Home » contrails » How to Debunk Chemtrails

How to Debunk Chemtrails

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

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

With discussion and reference here:

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

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

Contrails Through History

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

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

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

Chemical Tests, Aluminum, Barium, Etc.

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

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

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

Photos and Video used by chemtrail theorists

Theorists claim: Photos and videos show spray planes.

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

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

About the Chemtrail theory

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

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

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

General Discussion of Chemtrails

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

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

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

The amount of air traffic, grids, and contrail patterns

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

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

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

Contrail Information

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

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

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


Unusual contrails explained

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

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

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

The Los Angeles Mystery Missile Contrail, and similar

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

Other random stuff

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


669 thoughts on “How to Debunk Chemtrails

  1. bryansail says:

    Hi JFDee,

    -The lower altitude plasma creation IS documented, this is why I used the term atmospheric heating as opposed to ionospheric heating. The development of this technology has already been demonstrated.

    The comparison between natural magnetic field excitation which has been well studied and artificial plasma creation are different in part because of the regions where this occurs as well other differences. The field of scale argument holds some weight if the heating only occurs in the ionosphere or magnetosphere as is naturally observed. An artificial plasma has been demonstrated at altitudes of 50 to 90 kilometers and proof of concept of even lower level plasma creation exists.

    You wrote that there is no indication of an ongoing program. I am not sure what constitutes an ongoing program. There is over whelming evidence that militarizing the weather / war arena and having an advantage in warfare includes tinkering with the atmosphere.

  2. MikeC says:

    Plasma is a common industrial material used widely in a variety of industries all the way down to sea level – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric-pressure_plasma

    So what?

    military use of weather modification isoutlawed my international convention – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Modification_Convention

    which the US has signed, and ratified in 1980 – http://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVI-1&chapter=26&lang=en#6

    And in the USA a ratified treaty is the law of hte land, as per the Constitution Article II Section 2 – so if you have any actual proof of it happening in the US you should make that available to law enforcement agencies and publish it all over hte ‘net.

  3. bryansail says:

    Hi Mike,

    Warfare and gaining an advantage over your opponent has rules?

    I will post at metabunk eventually re; weather modification.


    Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
    -Ephesians 2:2

  4. JFDee says:

    bryansail said:

    “I am not sure what constitutes an ongoing program.”

    A program that is not just a ‘proof of concept’ or an isolated experiment, with measurable effects on the weather.

    I think the central practical problem is that the amount of energy required for actual alterations must be large enough to compete with the natural energy involved with weather processes. Basically, that comes down to match the solar energy that reaches a significant area of the earth (including all parts of the atmosphere and the surface).

    The numbers that I found through a quick search for the surface energy alone indicate that in full sun a value of 2787840000 watts per square mile can be assumed (100 watts per square foot). That’s 2788 megawatts for one square mile.

    Also, even that amount of energy would have to be smartly directed to amplify the still minuscule effect. With the weather being a chaotic system, any useable prediction of effects requires precise and fine-graned data – which is just not available.

    Look at the atmospheric soundings from two close-by radio sonde launches; they may differ completely (besides the fact that humidity measurement is still error-prone in cold conditions). Satellites can only provide large-scale measurements.

  5. Stupid says:

    Try to debunk this!

    Good luck! 😉

    p.s. Who’s laughing now?

  6. Patents are not evidence of something working, or it being used.

  7. Captfitch says:

    One of those patents (the one that mentions HAARP) talks about releasing oxides in a warehouse environment for some sort of RFID production process. That one must be a CT believers heaven! Controlled release of aluminum oxides, HAARP, and RFID chips all in one patent!! All they have to do is cut and paste the good parts, post the patent number and chemtrails are real.

  8. MikeC says:

    Yes Bryan – ther are rules for weather modificatin in warfare – don’t do it – di you read any of het links I provided??

    And the fact that people study and point out breaches of various treaties shows that they do not go unnoticed.

    As I said – if you have any actual evidence of eth breach of the treaty then you should make it known.

    Saying that the US has breached any given treaty on any given case is not actually evidence that it has breached any OTHER treaty. It might certainly give you cause to be suspicious – but suspicion is not evidence either.

