While the title of this post is “How to Debunk Chemtrails”, the actual debunking depends on what version of the theory needs debunking.
The most common version is simply that “normal” contrails should not persist, so the persistent trails must be “chemtrails”. The simplest way to debunk this is to note that all known books on clouds and weather say that contrails sometimes persist. As seen in this video:
With discussion and reference here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunking-contrails-dont-persist-with-a-study-of-60-years-of-books-on-clouds.3201/
After that, there’s a variety of common claims and variations on those themes. The best approach is to debunk the individual claim (such as contrails only last a few seconds), rather than trying to debunk the entire theory.
I’ve tried to arrange each section in the order of most useful links first.
Contrails Through History
Theorists claim Contrails used to dissipate in a few seconds, minutes at most.
But they didn’t. There’s a huge amount of evidence (in addition to lots of people remembering persistent contrails). It dates back to 1918 and continues up to the present day.
Contrail photos through history – Fifty photos of persisting and spreading contrails from 1950 to 1995. Taken from people’s old photo albums, and old books. Also links to other similar collections.
Life Magazine Contrail Photos – Eleven photos that appeared in Life Magazine from 1940 to 1998 show persisting and spreading contrails.
WWII Contrails – A large collection of photos showing persisting and spreading contrails from WWII in the 1940s.
Pre WWII Contrails – The History of contrails dating back to 1918, with the first persistent spreading contrail observed in 1921
Some more WWII Contrails – A WWII contrail photo I found in an old photo album uploaded to Flickr.
Thirty Contrails, Forty Years Ago – An impressive photo of a sky full of contrails from before 1967.
Clouds before Planes – Cloud Studies 1905 – A 100-year-old book showing photos of clouds that some chemtrail enthusiasts think must be man-made.
Memphis Belle WWII Bomber Contrails – 1944 – A 1940s film that shows planes leaving contrails, including with gaps in them.
Fighter and Bomber Contails, 1940s – Video and photos of wartime contrails over London and the English countryside
Twilight Zone Contrails – Contrails show up in a 1959 episode of The Twilight Zone
Chemtrails were Contrails – A video of some old newspaper accounts of contrails.
Contrail Confusion is Nothing New – Accounts from the 1950s of people being confused by contrails – taking them to be something else.
Chemical Tests, Aluminum, Barium, Etc.
Theorist claim: Chemical tests reveal aluminum and barium have been sprayed
In reality, the tests all show normal levels of chemicals. They were often very badly performed (testing soil instead of water, and confusing the level, or using the wrong units of measurements).
What In The World Are They Spraying? – An explanation of the mistakes in the popular chemtrail video.
Barium Chemtrails on KSLA – A very popular “chemtrail” news story where the reporter gets his figures entirely wrong.
Chemtrail Non-science Air analysis from Phoenix that shows levels so high we’d all be dead. They did it wrong.
Chemical Analysis of Contrails – Clifford Carnicom claims high levels of some chemicals, but they actually show lower than normal levels.
Photos and Video used by chemtrail theorists
Theorists claim: Photos and videos show spray planes.
Reality: all the planes have been identified. Most have non-controversial uses, and the rest are demonstrable fakes.
“Chemtrail” Aircraft Photos – The inside and outside of various supposed “Chemtrail” planes. Explained.
Fake, Hoax, Chemtrail Videos – Some of the more obvious hoax videos.
Germans Admit They Used Düppel!
– A German news story about chaff interfering with weather radar is deliberately mistranslated.
History Channel, That’s Impossible, Weather Warfare & Chemtrails – a look as some of the claims on the Discover channel show on chemtrails.
Contrails In the Movies – A look at a couple of contrails in some animated movies.
About the Chemtrail theory
Theorist claim: Lots of people believe in chemtrails, and it’s mentioned in a government bill, so it must be true.
Reality: Not really. Lots of people believe in all kinds of things, and the mention in the bill was inserted by some UFO enthusiasts.
A brief history of “Chemtrails” – How it got started in 1997, who started it, and how it developed.
Chemtrail Myths – Five common myths about “chemtrails”
How many people believe in chemtrails? – just how popular is the theory? Not very.
Kucinich, Chemtrails and HR 2977 – The supposed outlawing of chemtrails. What really happened.
General Discussion of Chemtrails
Theorist claim: People don’t remember lots of contrails like this, so it must be new.
Reality: Many people DO remember. But most people still don’t pay any attention to contrails. You see things more when you are interested in them.
Hazy Memories of Blue Skies – What do people remember about contrails? It varies.
Where are all the Chemtrail Photos?
Chemtrails: The Best Evidence
People Don’t Notice Contrails
The amount of air traffic, grids, and contrail patterns
Theorist claim: grids and X patterns prove they can’t be contrails
Reality: grids and X’s are inevitable results of air traffic, and winds and weather conditions.
Britain From Above – Air Traffic
30 Years of Airline Travel
Contrail Grids are not Chemtrail Grids
There are a lot of jets in the air
Contrail Information
Theorists claim: “chemtrails” are not contrails, because contrails don’t act like that
Reality: Contrails sometimes persist and spread, it depends on the weather at 30,000 feet (and not on the ground)
Persisting and Spreading Contrails
Contrail Forecast
The opposite of contrails
Measuring the height of contrails
How Long do Contrails Last?
Contrail to Distrail
Contrail Simulations
Why do some planes leave long trails, but others don’t?
