Home » contrails » People Don’t Notice Contrails

People Don’t Notice Contrails

I find clouds fascinating.   If I see a lenticular cloud while driving I might nearly crash the car while straining for a better view.   I’ve only seen mammatus clouds once in my life, and stopped to try to take a photo.  I’m quite fascinated by contrails and contrail shadows, especially the “black beam” shadows that seem to extend in front of the contrail.

Yet my fascination is not shared by the general population.  When I saw the mammatus there was nobody pointing up at the sky.    Other people on the freeway were not swerving their cars, despite the impressive black beam in front of them.   Why not?

Unfortunately, the answer is rather simple: they’re just not that into clouds.

Yes, my cloud obsession is simply not shared by other people, much in the same way that I don’t understand my friends interests in certain sports, or cars, or the contestents on American Idol.   They might be similarly bemused by my lack of interest in such things.  But the point here is that most people’s interest in clouds is limited to A) is it sunny? and B) might it rain?

So it’s hardly surprising that the gradual increase in contrails over the last 30 years has gone much without comment.   Each year the sky looks pretty much the same as last year.    But then, you get some people who, for some reason, started looking at the sky with more interest, and they noticed, for the first time, that the sky sometimes gets covered by contrails that spread out into a layer of cloud.

They then sometimes slip down a slipperly illogical slope – if they had not noticed this before, then that means it was not there before, hence it just started, and hence again it must be something deliberate.   So the “chemtrail” theory is born – these persistent contrails are actually some kind of nefarious deliberate spraying by the powers that be.

You’ll note that this theory is based on one fact in the theorist’s mind: “I did not notice this before”.

So, if you did not notice something, and hence it did not exist until you noticed it, then what about all those people who have NOT yet noticed that contrails spread?  Do the contrails not spread for them?

The reality is that the vast majority of people simply don’t pay much attention to clouds, or planes in the sky. The contrails have been there all their lives, and they might as well be noticing the type of covering used on the road outside their house, or what hairstyles the newsreaders have   For most people it’s stuff that is simply there, and does not impact their lives in one way or the other.  It changes slowly over time, but day to day you don’t notice any change.

Sometimes though some people notice things that others have not, and then you can get into an argument about how things are, or were.  One such argument took place in 1971 between celebrity activist Arthur Godfrey and Senator Gordon Allott, R-Colorado,  over possible effects of the then proposed supersonic transport (the SST, a high speed plane like the Concord).

One of the concerns Godfrey raised about the SST was the possibility of excessive contrail coverage.  The problem of contrails creating clouds was well known in 1971, and Godfrey was well aware of this from personal experience.  But Senator Allott was simply a person who had never noticed these spreading contrails, and hence we get the following newspaper clipping from the March 11, 1971 Missouri Mexico Ledger: (See the 4th story across at the top: “Godfrey calls SST ‘Nonsense’“)

Metabunk 2019-02-15 08-18-33


Godfrey tangled with Sen. Gordon Allott, R-Colo., when he said present jetliners are environment hazard enough without adding SSTs to the skies. Godfrey said he’d seen, on hunting trips to the Colorado Rocky Mountains, blue skies “clouded over” by jet contrails by 9:30 in the morning.

Allott said he’d lived in Colorado all his life without ever seeing jet contrails form clouds—and said he has too much respect for the environment go go on hunting trips and shoot animals.

If a US Senator failed to notice these spreading contails spreading in 1971, is it really that surprising that people still don’t notice them now?  Or that people who believe in “chemtrails” are simple people who have only now, for whatever reason, taken an interest in the skies.

82 thoughts on “People Don’t Notice Contrails

  1. JazzRoc says:

    Yes, my cloud obsession is simply not shared by other people

    Speak for yourself. I’m just as dangerous when driving if I see a lenticular cloud.

    I have seen a line of seven lenticular clouds “bouncing” downwind from our neighbouring island of La Gomera in the Canary Islands, and there is fairly often a large lenticular cloud above Mt. Teide volcano in Tenerife (which is more-or-less overhead for everyone here).

    I have seen mammatus clouds over Hertfordshire but I’ve never seen the magnificent supercells, tornadoes, and wall clouds that you get in the southern States.