  9. Jay Reynolds says:

    Did you realize that Bryansail has been posting here for five years?
    LOL 😉

  10. Victoria says:

    There is over 100 years of proof that they exist and ABDOLUTELY nothing makes me agrier and no one I know personally would EVER take me on to debate this as they would lose. It’s a no win situation for anyone due to the fact that I would die and or kill over this issue. If you don’t believe it then you should probably go bury your head in the sand until you no longer breath. God help any body who comes anywhere near my stratosphere who says they don’t exist. You may as well tell me you are a satan worshiper. I promise you will not feel safe around me.

  11. Victoria says:

    Read the Manhattan-Rochester coalition for proof.

  12. MikeC says:

    Yes – the aerial spraying of Zinc Cadmium sulphate – but that was not done by commercial airliners, the trails did not come from engines, the trails did not last a long time, the material being used was easy to detect (it was fluorescent precisely to make it easy to spot where it went) and ther is no evidence that it is being done now.

    you can see what that spraying looks like because the British were doing a similar experiment on their population around eth same time, and video of it is now available on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H51BTEmZoNw

    It is certainly evidence that the Govt has done secret experiments on people in the past – but it not evidence that persistent contrails are anything other than persistent contrails.

  13. Captfitch says:

    So much anger….. Craft beer is good, maybe some wine. There’s other things, something must be out there to mellow you out.

  14. Justin Barens says:



    2 scientific websites explaining “chemtrails” logically. You skeptics are just as silly as “truthers”! It took me like 4 hours of investigating to find these. They admit to spraying the sky.

    I figured this out, because I kept following your websites for following contrails and commercial flights, and they couldn’t explain the 6-7 planes leaving a trail in rows one after another, while not a single other plane, that was accounted for, left a trail. After I couldn’t find an explanation, I started looking for weather sciences to confirm your sciences. Sure enough, I find blatant weather manipulation.

    There ya go my friends. ACTUAL facts about “Chemtrails” or as I am calling them, seed trails. Keep in mind, I used your info to figure this out, not chemtrail theorists. I followed your commercial flights and contrail website, and it never accounts for the huge activity over Reno. But hey no need to explain, the website and their photos speak for themselves. Try investigative reporting instead of PSEUDOSCIENCE and assumption. Not trying to be rude, I just find skeptics to be somewhat rude. You’re telling people that factual things they see aren’t real when clearly as I just proved, they are. Now please, repost these sites and explain it’s sodium solvents and not some mass conspiracy to kill everyone. They simply want to rejuvenate water tables. I would argue more with the inconsistencies over Reno and northern Nevada, but seeing as those links logically explain the whole thing I don’t see why I would need to. Hope this helps with the search for facts.

  15. Cloud seeding happens IN clouds, and it does not leave visible trails, and it’s done with small planes. Totally different from what people call chemtrails.

    What people call chemtrails look like contrails.

  16. Justin Barens says:

    Nvm, In further reading I see you actually found this yet were too nearsighted to realize you explained it, your so busy trying to Yank Crankers you overlooked data you already had. Your debunking videos no theorist is watching, answering things that are not in question and skirting facts. Lol, why? It’s so logical and easy. Right under your nose. Lol, I’m still laughing about the admittance of using Pseudoscience. You skeptics sound JUST LIKE the Chem-theorists. Your so busy trying to prove an assumption you missed the facts. I’m as confused as I am amused, Why? Chemtrails EXPLAINED, go home all of you, your drunk.

  17. Justin Barens says:

    That’s not true. They can make clouds from it. Read further man. I feel like your all so into arguing you dont want an answer. Your as far in the rabbit hole as the CT theorists.

  18. Perhaps you could provide an example of cloud seeding leaving a trail?

  19. Justin Barens says:

    Nope. I’m not giving you anything. Do your own damn homework. I know the theorists are itching to argue with you, I’m not. I just hope my links and answer is good enough for logical people. Your a smart man, not being logical. The only answer good enough for you is “It’s not real”? Anyone who investigates or practices any kind of science knows going into something with a pre-conceived answer yields no results. Your page says it best: PSEUDOSCIENCE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience Also a popular scientific method for Ancient Aliens!

    I have shown the info I have found to many Chemtrail enthusiasts, and they go “Yup! That’s what i saw!” and then they stop telling people the alluminati is going to kill them. Trust me, those aren’t my only links, but seeing as your not interested in fact I’d rather not play that game with you. Have fun, I will be following your site for more useful information.