Chemtrail Plausibility Study
Why Planes Make Vapor Trails
Unusual contrails explained
Theorists claim: odd looking contrails prove they are not contrails.
Reality: all can be explained if you do a bit of research.
Hole Punch Clouds in Los Angeles
Contrail Gaps and other Questions
Broken Contrails
Contrails, Dark Lines, & “Chemtrails”
Contrail of the Day
Very Unusual Short Tapered Contrails
Early Contrails
Voodoo Contrails over Los Angeles
Contrails Above and Below
Racetrack Contrails
Short Sunlit Contrails Look Like UFOs
Aerodynamic and Rainbow Contrails
Identifying a Curved Contrail
Contrail Season in Los Angeles
Ground Level Contrails
The Los Angeles Mystery Missile Contrail, and similar
New Mystery Missile, Padre Island Texas. Debunked
Did Chemtrails Cause the Beebe Blackbird Deaths
Manu Ginobili’s Santa Monica Silver Surfer
Los Angeles Missile Contrail Explained in Pictures
Contrails are Usually Horizontal
A Problem of Perspective – New Year’s Eve Contrail
Other random stuff
Procrustean Science
Contrails and Chemtrails: The IFAQ
Volcano Clears the Skies of Contrails
AC-130 Flares and Chaff
A Very Unusual Contrail
Modern Contrail Confusion
Cirrus Uncinus and Contrails
Things are not as they seem
What gets me is the OBVIOUS lack of interest in the truth. These people so want their hoax to be true, that they will bend over backwards to misrepresent/manipulate the facts just to spread this nonsense to a wider audience.
They have so much invested in this that they know if they turn out to be wrong, they would have to admit that they have WASTED years of their lives spreading lies about subjects they have been completely ignorant about.
They just can’t admit that they may be wrong…
Cloud seeding is weather modification…which is NOT the same thing as “geo-engineering”…
GE is climate modification…
Can I chip in…
Ok there is evidence for and against. Now I do not argue that those who are paid to spread disinformation could shun chemtrails, there is absolutely no argument that contrails do not exist as simply they do – as the vapor trails are quite factual.
But there is evidence to the contrary to support theory (theory has to have evidence to back it up or it is speculation) of chemtrails. Nobody here on this site can pertain to be an expert on the subject of chemtrails… not from what I am reading above.
Now do not get me wrong I am not here to discredit anybody or have an argument… In Vietnam the US used agent orange and silver particles to create situations and problems that eventually backfired, which incidentally is a fact and an absolute admission. This is also a form of chemtrailing.
Just because one suggests that chemtrails do not exist, does not mean that they do not and that TPTB have not/are not using them for weather modification, control of climate change (which incidentally is a fact from various experiments that you can search online which will eventually help solve the problem of CO2), crop spraying, multiple animal (bovine inoculation) vaccine and various other guises such as human control dare I mention chemical warfare.
To suggest that there is no such thing as chemtrails is borderline naive, just because you have had no experience of such.
There are many things that TPTB do not admit to have perpetrated, just because they have not admitted such does not mean they have not perpetrated a crime for instance… ahem JP Morgan fucks over people everyday but they would not admit such.
But hey thanks for an informative site on contrails – there is no getting away from the fact that these two types of trail in the sky are very different. You went a long way to bring us the info and that is to be commended.
Fair play 🙂
NJOI
Azrael
Azrael said: “Ok there is evidence for and against.”
Yes,crop dusting, cloud seeding etc…exist. If you want to call those “chemtrails”- feel free but that is really just semantics.
But what is the evidence that the persistent trails in the sky – that get decried as “chemtrails” by legions of Believers- are anything more than persistent contrails?
Why was my pst deleted?!
It wasn’t offensive or insulting.
A little heavy handed if you ask me….
I did not delete anything, nothing in the spam folder either. What was your post about?
Its here now…didn’t show up before.
Azrael, if you redefine chemtrails to include agent orange and cloud seeding and ignore that this site looks at very specific claims, being that chemtrails are long persisting clouds brought out by airplanes in usual travel height, then of course you are talking about things that exist – but it’s also somewhat disingenous. Of course there is evidence of Agent Orange having been used, of course cloud seeding exists. No one denies that.
Thing is: there is no evidence for persistent contrails being chemtrails.
Isn’t it funny how chemtrail activists always talk about a very specific thing when pointing at chemtrails, but when someone argues that these are merely contrails and that there is no evidence for chemtrails at all, they start to include other stuff. Way of winning an argument, I guess. By failing the original one, though.
Noble said:
“Its here now…didn’t show up before.”
Actually, it did. It was the first post on a new page, but it was unreachable by a direct link, so you probably missed it. I noticed before that there seems to be a bug in the link to such a post from the front page – it sends to the previous page instead.
Thanks Alexey, I’ll see if I can fix that bug. WordPress (at least with this theme) is ill-suited to long discussion threads, which is partly why I’ve largely moved over to metabunk.org now.
Dang spray planes have been flying over my house all day. They’re dark with no markings except for a large red single-digit number. I’ve seen them filling up at the ANG base just a few miles away. I KNOW they’re carrying loads of chemicals…
To go fight the forest fires.
Uncinus:
I’ve been reading most of the day, and gotten thru only a tiny fraction of your site. Quite remarkable and I applaud your patience. I would have lost it years ago.