  2. Nat says:

    Nice site. I am here because friends are hyper chemtrail theorists and I promised to do some research. They claim it is the UN seeding our skies with aluminum bromide.

    I grew up on air force bases in the US in the ’50s and ’60s, so am very familiar with contrails. Dad flew C47’s for many years, so I always had my eyes in the sky. Contrails have always been persistent (or not) depending on the weather and altitude.

    One point not raised here and elsewhere: for all the junk still in our air I think our skies are much cleaner these days, especially on the east coast. I recall airline trips back east as a kid in ‘clear’ weather where I could not see the ground from the air. The haze was much thicker than today. I vividly recall contrails in North Dakota and Missouri, but not so much in upstate New York.

    As for mammatus/supercells/wall clouds: I witnessed the very deadly tornado in Kansas City, Missouri in May of 1958. That day featured just spectacularly odd shaped clouds of an odd color.

  3. alec says:

    cooooool website. i found this site because im writing an article for my high school newspaper on the recent phenomenon called “chemtrails”. although i believe there is corruption in our government and the human society, i was skeptical to draw negative conclusions about chemtrails. i have the luxery of living in hawaii where lush blue skies is the norm.
    im young, about to graduate high school, and ready to move into california, and the thought of a depopulation program of some sort is frightening, especially on a mass scale. my interest in clouds and the sky is of recent, so i can’t reference back to the early 90’s because at the time my only worries were if i could go outside and play at the park or not.
    i was wondering if you could help me understand the chemical content of contrails, and whether or not they are harmful to us.

  4. Contrails, the visible part at least, are made from ice which is formed both from the water in the exhaust, and the water in the surrounding air. It’s basically a type of cloud. If the weather is right it can last a long time.

    Aircraft exhaust is similar to car exhaust. Apart from the mostly inert nitrogen already in the air, it’s mostly water and carbon dioxide, plus some other things like soot, carbon monoxide and various chemicals. This page has a good overview:


  5. J says:

    Have you ever seen one trail disappear after about 30 seconds and the other trail stay for more than 2 hours?
    This happened from just a single plane.

  6. Yes I have. The plane is flying through different regions of air, with different humidities and/or temperatures. Quite frequently I see a segment of a contrail last for a long time, while the rest quickly fades away.

  7. J says:

    Comment #5 — Extra info

    I should have explained myself better.

    This happened in parallel, the right engines trail disappeared after 30 seconds while the left engines trail was visible for over 2 hours.

    I wish I had taken a picture but I was at work.

  8. There’s a few possible explanations for that, of varying likelihood.

    1) It was actually two planes, a low visible plane, and a high plane that was hard to see, yet left a trail.

    2) It was one plane, but the two engines each had a different power setting.

    3) Only one engine of the plane was in a humid region – unlikely, but it’s possible the plane was just skimming the side of a humid region. Think of a cloud, but invisible, is it possible for a plane to fly with one wing in a the cloud?

    4) The wake vorticies combined the two trails into one main trail, which is what you saw.

    5) Some secret program of spraying stuff is responsible for the second trail (or the first, as contrails sometime persist, whereas sprayed stuff sometimes dissipates).

    All in all, very hard to tell without photos or video.

  9. stars15k says:

    I vote for choice number 4. Occam’s razor and all.

  10. Suntour says:

    I think that chemtrail theorists don’t understand just how many commercial airplanes are passing over their heads throughout the day because they can’t see them. It is virtually impossible to see an a commercial airliner at 30,000 feet WITHOUT a contrail pointing it out.

    Take for instance this video “three chemtrail planes spraying at once” –

    The airplane in the middle plane all but disappears until the camera zooms way in on it :10 seconds in. Even then, without its initial contrail, it’s impossible to really tell what it is, as someone else mentioned, it looks like an “orb”.

    Therefore it’s my opinion that people believe their skies to be “free” of airplanes, until “spray days” when conditions are right for persistent contrails. At that point it feels like they’re under attack by all those airplanes over their heads.

  11. J says:

    I also live very close to Person Airport in Toronto, Ontario.

    Around 10km away, so I see many low flying airplanes, makes for some very interesting views.

    Thank you for your time.