  20. If you can’t give an example, then I’m assuming that you don’t know of any.

    If you’ve shown the info you have found to chemtrail enthusiasts, then why can’t you show it to me?

  21. Strawman says:

    Seems he’s more interested in LOL and capslocks than debate. Understandable: he might have to show something and possibly be challenged.

  22. JFDee says:

    Justin Barens,

    please add me to the list of people who are keen to see your seed trails. This would be something new and possibly exciting.

  23. Justin Barens says:

    You make a lot of assumptions. That’s my issue about your site. Your taking the most likely answer and jumping to it as a conclusion, but your still jumping to a conclusion.

    Besides I’m not doing anything special. Couple trips to a library and google and I found it all. I am satisfied with the answers I have found and had proposed to me, I don’t need anyone to debunk anything. I just thought I’d leave you with some info but you don’t want that you wanna yank crankers.

    Pseudoscience says it all. Have fun arguing with the Theorists.

  24. Strawman says:

    So let’s discuss it. Let’s be clear what we are talking about. What do you take issue with?

  25. Justin Barens says:

    I’m annoyed because you seem to have solid explanations but very little to back them up, you should link other sites (And check your links, MANY are broken, I apologize not noting which, there are so many spread throughout pages and conversations.)

    Also, you link yourself as your own source for a lot of info. As constructive criticism, this looks bad to anyone looking for info. It seems like you don’t want outside input.

    Also, tell me were you find these photos. I am not saying they aren’t real or plants, but I am having a hard time finding anyone but you or Nasa who have photos of contrails before 1990 (although I am in no way saying for sure this means anything, I’m just pointing this out because it makes a person question credibility.)

    Don’t come back with chemtrail arguments, I don’t care, I’m trying to explain why your site is frustrating people.

    ALSO! You need to address that different isotopes of Barium, Aluminum, and Strontium ocure naturally, while others don’t. If a chemical test shows unnatural isotopes, then it’s a question to ask about “chemtrails”. if they fail to find those, then it doesn’t matter. I point this out so maybe you can clarify, as the science of earth metals is not straight forward at all.

  26. Justin Barens says:

    Also, I need to explain that I did a lot of research to find out I was seeing Seed Trails. You say they can’t happen but the DRI website says they do, albeit rarely, and What I saw was a propeller plane dumping on clouds edges. I do not seed clouds or know why they do what they do but this plane and what it was doing is perfectly explained by the DRI website. It is REALLY annoying you come back and tell me they’re wrong. They even specifically say they do it over my area. If I had a damn camera I’d have you eating crow over it, really a dick thing to come back with when I really thought I was giving people on this subject information they might enjoy. If you want this site to be constructive, stop attacking people.

    Your news broadcast mentions that they could possibly use contrails to alter weather. How do you feel about this? And even if there is NOTHING going on, then I am the only one concerned about eco conditions, am I the only person who think Contrail blotting out the sun is still not ok? Broaden the conversation. This site would be much cooler if it didn’t feel like you were attacking theorists, especially since the results to your survey reveal you get more believers then non. Again, you like input into making your site better. That’s what this is.

  27. Justin Barens says:

    One last thing I have to drive home, Pseudoscience is not valid, and is commonly used by theorists as well. If your not using it, take it off the top of your website, if you are, then yes the validity of your claims can be in question.

  28. Justin Barens says:

    Forgive me if I’m frustrated but over the course of researching this, a lot of anger circulates, And I fear i got caught up in it. I too, should not attack anyone.

  29. Justin Barens says:

    Mick, or, Uncinus, is there a way to talk to you directly?

  30. JFDee says:

    Justin Barens,

    you could copy and paste web links into your postings – this would make it possible to follow your exact references.

  31. Doug says:

    I was just wondering why when I was younger these contrail only lasted a little while. Sometimes as long as 30 minutes before they disappated. Now on a still day I sometimes see contrails that last 6 hours or more . This seems very odd to me. I had been thinking it was strange long before I ever heard of chemtrails. Also the WW2 pictures you try to use as evidence against chemtrails the planes are mostly still in view.

  32. Alexey says:


    A contrail can last many hours, but the only way to see it all this time is to track it from the space or follow it on the ground. Contrails do not stay at the same place but are carried away by wind. Even when it is still on the ground, the wind speed at the contrail altitudes can exceed 100 mph. In six hours, a contrail would be blown out of sight.