I see you’ve got it covered on WW2 photos, but I didn’t see this one, which I particularly like.
http://www.motifake.com/facebookview.php?id=147968
I’ve seen a few mentions of sampling but I wonder if anyone has mentioned the possibility of sampling with balloons? There’s quite a hobby going on now with lots of groups sending camera/gps loaded balloons to 80K and above, and recovering them. Should be a pretty straightforward task to include sample containers. Wouldn’t even cost the CT’s any money as the hobby/amateur science groups would probably jump at the challenge. (For all I know, some may be doing this already.)
I need to learn to Google before I speculate: http://iamkosta.org/Things/WriteUp.pdf
And that’s just the first link to come up, and it’s years old. No excuses CT’s, get the real airborne samples and show the world!
VCP,
in my opinion, balloons are not suitable for sampling contrails. The problem is that they cannot be positioned at the right time and at the right spot (including the right altitude) to actually meet a persistant trail …
“Cannot be” meaning that it is extremely unlikely to get every parameter right. Of course not entirely impossible.
one funny thing is – either the sky is full of chemtrails, or it is not. Either there are plans flying around like crazy spraying their compass and square or tic-tac-toe formations – or not.
Why would you want to try to “debunk” what clearly exists? You definitely have issues with facing the truth.
Hilarious!
Donna W. said:
“Why would you want to try to ‘debunk’ what clearly exists?”
To claim that chemtrail spraying “really exists” is obviously not a real argument and could be countered from the debunkers’ side (“it clearly doesn’t exist”), without any actual relevance.
The point is: we are seeing in the sky what you are seeing in the sky.
We just have different explanations for what we are seeing. So we are equally convinced that we have truth on our side as you are.
I recommend that you take a look around this site, there are good articles about how to explain unusual trail formations and visual effects. Then you might at least consider that debunkers are not trying to avoid “facing the truth”.
Donna, the issue is no different to a person seeing a busy harbour or river and saying “can’t you all see the proof the govt is spraying the ocean with chemicals from speedboats? Just look down!
The evidence is right there in front of your eyes! All those speed boats spraying white “chemwakes” . Are you all asleep ?” etc
Everyone can actually see the white wakes. Nobody is denying you are seeing trails behind jets and speed boats. We are pointing out that you are not correctly understanding what they are.
Anyone who understands boats knows that the white trails behind speedboats are not part of a deliberate “spraying program” but are the natural normal hydrodynamic result of a speed boat’s passage through the water.
Lots of people understand boats but far fewer understand the atmosphere and aviation.
But folks who DO understand aviation know the trails in the sky are also just the natural and normal result of an aircraft’s passage through the sky at high altitude.
Not a conspiracy, just normal atmospheric physics.
Mick,
I’ve spent many hours on this site attempting to be as intellectually honest as possible. After assimilating a great deal of material, there are only two conclusions I can draw regarding your motivation in debunking chemtrails. You are either:
1. Ignorant
2. Intentional spreading subterfuge
My guess is that you are associated with Raytheon or a similar company. Mick, the following video makes clear that these programs are a present reality. And though these companies apparently prefer to operate clandestinely, these weather manipulation programs are not all that secretive. Clearly there are too many conspiratorialists making up all kinds of fictitious stories and passing along a host of misleading information, but that in no way precludes the fact that these weather modification projects exist.
So, although I appreciate this site’s effort to debunk all the pure nonsense (which is prevelent), you are responsible for the spread of this unethical attempt at military superiority. These companies need to be exposed and serious debate must take place before they continue. You’re running some great interference and that leads me to believe you have a vested interest in that which you’re promoting.
And, if it turns out that you are merely ignorant, please take the time to open your eyes. Though some of the “evidence” supporting chemtrails is clearly bogus, you shouldn’t use that as an excuse to ignore the realities. Listen, I don’t mean to sound harsh, but you are doing a great deal to cover this up which keeps average citizens from demanding an investigation.
Belfort Group – Coen Vermeeren, Aerospace Engineer Verifies Case Orange Report
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAHlD4v6w
Hi Chuck,
Could you point out some of the errors on contrailscience.com, so I can correct them? Thanks!
Mick, please don’t play this silly game. Who me where you’ve debunked the 316 Case Orange report. If you took the time to watch the video, it would have been more than obvious that these weather modification programs exist and are being implemented. This is not a CONSPIRACY THEORY. Governments are using private companies like Raytheon to conduct these experiments and I find it very difficult to believe that you are ignorant of that fact. Coen Vermeeren, an Aerospace Engineer, issued a rather dispassionate analysis of the “Covert Stratospheric Aerosol Geoengineering” programs in the video I linked. http://youtu.be/NgnAHlD4v6w
Listen, if you’re going to dedicate your life to disproving reality then that’s your business. We need watchdogs who will challenge wacky claims and photoshopped images, because there are obvious hoaxes and misrepresentations that heighten the hysteria. But when you and others insinuate than anyone who looks at the evidence and determines that we have a problem, is full of cooks and nuts who have a vested interest in grandstanding, you are being rather disingenuous. THE BELFORT GROUP (UK), didn’t conduct the “CHEMTRAILS SYMPOSIUM” because they are a bunch of tin-hat wingnuts. Dennis Kucinich proposed a bill that I can’t believe you’re unaware of. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/hr2977/text He’s not in the business of writing legislation to pacify the 2 or 3 UFO believing constituents that live in his district.
