If it’s a hoax why not let incompetents think as they wish about it like every other hoax in the world? Do you run websites disproving all conspiracy theories for no good reason, just to prove those unintelligent assholes wrong!

    C’mon people! It’s obvious the site operator has ulterior motives for his actions.

    This website takes countless hours of time of his personal time, and is filled with passionate arguments against this theory. Obviously this site also generates is own hosting costs, domain registration costs, etc.

    I’ve never see anyone so adamant about opposing a conspiracy theory, normally if you are a opposed to a theory or opinion you would disassociate yourself with the unintelligent fools and think nothing more of their stupidity. A fake theory doesn’t affect anyone besides the morons believing it. You on the other hand are paying to disprove it, as well as wasting tons of your personal time.

    When you get home do you tell your wife, “I just have to hop on the computer for a few hours to educate these stupid ‘chemtrail’ believers, I have nothing else I’d rather be doing besides arguing with people about a completely fake idea.”

    It raises suspicion that you may be being paid to do this.

    Contrails do exist, and chemtrails could as well. Please take into consideration the effect they could have on you or your grandchildren if they did in fact exist. As contrails have existed for years it is impossible to know if they are spraying or not. I will however say the clouds are being seeded(FACT) and the contrails today are much more persistent and in varried formations “X” type, that I’ve never witnessed before 10 years ago.

    HAARP is a very real program. Nikola Tesla was not a fictional character, this man really existed and created some of the most amazing inventions in history. Think

  67. Strawman says:

    Since you can’t disprove the provided information, you insinuate sinister motives? So, instead of arguing the evidence, you poison the well?

  68. Jay Reynolds says:

    WOW wrote: “I will however say the clouds are being seeded(FACT) and the contrails today are much more persistent and in varried formations “X” type, that I’ve never witnessed before 10 years ago.”
    It could be that new air traffic routes have opened over your area in the last ten years. Your claim that contrails didn’t persist before is the opening premise of the “chemtrails” hoax. Sad, because it has been throughly debunked here:


    Regarding your concern about why people actively debunk hoaxes, this isnot the only website that deunks things, a popular one called snopes.com debunks a wide variety of hoaxes. The facts are that bunk attracts debunk, sort of a corollary of Newtons Third Law of Motion!

  69. Strawman says:

    The funny thing is, when shown that persistent contrail existet in the 1980’s or 1960’s, the WITWATS facebook page’s reply is: it must have been running for some time, then. No getting out of the rabbit hole.

  70. Indeed, I’v even heard people say that contrails in the 1920s were the result of Tesla’s experiments.

  71. WOW says:

    And Tesla didn’t invent HAARP, okay. Monsonto isn’t real either. Ted Gunderson was just trying to incite fear, the pilots who tell you’ve what they’ve seen were lying, this is all to much to take in. Your arguing facts- visit weathermodification.com for information on cloud seeding projects.

    This is like saying to your friend “Hey, do you have car keys?”, and he responds “No. I never even had them.”. You can see him holding them. Its blatantly obvious that he is denying what you can see with your own two eyes. This is similar to the arguments for chemtrails & HAARP. You just refuse the fact that anything is going on, when its quite the contrary. You can’t debunk these theories without lying to yourself, and telling yourself you don’t really see what you have. I’ve seen many planes create persistent trails at very low altitudes, which makes me question the fact of whether this is happening or not.

    Snopes is a website debunking various hoaxes- this website focuses on a single theory with multiple people working to argue in opposition of believers.

    It seems anyone that leaves any sorts of comments in defense of questioning what is happening and 5 or 6 people that work for this site jump right on them to dispute everything they say. It is interesting however that you are the only 6 people in the world, or who’ve posted, who really care at all about debunking this theory. You however do so on a CONSISTENT DAILY basis for no particular reason while generating and inuring costs from running the website. I see the site displays no advertisements so you obviously don’t make the money for the website for that. It just doesn’t seem right that someone who genuinely disbelieves a theory to spend so much money and time daily to disprove it. Don’t you ever get tired of dealing with assholes?

  72. I can’t speak for the others, but I’m semi-retired, so I have a lot of free time. The web site sites on a shared server, so it does not really cost very much.

    Tesla did not invent HAARP.

    Monsanto is clearly real, so I’m not sure what you mean there.

    Ted Gunderson was an eccentric old man – I don’t know what his motive was. But he was wrong about the bases used for “sprayers”, and I suspect he was wrong about the government child prostitution rings and gang stalking.

    weathermodification.com is also obviously real. Cloud seeding has been done for over 60 years. But since the 1950 they have to take out classified ads in the local papers whenever they are doing it. So it’s hardly some grand conspiracy.