  33. Jay Reynolds says:

    You aren’t the first person to find that there is no evidence that the contrails people see in the sky, and turned to other things to explain what they saw. Just as it has been pointed out to you, cloud seeding doesn’t explain the lines people see, it mis-identifies one thing for another, plus it seriously loses the plot of chemtrails.

    What you seem to be doing is dumbing-down an already silly topic. You wont find any answers that way because you aren’t really looking at the problem directly, you are looking for easy answers on-line. There are far too many possibilities and misdirections to be found on this giant web, and there are already pitfalls and snares out there waiting to lead you down blind alleys and rabbit holes.

    I’d suggest you disengage from everyone else and concentrate on a personal project which should be able to yield the irrefutable evidence which you seek. I want you to personally succeed, and to go where few are going. I want you to solve the Great Mystery of chemtrails. I have even explained exactly what needs to be done and how to do it.

    Best of luck, be sure to get back to us with some of your results.
    Whoever solves this mystery will be a Great Winner.
    Now get to it!

  34. CBIncus says:

    I’ve found some very interesting information about contrails in a Russian book called “Aeronautical Meteorology” by Oleg Bogatkin. I’ll try to translate this text in English.

    The following rules were developed by aviation meteorologists in the former Soviet Union during the WWII, when almost no radiosonde data were available:

    1. In the case when contrails last more than 10 minutes along with cirrus clouds forming, this may be the sign of a coming warm or occlusion front, which is situated in around 300 km from us. If we consider the speed of the front equal to 30-35 km/h, the precipitation will begin after 10-12 hours. The same things are valid for a spreading contrail.

    2. In the case when contrails appear and last less than 10 minutes, the probability of widespread precipitation falling from As/Ns clouds is very low.

    3. If the contrail moves to the north from the observer, no significant cooling should be expected, because the winds are blowing from south.

    4. The speed of contrail movement is a good estimate of the winds in a jet stream.

    5. When a line of a contrail is much smaller then another one, it is the sign of strong upper-level turbulence.

    This is the evidence of spreading contrails observed 70 years ago.

  35. cloudspotter says:

    Evidence of trails over non NATO countries too.

  36. Pablo says:

    I don’t buy it. I was a sailor for eleven years, and i like to watch the sky and clouds. I can tell the difference between a contrail and a chemtrail most times. And just one simple question, as i live near an airport, and not so far from Schiphol in Amsterdam, i know the routes, them planes flying very high and producing contrails, but much lower there are other planes spraying chem, you see them flying back and forth. Why is that? Also when my house is so “dusty”to breathe, after some vinegar sprayed it becomes better. How can by using Orgonite it all starts to clear in an area and not aside of it. Guess thou this is government supported, cos even very respectable governments have complained about just to shut up later and being sprayed again. Take one for example Sweden. All UN countries are sprayed nowadays. Pictures of rural areas where no commercial aircraft’s fly have four of them flying back and forth..all bollocks if you deny it. So some say also them pilots have children and politicians also, they might believe in lies, or they get detox for. Oh and something funny happens nowadays as well, they started to retouch old movies putting chemtrails clouds so you might think its natural as well. Don’t you know owner of this page, there is a NWO coming? Do you know about the Illuminat? Or whatever they should be called. Do you UNDERSTAND their metaphysics? I do, and as much as they know as well. Now ask yourself why Aspartame, why dictated GMO’s, why a worse codex alimentaris, why do they put ppl in psychiatric camps and drug them because they believe in them “conspiracies”? Why did the FDA rises above the maximum on food contaminated with radioactivity after Fukushima? That’s because the CULL started already. Come on.. their agenda goes over more than hundred years of plannings..Ues, sometimes i see a video of some hysteric kid showing a contrail, well, some pictures i don’t trust. But when i am breathing some kind of air that feels like some sprayed Talc in my room, i know that ain’t natural.

  37. JFDee says:

    Pablo said:

    “I can tell the difference between a contrail and a chemtrail most times.”

    Pablo, what is the visible difference between a contrail and a chemtrail?