  12. bybs says:

    Well now that we have noticed, we don’t like it. I don’t want my blue sky turned to a haze of criss-crossed bullshit-fake clouds because some ADHD pilots just can’t stop zipping around the sky, doing who-knows-what for who-knows whom. Find a technology that doesn’t fucking trash the world, destroy the beauty of nature (which belongs to all) and ruin my view, or fucking step down bitches! And unlike you I wouldn’t be surprised if the military was spraying some form of chemicals on us, I mean have you looked at human history? Do you see the bullshit which those in control always seem to get into, and how little they care about you or I? Remember Agent Orange? Or was that just Kool Aid they were dumping on the Vietnamese? And do you think that Fluoride in your water is really for your teeth? You my friend, under your veneer of scientific rationality, are actually dangerously naive.

  13. Shilltastic says:

    The pilots are going from point A to point B. I KNOW you “think” they are turning around and creating patterns in the sky just to annoy you, but you are wrong. And your house blocks my view of the nature under it. Please tear it down! See how ridiculous that is?!? And since there is ZERO evidence to support any claim that anyone is spraying anything, there is no reason to believe there is any such thing. Unless, of course, you buy into the paranoid rantings so prevalent on youtube and other sites dedicated to hoax BS. And comparing “Agent Orange” to the trails in the sky is like comparing apples and elephants I know you don’t agree…that’s OK. I don’t agree with your either. I may be “dangerously naive” but that’s better than pathetically paranoid ANY day of the week.


    > And your house blocks my view of the nature under it. Please tear it down! See how ridiculous that is?!?
    Yes, QUITE! I own my house and the nature under it, you and the persistent contrail leavers on the other hand DO NOT own the sky. F’ing ridiculous analogy.

    > And since there is ZERO evidence to support any claim that anyone is spraying anything, there is no reason to believe there is any such thing.
    Clearly you have chosen to disregard the actual evidence that does exist as seen in the special aired on Discovery channel and many other independent analyses of persistent contrails and their fallout. There are spray days and non-spray days. You will allege that the difference is merely atmospheric when in fact those of us making observations have noted that the persistent contrail leavers aren’t even in the air on non-spray days.

    > I may be “dangerously naive” but that’s better than pathetically paranoid ANY day of the week.
    Sure, but not nearly as good as open-minded and observant of all sources of information, no matter how contrary to one’s own world view. I love clouds too, just not the linear unattractive man made ones.

  15. SR1419 says:

    chosen to disregard the actual evidence that does exist as seen in the special aired on Discovery channel and many other independent analyses of persistent contrails and their fallout. There are spray days and non-spray days. You will allege that the difference is merely atmospheric when in fact those of us making observations have noted that the persistent contrail leavers aren’t even in the air on non-spray days.


    the only “evidence” of supposed “chemtrails” is that they persist and contrails supposedly don’t. There has not been single sample of contrail- an actual sample of contrail- that has shows to contain anything other than would be expected in jet exhaust.

    Asserting that a “sample” taken from the ground is from a contrail is simply not logical. It is without scientific precedent and should not be considered “evidence”.

    Can you provide any source material for these “many other independent analysis “- please tell me you have more than will thomas or carnicon…

    If contrails actually do persist…then how do you know there are “spray” days and non-“spray” days…

    “persistent contrail leavers aren’t even in the air on non-spray days.” – this doesn’t even make sense…persistent contrail “leavers” are any plane who flies thru the right atmospheric conditions…do all planes stop flying on those days?

    Please help me understand.

  16. kelly says:

    I believe the grass is a shade of green and the sky some sort of bright blue blue and that is how it supposed to be. who doesn’t enjoy a sunny day? I think there are as many different types of people as there are people. Do you really want to know what is going on? Do you want to acknowledge what is possible regardless of the consequences if it feels sickly or makes your stomach turn or you feel an absolute will to never be misled because you will always seek the truth whenever it may be. THe ones responsible will be….He will destroy those that destroy the earth…. believe it or not..and yes there appears to be something sinister going on…Dumb your self down if you want because people are easily misled OR seek and you will find and seek and ye will find and may those that are chosen be given unwavering faith to endure until it is finished and yes it is easter and there is one whom you should fear ….. Good day and Have an amazing time….