    If planes are always making trails at low altitudes, then why has nobody been able to demonstrate this? All the videos I’ve seen of “low altitude” planes have simply been planes that are close to the horizon – i.e. they are far away, not low.

  73. Jay Reynolds says:

    WOW-“the pilots who tell you’ve what they’ve seen were lying,”
    Please cite the pilots you speak of. I don’t know of any pilots organization against “chemtrails”.
    WOW- ” I’ve seen many planes create persistent trails at very low altitudes”
    Please link to a picture of these claimed low altitude persistent trails. If they were low altitude the planes would be clearly identifiable. All the photos shown so far are high atitude, though people have been claiming unusually low altitude contrails for years, no pictures have ever been shown.

    This website is about he chemtrail/contrail conspiracy theory. Many folks who post here also post on the forum linked at the top of the page, where you will find some of us debunking various other subjects, much like snopes. Join in if you like. I hope you get over the chemtrails idea, because my 15 years of experience shows it to be a dead end.

  74. JFDee says:

    WOW, I’m one of the occasional posters. In the last few years I noticed the growth of something like a “counter-enlightenment” trend, and I realized that I grew passionate about voicing support for reason and science.

    There are many areas where that support is needed; I chose the “chemtrail” issue because I’m a hobby pilot and have learned a thing or two about the atmosphere.

    Is there any reason why debunkers should be less dedicated than their “counterparts”?

  75. Maurice says:

    Just on simple remark. some logic here, where are the tremendous amounts of poisonus liquid stored in a commercial aicraft ? Let us make it simple, at 35 000 ft you are not able to identify an aicraft with your bare eye, but you are able to identify weather or not the there are gazeous polluants realeased by the same aircraft ?? The aicraft must be spraying tons of liquid to make it visible for thousand miles at Mach 0.8 for a spectator at ground level ( or to at least be able to discriminate between barium and vapour 30 000ft above you, where it takes lab precision spectrometers to identify micro concentrations if by scientists) Where are all these tons of liquid stored…mmmh ? On the other hand if it is not tons of liquid but a small jet of poison mixed up with the remaining of tons of kerosene burnt, it is even more obvious how are you able to discriminate a few liters of poison sprayed 35 000 ft above your nose at 350 knots ???

  76. Steve Watson says:

    BIG brother loves you baby. Get real and stop kidding yourself. Your attempt to debunk the obvious is an insult to the most basic intelligence.

  77. So why don’t you point out something wrong on this site then?

  78. Noble says:

    I wonder why no one ever takes you up on that challenge.

  79. Gingerconvict says:

    I have been suffering on my own I felt with the ranting of people I know who seem to of been sucked into the Chemtrail conspiracy. I have to admit in specializing more in things outer space than within the thin atmosphere of this planet.

    SO THANK YOU!! I have no read the whole thread but so far have enjoyed a place of sound minds an evidence based arguments rather than the YouTube based drivel I normally see posted as “evidence”.


    This post was bugging me and if I have missed the post regards this I apologise but please point out the errors. I can’t seem to find evidence it was ever made by the BBC in the first place but then my son required my time in finishing a lego project and it just felt more important 🙂

  80. Alexey says:

    Gingerconvict said:

    “I can’t seem to find evidence it was ever made by the BBC in the first place”.

    It was made by a regional BBC studio. As I happen to live in this region, I vaguely remember watching it in around 2005. There are couple of old articles on the BBC site too:

    However, the youtube piece is apparently an edited version. I am certain about it because in the UK there are no commercial breaks on BBC.

  81. MikeC says:

    Gingerconvict – the 1950’s and 60’s tests are pretty well known now – if you search for “Porton Down” and Zinc Cadmium Sulphide you can find all sorts of reports about it on the ‘net.

    So yes this testing happened.

    Linking it to Esophogeal cancer is a bit of a long bow thought – apaprently England has always had a higher rate of it than “normal”, along with various otehr countries – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esophageal_cancer#Epidemiology

    So yet again the chemtrail propaganda:

    1/ misses the point – this is not evidence of anything being sprayed NOW, and
    2/ fails to actually make a causal link

  82. Jay Reynolds says:

    It is pretty clear that this sort of testing wasn’t done to sicken people. The same sort of testing was also done in the USA, and the amounts for cadmium were likely to have been less than what people are exposed to from natural soil dusts. This reminds us of the claims that aluminum found in rainwater are something unusual, when the claimants never told you that the normal exposure from dust was actually greater than those they were finding.