We need to discover WHY these governments are polluting our skies and debunk the faulty explanations. Then and only then can we the people stop them. Nothing will happen if people like you continue to keep people in the dark. PLEASE stop misleading people by throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I just wanted to give you one last chance to be intellectually honest before I wrote you off as either blatantly ignorant or deliberately deceptive.
For those who want to separate science from fiction, here’s the link to a 300 plus page report, CASE ORANGE, produced by the Belfort Group (an environmental watchdog). For those so easily persuaded by some of the subterfuge on this site, you may want to take the time to read this report.
1. The fully indexed 300 page report: http://saive.com/911/DOCS/Chemtrail-Symposium-Belfort-Group-300Page-Report.pdf (85mb)
2. The searchable 70 page report: http://saive.com/911/DOCS/Chemtrail-Symposium-Belfort-Group-70Page-Report-Searchable.pdf
Knowledge is power. This is not a CONSPIRACY THEORY.
There’s sufficient debunking of it here, in particular post #3.
http://metabunk.org/threads/95-Debunked-Belfort-Group-quot-Case-Orange-quot-conclusions-amp-recommendations
There’s more elsewhere, they rely heavily on some jokes in this pilots forum, mistaking them for serious discussion:
http://www.airwork.nl/bulletinboard/showthread.php?t=6001
Mick, thank you. I will take a look. I have no dog in this hunt. As I’ve said, I ONLY want to believe the truth. My hope has always been that his is the hoax you apparently believe it is, but thus far, after looking at this issue for the past 5 years, that’s not my conclusion. I have a friend who’s in the final stages of obtaining and analyzing a “contrail” sample. It’s going to cost him upwards of $100k.
Really? And he’s financing it himself? That should be interesting when it comes back as ice. Can you tell us anything about how he’s going about it? Where is the sample(s) going to be taken?
I hope your friend shows the result. Chuck, could you please tell me the singlemost convincing argument in the Case Orange document for the white lines being anything other than ordinary contrails?
I’ve read it and am not as convinced as you are.
BTW, I think Coen Vermeeren wrote the document…..
Mick, my friend has no vested interest whatsoever in reporting bogus data regardless of the results. I can assure you that he would not go to this expense if he was not deeply concerned about our future. I’ve seen his rather elaborate plan. He has gone to great lengths to make certain the specimen is not tainted and that the lab is well equipped to be able to perform the testing. Though he knows quite a few pilots, the main hold-up, other than securing a few more thousand in funding, is that he’s not yet found a pilot willing to carry out the mission. (for fear of the repercussions).
Jay, I live relatively close to an airforce base and I can tell you that things are not as they were. Well before I became aware of this issue, but in the past 10-12 years, I had complained to my wife on numerous occasions that the sky was rarely bright blue as it used to be. By day’s end, it was covered in a milky white haze. Something has changed. Sure, there’s evidence of contrails lasting a few hours, but not from morning until night and into the next morning. Yesterday, by late afternoon, the trails had covered every inch of what should have been a blue sky.
Listen, people all over the world are reporting this phenomenon because it is not as they remember it to be. I’ve scanned my old photograph albums and I couldn’t find even one shot where I noticed the kind of weird cloud formations that regularly frequent our skies. Usually 2 to 3 days per week this criss-cross of contrails is abundantly evident.
Weather modification efforts have been with us since I was a kid. But they were usually confined to cloud seeding for hurricanes etc. So we know these programs exist. So why are you guys so certain that the companies that have secured the patents aren’t experimenting? Our local meteorologist alluded to the chaff created by military testing.http://youtu.be/qc0TWVtozio
What hard evidence do you have that Coen V. wrote or even collaborated in that report? If he did, that would be incredibly disingenuous at best and at worst it would be highly suspect. I watched the video twice and he certainly acts as though he been commissioned to analyze that which he had no vested interest in.
So what motivation do you all have in maintaining this site? As quickly as you responded, it seems as though this endeavor must take up every waking non-working hour. Why? You’re coming up with snippets of reports that appeared almost 5 decades ago. Where did you get the vast resources that seem to be at your fingertips? Will you guarantee your readers that you are not now nor have ever been compensated for your efforts?
Except when it doesn’t. I do plenty of other things. This is a hobby, and I’m unemployed.
Google.
Yes, I swear by all I hold dear, upon the lives of my family, upon the memories of my ancestors, upon my honor and reputation, that I am not compensated for my debunking efforts.
Chuck, it looks like you couldn’t possibly understand this mind set: http://xkcd.com/386/
Also, is this: http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/23839726@N00/7933031094/ the sort of thing you are talking about? It was over Montana’s Rattlesnake Wilderness and lasted about an hour. What possible reason could the evil chemtrail sprayers have for doing this? Why shouldn’t I accept the mainstream explaination, a mass of humid high altitude air moving over? (The sky started out clear, then a couple of planes produced short contrails, then a pair of broken contrails, then cirrus clouds and finally many persistent contrails over part of the sky. A few hours later, the sky was clear.)
Chuck, my best suggestion is for your friend to carefully design his experiment, especially if he is spending so much hard-earned money which would be a shame to waste should the results be inconclusive.