  17. captfitch says:

    I don’t worry too much about the individuals who write posts like the above for a couple reasons. Primarily they are so far gone that would be fence-sitters can easily dismiss them. Secondly, thier views are so off the wall that I’m confident they won’t take any action. I fear the individual who has a firm grasp on reality but also is prone to conspiracy, which along with being fun to believe in, can also be a fun hobby to devote time to.

  18. kelly says:

    Hi Everyone ……This reminds me of an experiment that was performed to see the effects of peer pressure and to see it was truly amazing. The participants are lead into a classroom the pretense I don’t recall. There was somewhere between 6-10 people and a person of authority dressed in a white uniform. Then after the rules of engagement are explained the show begins. In one test the volunteers are shown on paper 4 lines of which all are clearly different lengths with 2 being closer in length but still with out a doubt 1 is longer than the other. The test subjects are asked one by one which line is the longest a,b,c,or d and one by one they dismiss the longest line and choose the shorter line until its williams turn ( that may or may not be his name but I like William) and William says with a confident voice c. The participants are asked once again one by one which line is longer and to Williams dismay each one says the shorter line b. The process continues again around the seated circle and stops with William he again says c and with the look on his face you can feel his dismay. He is truly perplexed because c is clearly without question the longest line…This same scenario continues on and on until william seems to just give in he finds it easier to just go along and even starts to actually have doubt. Seriously by repetition and the desire to fit in William actually changed his answer to b ! Yes it did happen look it up…Oh yes did I mention they were all (except William) instructed to give the wrong answer….He changed his answer that he new was absolutely right by peer pressure within 10 minutes ..please be informed …what harm does it do to error on the side of caution??

  19. JazzRoc says:

    What harm does it do to err on the side of caution?

    Quite a lot. Even responding to such a request is an error.

    You wouldn’t be asking the question if you hadn’t in the first place “erred on the side of” – ignorance, from which you drawn a full set of wrong conclusions.

    Planes have to produce water because they burn a hydrocarbon fuel. This water must appear in the air behind the plane, and does – as ice crystals. If the air were perfectly dry up there, ALL the trail ice would sublime into water vapor up there.

    But it isn’t. It already contains a measure of water vapor within it – typically something in the order of 70% of its maximum capacity. The air may only accept either all of the ice crystal trail, part of it, or none of it, depending on its ambient humidity, the state of which is not visible from the ground. All degrees of humidity are equally invisible to an onlooker. Large trails are possibly purer than your tapwater because they have pure water vapor ADDED TO THEM by a factor of up to ten thousand times.

    All these facts have been known for nearly a hundred years and are freely available on the Web. Hundreds of studies are available. ALL the facts are known, ALL the tests have been made.

    You will NEVER find them until you EXCLUDE the words CHEMTRAIL and AEROSOL (for instance) from your search.

    Until you do, you will be in the following scenario: you’re a schoolchild going to science class, but you can’t hear the teacher because there are blindfolded students with megaphones telling you teacher is a liar. They are wearing pointed hats with a “D” on them.

    What does the D stand for?

  20. kelly says:

    Hmmm… not so much ….. I do recall a time though when I thought I knew the facts or rather like everyone else does- told myself what I wanted to hear and then went on to discover that my actions set me back physically for months.. all is better now though.Thanks. yes it may be true now that figures never lie but liars may often figure. contrails/chemtrails may be explained various ways. I do not know why they are present but they are in the sky every single day all winter long every single day. It may start out sunny or clear overhead but still hazy in the distance but you can count on it becoming overcast and staying that way for the remainder of the day. The first time I noticed was about 5 years ago. It was a cold and crisp January morning sunny and clear not a cloud to be seen. When a jet flew overhead leaving a white trail that extended from one end of the sky to the other within a short time another flew overhead leaving the same trail. Looking back this is the first time I can say that I witnessed a contrail/chemtrail. Now the tails did’t go away instead they just hung there puffing up and expanding.They were there 20 to 30 minutes? So I started to take notice. I mentioned to a coworker and he said it was cold out. Huuhh? Having to get back to work i couldn’t stand there and continue to watch. As I was growing up I wanted to be a pilot I would spend much time watching the skys. I hadn’t witnessed anything like it before. I didn’t think to much of it and I’m skeptical by nature. What a shame. At that time I knew there was information out there on contrails/chemtrails but I hadn’t made any inquiries. It took me until this winter 5 years later to gather information. After day after day after day waiting to to see a sunny clear day or a day with cotton ball clouds I told myself wake up! YES the sky is overcast and dreary. This is not the sky I grew up with. As i watch these trails left behind that don’t go away and that just hang there. They are not what was normal in times past. Yes I will consider it in my best interest to conclude that there is something fishy going on. Considering what I know about history I think that would be wise. Go ahead just quietly say it to your self …is it possible.. how exciting it would be and proceed with the assumption that something unusual is happening now. I will admit I make mistakes I’m human.