    Here is what was found about the US testing:

  83. 57states says:

    Can someone explain weather modification … if is it real? if it is I wonder what chemicals would be used to make artificial clouds? “Normal” contrails (ice crystals) dissapte anywhere from 10 sec – 1 min max.Just like your breath on a cold morning.They do NOT linger & form clouds, in the typical sense.You can argue the atmospheric/altitude conditions untill hell freezes over.Persistant contrails(chemtrails) do NOT dissapte as they scientifically should.They continue to spread untill the sky is completely covered.
    Most (if not all) of the controversy seems to come from people that have not dug into the issue near deep enough, blindly believe the establishment pseudosciences, & or are too young or non-observant to discern what a “normal sky entails to draw logical perspective from. Or …they are just flat out trolls/disinfo agents.

    Air , water & soil sample have been taken worldwide.What was contained in ALL the samples taken match the patents that ARE on file.Many samples have shown far above “safe” levels of toxicity.The technology is patented.The chemicals are patented, as are the methods.As you can see, there is a plethora of *documented* proof.We have Independant research samples, photos, videos & now numerous patents.(any lawyers out there?)

    It’s taken me some time to amass this information, please spread it to the four winds.

    Enter the following into any patent or search engine:
    1.US2871344 – Long Distance Communication System.
    2.US3064575 – Dischargers For Pyrotechnic Devices.
    3.US3518670 – Artificial Ion Cloud.
    4.US3674174 – Airbourne Dispenser.
    5.US3808595 – Chaff Dispencing System.
    6.US3813875 – Rocket Having Barium Release System Create Clouds In Upper Atmosphere.
    7.US3899144 – Powder Contrail Generation.
    8.US3910189 – Deployment of Conductors Into the Atmosphere.
    9.US3975292 – Method of Screening Infra-Red Radiation.
    10.US4030098 – Method & Means For Reducing Reflections of Electromagnetic Waves.
    11.US4035726 – Method of Controlling &/or Improving High-Latitude Comm Systems.
    12.US4052530 – Co-Deposited Coating of Aluminum & Titanium Oxcide.
    13.US4134115 – Device For Spreading of Chaff Payloads For Radar Interference.
    14.US4167008 – Fluid Bed Chaff Dispenser.
    15.US4175469 – Centrifugal Aerosol Dispenser.
    16.US4304517 – Chaff Ejection Device.
    17.US4309705 – Chaff Ejection Device (update).
    18.US4406227 – System For Multistage, Aerial Dissemination & Rapid Dispersion.
    19.US4406815 – Transmission Reducing Aerosol.
    20.US4484195 – Method of Screening Infra-Red Radiation.
    21.US4638316 – Radar Reflecting Electrolytes.
    22.US4712155 – Method & Apparatus Creating Artificial Electron Cyclotron Plasma Heating.
    23.US4759950 – Method For Metallizing Filaments.
    24.US 5003186 – Stratospheric Welsbach Seeding For Reduction of Global Warming.
    25.US5049883 – Combined Microwave & Infra-Red Chaff.
    26.US5074214 – Method For Controlled Aero Dynamic Dispersion of Organic Filaments.
    27.US5531930 – Aluminum Metal Composition Flake Having Reduced Coating.
    28.US5680135 – Radiation Communication System.
    29.US5686178 – Metal-Coated Substrate Articles Responsive to Electomagnetic Radiation.
    30.US7623059 – Disruptive Media Dispersal System For Aircraft.

    Undeniable evidence that chemtrails are being sprayed.

    Now I’ll get to work on the legislative side of things to further prove what we already knew via common sense….

    As far as the purpose, it is multipurpose.
    1.Weather contol & weaponry.
    2.Scalar energy & wave weapon tech.
    3.Radar & comm enhancement.
    3.Project Bluebeam – Fog screen tech.
    4.Increase/Decrease global warming anomalies.
    5.Gradual decrease of crop yeilds by poisoning the soil via toxicity.
    6.Transhumanism of ALL life.(I’m still into this research atm)- Nano technologies.
    7.Deliberate dumbing down of populations via toxicity.
    8.Increase cancers & decrease life spans via toxicity.
    9.Population control / reduction via toxicity.

  84. 57states, like I said, look around here. Your questions have been answered. Chemical tests, for example:


    Contrails DO actually persist sometimes:

    Please don’t just dump chemtrail “evidence” here. I’ve seen it all before. If you’ve got a particular question about something, then:

    A) Check this site to see if it’s been answered
    B) Ask ONE question, and wait for an answer.

    Further cut-and-paste dumps will be deleted.

  85. MikeC says:

    57 states – lists of “chemtrail patents” are a dime a dozen on the ‘net – yours is actually quiet short – cf http://nexus.2012info.ca/forum/showthread.php?11119-Chemtrails-The-List-of-Patents-For-Stratosperic-Arial-Spraying-Programs!