  38. Thanks CBIncus, I found a copy of the book online, the section you mention starts on page 157

    Since the book is from 2005 though, the theorists will just say it’s part of the cover-up 🙂

  39. Chris says:

    I just have one question… if an airplane is showing a contrail and they are adding a chemical (regardless of the chemical, SF6, Silver Iodide, Salt,Jet fuel, or jet fuel byproduct, etc…) then is it still a contrail or is it at that time something else? Seems like that’s the argument here right? At what point does it go from being a contrail to a chemtrail?

    I would move that a condensation trail is any trail that is “ONLY” condensation (water vapor).
    I would also state that any trail from behind a plane that has any chemical in it (jet fuel, silver iodide, aluminum, sf6, strontium, etc…) is a chemical trail.

    Anyone agree? I mean if we are going to split hairs then let’s split them…

    The fact that they ARE seeding, they ARE spraying chemicals over our heads is no longer a theory…
    And I have “hundreds” more links if a point needs to be made, I am just trying to get past the BS of using “language” in the manner that it’s thrown around here. Let’s be real shall we? There are planes spraying harmful chemicals into our atmosphere, size makes no difference! There are governments on all levels involved in weather modification. Typically (but not always) weather modification is done by plane, sometimes ion cannons, but primarily by planes. We are seeing the benefits of this in the form of precipitation, however maybe like the downwinders, no one will know the damage being done until it irreversible. Maybe if we united to get the REAL story we as a society would be better off instead of calling names over the language of “contrails or chemtrails”. I can’t believe we have become so insensitive!

  40. I’d say if has chemicals that are not normally found in jet exhaust (or not in that quantity), and that those chemicals were deliberately added, then it’s a chemtrail.

    Cloud seeding though is not chemtrails. It’s something that is done to clouds, at low altitude, from small planes, and does not leave a trail.

  41. Ross Marsden says:

    Chris said, “There are planes spraying harmful chemicals into our atmosphere, size makes no difference!”

    There are vehicles on the ground and at sea doing this as well. Also chimneys, and other vents of various types associated with industrial processes.
    Will you lump these in with the aircraft. Teir pollutants are a lot more “available” to us that 7 miles up in the atmosphere.

  42. cloudspotter says:

    Chris, the exhaust gases are the same if the plane is taxiing or cruising 7 miles up. The reason you can see the trails when it’s 7 miles up is because the water vapour in the exhaust freezes. You still don’t see the rest of the exhaust constituents.

  43. Chris says:

    Ross, that is like saying if your friend jumped off the cliff you should… WHAT? Just because there are other pollutants out there means we are OK to add more? Especially when it’s being hidden to some extent????? The reality is everything you ask about has some govt regulated oversite (EPA or something). These programs have no transparancy, no control, no oversight… SHIT NO ONE WILL EVEN ADMIT IT’S HAPPENING… so I’m not waiting to become a “downwinder” sick and dying after the testing process and “hope” they take care of my family since I can’t even trust them to be honest. There are no “chemtrail” projects… who cares who admits to what and where they are spraying chemicals over my head cause well we don’t believe they would do it… I BELIEVE ANYONE IN THE AFTERMATH OF ANY CATASTROPHY WOULD SAY YOU ARE BEING SHEEPLE. The downwinders, how about the whole city gone because of asbestos poisoning… what about the towns that are DEAD because of fracing and the water poisoned, or maybe just maybe the eventual people who will be dealing with health issues from Silver Iodide (on the hazardous substance data bank… odd) or SF6 (also a hazardous material listed in the HSDB) and those are the 2 primary chemicals they admit using to seed… RIGHT NOT ANYTHING FOR US TO WORRY ABOUT RIGHT? If this is what they say they are doing, well I have found it’s like an ice burg, 10% above water and the rest well keep looking…. BUT HEY LETS ARGUE ABOUT CHEMTRAILS VS. CONTRAILS… seriously… I just looked through the USAF Contrail debunk manual and funny enough there is NOT 1 PICTURE THAT REPRESENTS THEY WAY THE TRAIL LOOKS TODAY… NOT ONE. Weird, since you say they they aren’t doing it, I must believe… well I’m a very educated individual with a lot of life experience and 40 years I can tell you I DID NOT SEE ANYTHING LIKE THIS. Since this is about contrails, you are right no one has definitive proof… so just believe. I PRAY FOR THE PEOPLE IN LA who are dealing with the sink hole… no, no one is cause any unintended damage… GOOD LUCK!