He should enlist the services of a competent environmental atmospheric scientist who has done research and is willing to stake his name and reputation on his results. He should make a clear hypothesis and use the scientific method, document the entire experiment in as many ways as he can, and above all publically display the results whatever they may be.
Since he evidently hypothesizes that something is unusual or unexplainable, I’d suggest he begin by researching what is already known to be ordinary about aerosols in the air. Only with a thorough understanding of “normal” can one design an experiment to detect “abnormal”. He needs to get a good idea of the range of variability of aerosols in the atmopshere, and what causes that variability.
He should expect that his results will eventually be examined in rigorous detail by the most advanced atmospheric scientists available, who will be looking for errors of any kind. I suggest that, at a minimum, he could submit his experimental design here so that it can be perused for flaws. I will assure you that anything published in support of the chemtrails idea will eventually be so examined, so he might as well get his design critiqued before proceeding with something flawed.
I have given some thought as to how such an effort as your friend proposes could be done, but in my opinion, one of the first steps towards doing that would be to determine when, where, and which airplane’s ‘chemtrail’ to approach. In order to select such a target for sampling, you would have to get a good idea if it were leaving an ordinary contrail or a putative ‘chemtrail’, since there would be no use paying to sample an ordinary contrail from a passenger jet. I’ve detailed some ways in which such ordinary jets can be identified using flight tracking software, and how even unknown jets can be identified and recorded using high resolution telephotography at the link below:
http://metabunk.org/threads/100-14-Years-of-Chemtrails-Comments-and-Suggestions
Good luck on your friend’s work trying to prove “chemtrails” exist, he’ll need it.
“So why are you guys so certain that the companies that have secured the patents aren’t experimenting? Our local meteorologist alluded to the chaff created by military testing.” http://youtu.be/qc0TWVtozio
“What hard evidence do you have that Coen V. wrote or even collaborated in that report?”
I appreciate the advice, Jay. I assure you that my friend won’t spend $100k without following all the accepted protocols.
Chaff is a known thing, it’s not a secret. The fact the the military sprays chaff is common knowledge. That’s not chemtrails, unless you are descending into a semantic argument.
Mick, I have to hand it to you, in light of being under constant attack, you certainly haven’t lost your sense of humor.
Listen, as I said, I have no vested interested in holding to anything but the truth. I’m not a tin-hatted, UFO infatuated, wingnut in need of a conspiracy. But at the same time, I also don’t want to be guilty of ignoring the obvious. If there is something nefarious going on that is affecting my grandson’s future, I want to expose and oppose it. Perhaps the reason the chemtrail conspiracy is believable, is due to the rather sordid things some of these governments have perpetrated in the past. So, since I believe I have a moral obligation to do everything in my power to leave this place better than the day I arrived, I am compelled to practice a bit of due diligence.
When I first heard about the chemtrail conspiracy theory from a trusted friend, I thought he was a little too paranoid and I told him to take a chill pill. He was really big into the grand Luminati/NWO/one-world government conspiracy stuff. But, as I said above, when I had a few weeks to ponder his claims, I realized that the haze I had been complaining about to my wife might be that which he was referring to. So I began looking into the whole deal much more seriously.
Over the past 5 years I’ve flipped and flopped, but suffice it to say, I have become increasingly convinced that something is going on. It seems rather incomprehensible to believe that this has become a global issue and yet is totally bogus. I suppose it’s possible. It’s not like the masses have never been led astray before. I’ll keep reading.
Are you familiar with the fellows who run this site? http://swallowingthecamel.blogspot.ca/2012/07/chemtrails-iii-aerial-spraying.html
“What hard evidence do you have that Coen V. wrote or even collaborated in that report?”
You’ve got to pick your battles though. Given that there are so many evils in the world that are undeniably happening, then it seems a bit counterproductive to spend a lot of time on fighting something for which there is no good evidence that it even exists in the first place.
I’ve not seen that swallowingthecamel site before.
I think Jay just suspects Coen Vermeeren because he’s the only person really association with Case Orange – he also gives the presentations of it. There’s no hard evidence. but then there’s no other candidates.
This haze you talk about, can you put any numbers on it? How long have you noticed it for? When did it start? How often is it hazy? Could it be the weather?
I must admit, the kind of intellectual leaps in this video drive me crazy. It may well be the case that Vitamin D levels are down and heavy metal toxicity is on the rise, but the immediate leap to determine that a deliberate spraying program is the cause, is problematic at best. http://youtu.be/NWXEsnFZhBI
The creator of that video says that “Base reflectivity means the amount of sunlight reflected by aerial spray refective material that shows up in our weather radar, yet local stations report real clouds and natural rain.”
Excuse me, but weather radar has no capability to measure sunlight, it measures the strength of the radar waves sent out which return from reflective objects with some mass in the sky. Sunlight does not reflect radar waves, since it is a wave itself and has no mass.
Whoever made that video has no clue how things work.
And that was my point, Jay. That’s why I’m attempting to separate fact from fiction. I’m finding that so much of this stuff is being built on top of faulty presuppositions. I realize you guys believe you’ve already sufficiently debunked this stuff and that I’m wasting my time…but, just as you had to go through the due diligence process, I have to do the same.