  21. captfitch says:

    Go ahead just quietly say it to your self …is it possible.. how exciting it would be and proceed with the assumption that something unusual is happening now.

    I think this is half the problem with the chemtrail beleivers- or many conspiracy theorists for that matter. It IS fun to believe in these types of things for several reasons. It’s fun to try and put together the clues, it’s fun to notice the phenomena, and it’s fun to think that you’re on the “inside” of some plan. On the other hand it’s not so much fun or exciting just recognizing the truth. Plus it’s much more complex and dry with virtually no mystery or intrigue.

    Why don’t you look for the real reasons behind these trails. I know it won’t be as much fun but once you start seeing the patterns and the reasons they exist it will be quite clear that no one is doing anything malicious.

    I’m reminded of a line in a song:

    “at age seven he imagined the moon overhead followed him. By nine he had deciphered the illusion, trading magic for fact. No trade backs. So this is what it’s like to be an adult.”

  22. JazzRoc says:


    I do recall a time though when I thought I knew the facts, or, rather like everyone else does – told myself what I wanted to hear and then went on to discover that my actions set me back physically for months. All is better now though, thanks.

    Whoa, there. You’ve a tendency, and you haven’t lost it at all.

    You would do better to take the step offered you. Learn the facts that prove that chemtrails are a myth, and move on to something more useful – like discovering a real conspiracy somewhere, or finding out the true causes of pollution in your environment.

    You wouldn’t want yourself to be found acting as a passive support to people who, using “chemtrails” as their ruse, actually ARE posting mendacious disinformation, advocating fake potions and artefacts, and/or armed militias dedicated to the overthrow of your government, would you?

    If you don’t take this advice you WILL repeat the above mistake.

  23. Ryan says:

    You’ve only seen mammatus clouds once?! I see them fairly often. Nobody taught me about them in school. I heard that they always existed, but old cameras were not advanced enough to capture a picture. Riiiight.

  24. Probably depends on where you live and the weather you get there. We only get about four big storms a year here, and they are generally the big rolling “storm system” kind, and I’ve never seen a big isolated cumulonimbus in Los Angeles.

    I’m sure there were several mammatus clouds that I missed.

  25. Actually I think there is something to the “old camera” not being advanced enough – but it’s more film vs. digital. Really it’s all about contrast. The fancy pictures you see have all been enhanced digitally. Like the top resulst here:


    Before digital you had to be very lucky with the light to get a good photo of them. If you go in a few pages on Flickr, you get less interesting photos


  26. SR1419 says:

    I saw them fairly often as a child growing up in MN in the 70s- Every summer was an amazing show of weather as huge storms would blow up to the west of us and coming rolling in with a fury…and then blow past revealing their aftermath on the ground and in the sky.

    …the mammatus clouds were always very memorable as we called them the “egg-carton” clouds…

  27. none says:

    I saw an array of evenly spaced contrails spanning all the way across the sky (kansas city) I could tell it was deliberate. that was the Wednesday before Thanksgiving-by that Friday almost everyone I knew had the stomach flu, including myself. The morning of these contrails the ground was wet like a spring morning, and it was unusually warm for the season.(i could also smell something but could not finger what it was. Don’t care what you say-Normal aircraft activity never produces an array of evenly spaced contrails, this was seeding something.

  28. You’d think if everyone in Kansas City had “stomach flu”, then thousands of immunocompromised people would have died that day and It would have made the news.

    Perhaps it’s was just a bad item of food that a lot of people you knew happened to have some of on Thanksgiving. Undercooked turkey maybe?

    Normal aircraft activity means flying the same routes, often at fairly regular intervals. The wind blows this sideways, and with just 4-5 flights, you have a “grid”

  29. TheFactsMatter says:

    “I could tell it was deliberate.”