  44. Strawman says:

    There is no evidence the trails are anything other airplane exhaust or the results of exhaust.

    There is no evidence anything about contrails is being hidden.

    You disagree?

    Stop accusing others of being sheeple, stop ranting, and just bring the evidence.

    Still waiting.

  45. MikeC says:

    Chris you rightly point out environmental disasters – but how many such disasters have ben caused by aircraft exhaust freezing at 30,000 feet???

    We only have so much time and energy as individuals – I think that concentrating on things we know cause problems is a better use of it than chasing clouds. Polution at ground level is a major problem in many places – pollution at 30,000 feet barel affects anyone or anything – so why not work on the one that has the most effect?

  46. Steve Funk says:

    “If ‘persistent contrails’ have existed since
    commercial aviation began, why did significant academic
    interest begin in 1996,. . .”

    Here are four scientific references to persistent contrails between 1971 and 1993.

  47. MikeC says:

    Ronin the paper is very shoddy – for example it quotes the existence of military weather forecasting as proof of chemtrails and describes HAARP as a Laser.

    It quotes extensively from the paper “Owning the Weather” as if it was a scientific or policy paper rather than a thought experiment as part of a course of study, and it also pulls in known biological/chemical warfare systems for “spraying” as evidence that chemtails at 30,000 feet are something other than ice crystals – without bothering to actually show that such systems are in use, or that such materials are being sprayed.

    I’d be interested in what sort of PhD the author TJ coles is supposedly doing, and how well s/he got on with it, because if this is a sample of how Doctoral candidates at the University pf Plymouth think then I’ll be avoiding workign with any othem in the futre…..like the plague!! 🙂

    It probably deserves its own thread over at Metabunk.

  48. Kodesh says:

    First off – I like stirring the pot on issues on issues where evidence is very lacking and conspiracies like this one only linger because it is somehow tied to a other conspiracies that do have some solid evidence. At any rate, I posted your website on several Facebook chemtrail pages.

    On another note, I want to see pictures of “unmarked” planes spraying. I am not against eyewitness accounts but when a plane is 6-8 miles away I have my doubts anyone can read the tail logo and numbering. Someone needs to aim a telescope or extremely high zoom camera at these planes and take some pictures to prove they are not commercial airlines.

  49. Andrew Pring says:

    The major component of condensation trails (COTRA) is condensing water vapour from burning hydrocarbon fuels. It condenses into cloud in the same way as other cloud formations when humidity reaches 100% and as wit other cloud they will dissipate in drier air. The persistence of COTRA will depend on wind speeds, wind shear, ambient humidity, and temperature. These will vary with weather conditions and height of the aircraft.
    I spent many years reporting COTRA as a meteorological observer. I would note that seemingly blue skies often contain high level cirrus cloud (and COTRA) that only becomes apparent when the sun is low in the sky which is when most of the controversial photos are taken. Natural cirrus cloud often occurs in bands that resemble COTRA.
    I was aware of meteorological experimentation using rockets discharging silver iodide crystals to seed cloud. These were unpredictable and unreliable. If they had been successful then creating rain at will from existing cloud would have been useful in drought areas.

  50. Why are you calling them COTRA? They are called contrails.

  51. Captfitch says:

    No, COTRA. Seems cumbersome but there’s probably a 5 letter limit for phenomena and this was the best fit.

  52. Aha, sorry. Meteorology coding term. You’d think I’d know that.

  53. Skepticalofskeptics says:

    My question is,
    On days when there are a lot of contrails, why aren’t there nearly as many commercial flights?
    FAA documents air traffic publicly, and you can access that data online for free,
    or watch it in real time here: http://www.flightradar24.com/

    On the west coast of the US, there are very few commercial flights travelling east-west.
    While the majority are north-south, and some can be correlated to commercial traffic, the majority can not… If not commerical traffic, whose planes are these, and where are they going?

    And last but not least, why do these contrails seem so prevalent in remote parts of the countryside not near major airports? I thought air travel had gone out of style:

  54. There are the same number of flights, they are just a lot harder to spot when they do not leave contrails. See:

    Contrails occur when planes are at cruising altitude. When a plane is approaching or leaving an airport then it’s usually too low to leave a contrail. You still get contrails from planes passing over the airport though. You see them in “remote parts of the countryside” because that’s what plane fly over to get from city to city. See:

  55. Skepticalofskeptics says:

    Gosh, that’s a neat map, but it doesn’t really answer my question.
    Maybe I didn’t ask it correctly.