Mick, the problem with much of this is being certain of a starting point and deciding exactly what was “normal”. I have no way to quantify the haze. It’s certainly not scientific to speak in these kinds of nebulous terms but I have no way to offer objective data. I just can’t remember this kind of milky cloud blanketing the sky as often as it is now. There’s a distinct difference between that and typical cloud cover because by the of the day you can still notice the streaky patterns left by the trails. I live about 20 miles from an Air Force Base in Tampa, FL. At least the fellow in the following video attempts to account for what he apparently believes is an increase in persistent contrails. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQz3aZtbF-c My question is this. If there’s an increase due to an increase in air travel and if the newer, more efficient engines are producing more of these contrails than their predecessors, why do the trails persist for so long? Why wouldn’t we simply see more trails following 20 or so lengths behind the planes and then evaporate. Have atmospheric conditions changed? So, far, and perhaps I haven’t looked in all the right places, I have not seen anyone speak to the reason for the contrail’s longevity.
Unfortunately I think this is largely a matter of perception. People notice what they look for. If there’s one season where they see a lot of something then they notice it, and then they start seeing it more and more.
In part this is because of an increase – but it’s also largely because they are mentally primed to look for it.
There are a LOT of young people who claim the first time they saw a persistent contrail was in 2011 or 2012. But really they simply never noticed them before.
Contrails have always persisted a long time if conditions are right. The new engines make the persistence a bit more likely, but mostly it’s due to increased traffic, and increased attention.
Just a suggestion Chuck, but this blog is not best suited for long discussions – perhaps you’d like to join us over on the chemtrail forums at Metabunk.org, where you can start new threads, and join existing threads on particular topics.
http://metabunk.org/forums/9-Chemtrails
Mick, since there were well over 400 responses to this particular blog, I had no idea that it was limited to short discussions. Sorry. I’ll check over at Metabunk.org. I have some questions regarding a post at http://www.DavidIcke.com. Thanks
It’s not limited (some posts have over 1000 comments), just not well suited.
All of you people are buffoons…the symptoms of raining death are showing up in record numbers. I swear the next person that tries to explain why the sky looks like a rainbow oil slick every day with b.s. explanations trying to debunk and discredit us truthers needs to be beaten with a large blunt object. Whoever this clown Nazi shrill is running this so-called truth site should be ashamed of themselves. Have fun in Hell asshole.
Really? What are the symptoms of raining death then? and where are these numbers documented?
“Oil slicks” have rainbows because of reflection and interference, rainbows in the sky are due to reflection and refraction, so yeah – anyone who says the rainbows in the sky are the same as oil slick rainbows is a bit ignorant – I agree.
We will not be phased by threats of violence! We will continue to stand up to liars!
US patent 5,003,186 March 26, 1991 “Stratospheric Welsbach seeding for reduction of global warming”: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,003,186.PN.&OS=PN/5,003,186&RS=PN/5,003,186
One or two articles on the subject of geoengeneering…perhaps you guys would like to browse them??? http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.agriculturedefensecoalition.org%2F%3Fq%3Dgeoengineering&h=pAQFVW6uT
Steve,
the last link is a bit awkward, it will just redirect to this:
http://www.agriculturedefensecoalition.org/?q=geoengineering
Geoengineering as discussed there is not related to the Chemtrail theory.
It is probably worth to know that one of the the leading persons of the Agriculture Defense Coalition (Rosalind Peterson) just recently stated in a radio show:
“In 10 years of research, other than aluminum coated fibreglass, chaff releases by the US military, I have no proof whatsoever that the jets are releasing anything but jet fuel emissions”
Here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOXt0BTOTN0
“Nazi shrill”
??????
jirish777, I can practically feel your loathing. Don’t blame us for you not having success spreading the chemtrails hoax amongst the average man-on-the-street. You can only blame yourself or your leaders for not taking my advice on how you can put an end to the mystery. I’ll share with you:
http://metabunk.org/threads/100-14-Years-of-Chemtrails-Comments-and-Suggestions
Uncinus, I really appreciate what you have done here, the whole website. There are not many people who would dedicate the same amount of time and effort as you do to debunk this “chemtrail nonsense”!
I have something which you may or may not find helpful. For those who don’t believe that the weather is different in different altitudes and contrails only form in certain bits.
It’s an Atlas V rocket launch, and there is no trail left behind the rocket on this launch, until it enters an altitude which allows one to form behind the exhaust.
Worth a look anyway http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9S0z1ofcIc
Freaking awesome video. Question- Is that rocket purely solid fuel? I thought it should have been making a water cloud like the shuttle.
Wikipedia says it burns kerosene and liquid oxygen. But I figure the jet from the engine is extremely hot (compared to planes at least).
Thanks Johnny, I actually used that SDO launch a while ago in this post:
https://contrailscience.com/why-do-some-planes-leave-long-trails-but-others-dont/
This site is ridiculous. Wired magazine last months cover admits to geo engineering.Wake Up! All you have do do is look up at the sky. Why then did I never see this before 1996. SHOW ONE CHEM TRAIL FROM 1918 LIKE YOUR SITE PROCLAIMS. SHOW ONE MOVIE BEFORE OR NEWS CAST. GET REAL YOU CAN NOT SHOW ONE PICTURE OR VIDEO CAUSE THESE TRAILS DID NOT EXIST.. GO TO INFOWARS.COM OE ALEX JONES ON YOU TUBE GET THE TRUTH. THIS IS UNEDUCATED. MARLARKIE. BS
There’s no photos from 1918, just eyewitness accounts. But the are plenty of photos and videos from 1940 and beyond:
https://contrailscience.com/wwii-contrails/
https://contrailscience.com/contrail-photos-through-history/
David,
So geoengineering is admitted…lets say its a global thing.