  86. Jay Reynolds says:

    57 states,
    weather modification is used mostly in states west of the mississippi to increase rain and snow to get water for crops and hydroelectric power. It is licensed in those states and the state governor appoints a board which issues licenses. It is done using small planes and mountaintop burners. The planes and burners make a small amount of silver iodide smoke partcles which act as seedsaround which water droplets can form. It only works when sufficient rain clouds are available and helps the clouds to move along the process of making rain. It is done at altitudes far less than any of the contrails you see, and leaves no visible trails. here is a video on youtube showing these small twin and single engine planes.

    Here is the Texas weather modification licensing agency:

    Similar laws are in other states. There is no great mystery about weather modification. Everything is out in the open and has been for many decades.
    It’s too bad that chemtrail promoters try to ride on legitimate farmers trying to get more rain for their crops and herds. Sinful, actually, to try and paint something normal as some great conspiracy.

  87. Strawman says:

    “Most (if not all) of the controversy seems to come from people that have not dug into the issue near deep enough, blindly believe chemtrail pseudosciences, & or are too young or non-observant to discern what a normal sky entails to draw logical perspective from. Or …they are just flat out trolls/snake oil salemens.”

    Fixed that for you.

  88. TeslaToys says:

    I have witnessed “contrails” at extremely high altitudes ( the altitudes private planes fly at to get places faster, like the on I was in) that stop all together for a few minutes. then leave large, very thick trails, just to stop again in a few minutes. I flew next to these planes, and witnessed the length of trails change in real time. All of the pilots I have spoken to have no explanation for this. This can be witnessed from the ground too, when a long “contrail” stays in the sky in one spot, then drops off, and continues in another. This is evidence of unusual plane behavior. Then, I took pictures of the trails and found that they are always crossing in a particular pattern over where I live, with the chemtrails crossing at certain repeating angles. This is “highly unusual” according to pilots. And what more? It is such a large scale phenomenon that people blame the government. When skeptics, like myself before preforming hundreds of hours of research and data collection, here that the government is the prime suspect, THEY IGNORE YOU. This is understandable, because the government is for the people, by the people. Why would they want to do this? I believe it is not just the Untied States Government, but a collection of people with a lot of power and money. Besides, its not like it is the first time humanity has committed unspeakable acts of horror on itself. Some people still deny the holocaust because they think its unimaginable for it to actually have happened. In this case, history is repeating itself (as it always does), but this time its on a mass scale. The only part of the world who still protects its people from this is China. Dont believe me? I dont care, I wrote this for the people who will hopefully learn from it and research it. Remember to always be skeptical about any information that you are given, not all of it could be true. What you choose to believe is up to you, but I am obviously a believer.

  89. Flight paths generally cross at the same angle. It’s not unusual at all. A plane from LA to New York is always going to fly over Kansas at the same angle.

  90. Jay Reynolds says:

    Pilots have plenty of explanations for the things Teslatoys claims they don’t. There are tens of thousands of pilots who have made contrails out there. No chemtrail believers among them. If Teslatoys has one, he should come out and speak for himself. But none of them do, even though 5000 ordinary commercial flights per day fly in the same airspace.

    You folks are asing is to suspend disbelief if you expect that tens of thousands of pilots flying every day for over a decade see these “chemtrails” and not one of them has ever said anything abou it?

    How ridiculous is that?

  91. Mike Glynn says:

    Telsatoys, I am a pilot and fly regularly to China. They have as many contrails there as anywhere else.

  92. Anonymous says:

    Has anyone ever seen 2 planes, both at relatively the same alt(visually), and only one has a trail?

  93. Observer says:

    I’ve been reading over these for awhile. I decided to talk to an old flight buddy from Jacksonville University who flies commercial now. What he told me was this. Seeding and Chaffing are no secret. Especially in areas close to military bases. The spraying of metals in the atmosphere is used for radar. He does not know if it has health implications. Contrails have a life span of about 15 to 20 minutes, after that they tend to just fade if they persist at all.
    I also contacted my local air port and was told this word for word. The commercial planes are not the ones leaving the trails you’re seeing. Only the military planes leave the trails because they use a higher grade fuel blend.

    As a child I use to watch the skies with my binoculars and write down the planes I would see in a little notebook I had. I have seen short contrails left behind the back of planes most all my life. Never in my youth from 8 – 18 of sky watching, plane observation, even my nights of telescope viewing did I ever see a bombardment of contrail activity creating crisscross grid patterns and X’s that latter led to rain. You don’t gotta be a meteorologist to predict the weather anymore.

    This subject is of great interest to me. My father was 24 years Navy so we moved around the U.S allot. I started seeing persistent contrail activity in heavy layers in 1998. Seems to really have increased from 2005. Not sure what it is. I heard on public radio that geo engineering is real, I don’t tend to believe to much public radio. LOL. 😉 What I think it is seeding. I just think they’re making it rain. Is it harmful to the environment or human health? Time will tell I guess.


Comments are closed.