    I mean the number of contrails from aircraft does not match up with the number of commercial flights that are actually in the sky. The records don’t show that many commercial flights, and they don’t show ANY east-west flights. Occasionally a plane or two gets diverted and circles around, but there are regular east-west flights that leave contrails which I can’t find any FAA documentation for.

    Why are there more contrails than documented commercial flights?

    In the southwestern part of OR, there aren’t any regular flight paths. It’s the farthest western point of the US. On the east coast of the US, there is enough air traffic to turn the sky into a continuous lattice of contrails every day, which is disturbing on it’s own. But I’m on the West coast. Nobody flies past here to anywhere else. People fly here, leave for other places, and fly over going north-south between Los Angeles and Seattle.

    So where are all these planes coming from and going to?
    How do I find out what the local flight paths are?

  56. Steve Funk says:

    Skeptical, I’m not sure exactly what you mean by southwest Oregon, but if you are in the Medford Ashland Grants Pass area, this thread, mostly about Mount Shasta, would be the same as what you see. See in particular posts 11 and 12. There are over 100 commercial passenger flights every day on these flight lines. Nearly all of the traffic from the bay area to the northwest goes on these routes. About a third of the traffic from Southern California airports goes on these routes. (The rest follows a flight line about 70 miles east which can be seen in optimum conditions. There are also some international flights from Europe that follow these flight lines, depending on where the optimum following winds are. In Mount Shasta, about 99% of the flights and the contrails are north-south. The occasional east-west flights could be cargo planes from Reno, or transpacific flights.

  57. SoS, if you could be more precise about your location it would be helpful.

    Also, a photo of what you consider to be an East-West trail might also help.

  58. Captfitch says:

    SoS, don’t say nobody. I used to go feet wet over Oregon all the time on the way to either Alaska or Hawaii. Many, many modern planes jump off the coast in that are on the way to Asia. The funny thing is, if you imagine a flight from dallas to Japan you would picture it going over Southern California. Nope, it goes way north of that and don’t get me started on the northern pacific routes. So you would normally see lots of east west flights.

  59. Anonymous says:

    You’re a troll – a disinformation troll. Who do you work for troll? The UN?

  60. Anonymous says:

    Weather is a hedge fund now on the mercantile exchange…..Historical Fact: Henry Kissinger introduced “Owning the weather by 2025” in Congress. It’s in play. Has been for a long time. It’s done through a harmless sounding enough word, ‘Geo-engineering’. All the patents are there. Start connecting the dots.

  61. MikeC says:

    Anonymous wrote: Historical Fact: Henry Kissinger introduced “Owning the weather by 2025″ in Congress.

    Really? When did he do that? AFAIK the paper itself was written about 1995 wasn’t it – wouldn’t that be a bit late for Kissinger to do anythign with it??

  62. imhotech says:

    There is no debunking chem-trails anything to the contrary is misleading..wake up !


  63. Steve Funk says:

    Four legs good. Two legs bad.

  64. MikeC says:

    imhotech – do you really think that getting kids to repeat a conspiracy theory makes it any more valid than it was without them doing so?? Honestly??

  65. CBIncus says:

    Thank you Uncinus for posting Bogatkin’s book. I’ll try to find an older one about contrails.

    This is an observation from today. I’ve noticed this plane in the morning and checked the Flightradar24 site. The aircraft produced a spreading contrail. Here are the images:

    The Airplane
    Spreading Contrail
    Filghtradar24 Map

    Let’s look at the satellite imagery. We see some light Cirrus clouds above the central and southern parts of Moldova. So the trail coincides with the ice-saturation zone.

    Satellite Imagery

    This is an another evidence of natural origin of spreading contrails.

  66. Alex P says:

    Just came across this.. http://www.naturalnews.com/037451_chemtrails_conspiracy_theory_geoengineering.html

    I dont believe in chemtrails but this article is suggesting the swedish government admitted to their existence, any thoughts on this??

  67. Pernilla Hagberg is just a local green party council member. She’s just repeating the normal chemtrail stuff from “What In the World Are The Spraying”, etc.

Comments are closed.