What evidence do you have that geoengineering results in trails?
Nothing.
The trails are contrails and are unrelated to any sort of program.
Alex Jones isn’t qualified to say what the trails are.
I just read the wired article.
It refers to simulations.
Did you read it David?
Oh no ! I thought they were just doing computer modeling on geoengineering ? I guess if nasa and Noaa are helping them pollute the ocean maybe they are doing the same to our atmosphere ? what do ya think Unicus ? http://www.theblaze.com/stories/controversial-geoengineering-experiment-to-stop-global-warming-discovered-off-canadian-coast/comment-page-2/#comment-4282212
No, there’s been lots of experiments with ocean fertilizations, biochar, cool roofs, carbon capture and sequestrations and other geoengineering techniques.. The computer modeling referred to is for atmospheric SRM.
And the “they” in this particular case is essential a con-man, not a scientist. He’s supposedly trying to bilk people with some carbon-credit scheme.
Thanks Mick for your answer but how did NASA and NOAA help or loan them the equipment ? Isnt Global warming all filled with Con_men ? Al Gore and CCX
He did not get NASA or NOAA to help them. As far as I can tell he just used their web sites.
I do not think global warming has any more con-men than any other area where money is involved.
We can continue discussing this here if you like:
http://metabunk.org/threads/849-Perspective-Russ-George-s-geoengineering-project-Plankton-Bloom-UN-Violation
The section about NASA and NOAA equipment is this:
“George says his team of unidentified scientists has been monitoring the results of the biggest ever geoengineering experiment with equipment loaned from US agencies like NASA and the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration.”
It only refers to monitoring – which could mean anything from getting water samples to satellite photos.
Sure would like to if it were easier to log on to Metabunk ? Canadian government ‘knew of plans to dump iron into the Pacific’? http://treasurecoastskywatch.blogspot.com/
Ben Kravitz propaganda pushing chemtrails ( geoengineering ) How are they gonna whiten our skies ? They are already whitening our skies in Florida .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEcnOMINo2k&feature=player_embedded&list=PLFB23E55E1C3C6579#!
how much easier could it be to logon to Metabunk??
I dont know but out all sites it is the hardest . not as easy as this site .
It is easiest to log in at the top when you first open the page. Not so easy if you try to make a commen, then log in.
I must have some sorta blocker or something because my home computer logs on just fine .
This site does not require any logon at all though…….Metabunk uses much the same logon sytem as any other “proper” forum ….if you are not used to it I guess you haven’t actually got all tha much experience at discussion fora??
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=6&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=5%2c003%2c186&OS=5%2c003%2c186&RS=5%2c003%2c186
do your research
Hi Melody. You link was broken, was it to the Stratospheric Welsbach patent? Google patents is good for easy links.
http://www.google.com/patents/US5003186
I have actually done quite a bit of research. Maybe you could have a look around here and tell me what I got wrong?
Yup, i have also done plenty of research about these subjects.
How is the patent you posted linked to the trails we all see in the sky, without making many assumptions?
Sorry, I honestly can’t make the connection with a good conscience. There is too much at stake. Including the reputations of many people.
Do you have any evidence that anyone is being affected in any way by this patent?
You debunk nothing except the fact that you have no idea what you are talking about. Try forming some of your own thoughts before coming to a conclusion on a subject. Enjoy being a sheep 🙂
So having debunked the idea that he has no idea what he is talking about that must mean that he DOES know what he is talking about! 🙂
Or, alternatively, you could use the factual information that this site abounds in to become more knowledgeable yourself.
Sheep and chemtrail beleivers both do not study science. At least the sheep has an excuse.
I just came across this subject, which I had never heard of before tonight . And I have to say that like most conspiracies of this ‘supposed scale’ I always ask the same question. If this were really occurring around the world (chemtrails) do you think you could keep it a secret for long. With people wanting to have their 10 min’s of fame or a large enough cash “donation” people would talk. Also who can say that any government runs with the efficacy and order to keep something like this running without problems. I don’t know about you but my experience suggests that most operations, even on a regional level let alone a global level would inevitably go wrong. Remember no ones perfect, we’re all human. So we’re is the proof, not speculation not circumstance. I want to hear from the begrudged chemtrail loaders who are paid bow wage, the pilots with moral issues who can’t live with the guilt of inflicting this terrible evil upon us, the cold logical formula created by the immoral scientists whose case notes got left in the system for some Jonney shuffle bug to find. Proof logic rational thinking.
Actually reading some of the comments on hear I’ve changed my mind. Chemtrails must be real cause of the mad, crazy remarks of some people. Must be effecting them LOL
Lol,
from all that I have heard, watched and read I came to the conclusion that believe in powerful conspirators shows a lot of the characteristics that are usually associated with religion.
Even if these powers are evil by definition, their projected omnipotence gives a sort of direction to society. Careful planning is assumed, which is able to explain the world in relatively simple terms (even natural catastrophies). Order – even the dark flavour – is preferred to chaos and complexity.
At the same time, the individual is relieved of the pressure to change and expand its horizon. Being powerless can be quite comfortable …
Jfdee
I agree with you that people feeler compelled to find a belief in something greater than themselves, it seems to be the human condition. But as we have seen with religion and any form of manipulation of the masses it can be done quite easily as many people choose to believe what they can’t see and prove. As if that the mystery is enough evidence in its self. But this is an unhealthy way to lead ones life as it limits us on what we can and do prove. Having beliefs of any sort holds us back as a species and continues to divide us.
Lol, you guys are going to need to take this site down in a few more years when the chemtrail phenomena is no longer under the banner of conspiracy theory, but an accepted part of mainstream science.
http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2012/Pages/spiceupdateoct.aspx
We’ll see. But the actual question NOW is what evidence do you have to support the theory?
Why it is a prerequisite that anyone who runs a conspiracy website needs to have awful formatting, write illegible, non-sequential run-on paragraphs, and show the composition skills of an unhinged middle schooler?
They have no trouble grasping the complexity and nuance of deep, historically nested conspiracies… but HTML? Forget it. WordPress? Not a chance. Too busy bringin’ the truth!
I’d like to think it’s something as elegant and simple as “their web pages are a visual metaphor for their brains: manic and cluttered.” But I think it’s actually a conspiracy.
I’ve read it all and am uncertain either way as I have no proof either way- but more leaning toward yes chemtrail, for the simple fact of there being little proof our governments are about peace, abundance, health and happiness. You only have to investigate the pharmaceuticals, the tobacco, the food companies, the media ,. do I really need to go on… People are being overwhelmed with chemicals and a whole lot of mental jargon today. It isn’t harmless. Governments allow it. There’s no conspiricy – it’s for all to see. But I conclude with; the power of your mind can transmute the atoms of water – and probably just about anything you believe it can. So whether they are happening or not…think happy thoughts haha…u get the point…. Then ‘they’ can’t touch this
love this site so much. just thought some secondary school (high school) science/geography about the types of cloud might be useful here. I though about using photos from the UK MET office, but that would probably be discounted so here is a link to a picture from a school textbook about the different types of cloud at different hights.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ofd_O_OBxCY/TjzrFPXlqqI/AAAAAAAABrQ/U8mdQ7-i-u0/s1600/clouds.jpg
Please note the slightly ‘stripy’ effect of those on the left of the picture as in reality these can form very straight lines and even grid patterns.
Is it still a conspiracy when things like this: http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/7/3/034019/article are published every other week?
Is what still a conspiracy?
Talking about SRM geoengineering has been going on for decades, there’s no evidence anyone has done it.
Is it wrong of me to mistrust those in power? We should not be surprised at biological warfare against the population when such scandals have been exposed many times since the 1940’s. Unsuspecting communities have often been used as laboratory animals to test germ warfare agents and some 20,000 covert experiments on civilian populations in the United States between 1910-2000 have been uncovered by congressional investigations. So I ask you, is it wrong that I mistrust? Er, nup. I can appreciate a good de-bunking, you clearly can’t speak for every pilots trail but hey, right?
It’s not about being fearful or spreading fear, if only it were that simple, de-bunkers.
No, it’s not wrong to mistrust those in power.
It’s a bit odd though, to suspect specific acts without any evidence for those acts.
Catherine wrote:
“It’s not about being fearful or spreading fear, if only it were that simple, de-bunkers.”
But Catherine, Russ Tanner of Global Skywatch stated publicly earlier this week that his prime campaign to bring about chemtrails awareness was going to be by using a technique he called “Fear Based Marketing”. That is a quote from a leader of the movement which can’t be denied.
Clouds have been seeded from aircraft with silver iodide since 1923. Now used in geoengineering aerosol particles are “sulfur, aluminum, strontium, and gram-negative soil bacteria (bioprecipitation).”
I am amazed that this guy actually took the time to create a website to try and debunk an official government program that has taken place since 1923. How sad.
And what does any of that have to do with the trails in the sky?
Nothing…
Michael Fleming wrote:
“Clouds have been seeded from aircraft with silver iodide since 1923.”
Not so – the first cloud seeing occured in 1946, and that was in a laboratory. The first cloud seeing from aircraft was done with dry ice.
I live in the UK and am curious about the vast amount of flight activity and trails I now see in the sky. On some occasions we have 4 or 5 planes flying across the local airspace, all visible, and often 3 of them will be in the same group (ie, flying in same direction and close to each other).
I have been monitoring these planes whilst also viewing the http://www.flightradar24.com website, and there are two observations I have made:
1. The planes which leave visible trails never seem to appear on http://www.flightradar24.com . (Said website says it shows 70% of European passenger air traffic.)
2. The planes that don’t leave visible trails usually are present on that website.
Isn’t this a reasonable indication that the planes leaving the persistent trails are not passenger airliners?
I’m not here to ridicule or be ridiculed. Just hoping someone could help shed some light on this anomaly.
Thanks,
James
James, this is likely a combination of two things:
A) Contrails are generally a lot further away than you think
B) Planes without contrails are quite hard spot unless they are quite close.
Hence you only identify the no-trail planes on FLightRadar24 that are directly overhead, as those are the ones you see. Most of the contrails you see will not be that close, but you’ve only been looking for planes within a few miles of you based on your experience with trail-less planes. So you won’t find the majority of the trailed planes.
How far away was the furthest plane is that you identified?
Ref:
https://contrailscience.com/how-far-away-is-that-contrail/
https://contrailscience.com/where-did-all-the-planes-go/