    Could you please explain how you could tell it was deliberate?

    ” Don’t care what you say-Normal aircraft activity never produces an array of evenly spaced contrails, this was seeding something.”

    It happens all the time…when the atmospheric conditions are correct. It’s a perfectly normal, predictable and very well understood occurrence.

  30. Ben says:

    flights in the U.S. are on the decline. I’ve seen it mentioned about 100 times on this site that, “more flights equals more contrails.” This would seem to contradict that notion. I’ve also heard it stated that the obsession with “chemtrails” is due to conspiracy websites, the same contrails were “there the whole time’ and so on and do forth. Maybe somebody should do a test and make up a “new’ conspiracy based on a very obvious and often occuring phenomenon. Start some scary websites and see if you can get some traction. Maybe put it out there that the wind is strange now. Put the suggestion out that wind didn’t used to be this way. See if you get peopel to bite. After all, they are just paranoid and you should have no trouble whipping them into a frenzy. I will once again, call on anybody to produce video showing the typed of contrails we see on a daily basis now from the 1960’s—-1980’s. The pics on this site that claim to be of “persistent” chemtrails are only nillisecond snaps of time. Every photograph shows us something “persistent’ since they are frozen in time. I want moving pictures, criss-cross patterns and the like. Thanks

  31. MikeC says:

    Flights in the USA have decreased recently – but the long term trend is very much an increase – eg see http://www.ntsb.gov/aviation/Table2.htm – this is a table showing accident rates, but it shows the number of hours flown by large jets in the US annually from 1990-2009.

    In 1990 it was 12.15 million hours.

    In 2009 it was 18.01 million. Clse enough to a 50% increase in 20 years.

    there was a dip in 2001-03, and another in 2008-09 – it was 19.637 million hours in 2007.

    Why should thruthers have to show that chemtrails don’t exist when hoaxers can’t show that they do exist? where’s a single air sample from a “chemtrail” showing it’s chemical composition? Why is it shuch a problem to get up there and get a jarful of air?

  32. Show me a video of cirrus clouds from the 1960s-1980s. There’s just not a lot of videos of clouds out there. It does not mean the clouds were never there.

    Sure, there’s been a bit a dip recently in US air travel. But it’s nothing compared to the huge growth between the 1970s and the 2000s, when air travel nearly tripled.

    The growth in air travel is what helped START the idea that this was something new. Now (according to your link) the air traffic levels have simply fallen back to what they were in the late 1990s, when the “chemtrail” idea gained traction.

    And I’d disagree that the pictures don’t show persistent contrails. They clearly show contrails that have spread. For a contrail to spread, it needs to persist. Look at this from 1989:

    Clearly showing trails that have been spreading for at least 30 minutes. Or then this from 1990:

    Again those trails have been there a long time.

  33. Maybe somebody should do a test and make up a “new’ conspiracy based on a very obvious and often occuring phenomenon. Start some scary websites and see if you can get some traction. Maybe put it out there that the wind is strange now. Put the suggestion out that wind didn’t used to be this way. See if you get peopel to bite. After all, they are just paranoid and you should have no trouble whipping them into a frenzy.

    I’ve thought of doing this. But I don’t think you can simply do it with a web site – you’d need some “in” to get a critical mass moving. Chemtrails got its start via the Art Bell radio show in 1999, but had been percolating around for a while before that – with one the the earlier mentions being this in 1997:


    Art Bell pushed it, and then also Jeff Rense:


    So you can’t just put up a site – it needs to catch on somehow. I still might give it a go at some point.

    I’ve often though that sidewalk dark spots (chemspots) are a good analogous thing – quite common, but not something I specifically remember seeing before 2003.

  34. TheFactsMatter says:

    Written by Ben on November 29, 2010.

    flights in the U.S. are on the decline. I’ve seen it mentioned about 100 times on this site that, “more flights equals more contrails.”

    How about more flights over a specific area than there were however many years ago? Routes change as more efficient ways to manage them are figured out. Some areas that had little high altitude traffic over them in the 80’s may have hundreds of more flights over it now. Where do you live? Is it possible? Would you agree that it’s at LEAST possible?

    Not only more efficient routes, but hundreds of airports have been added over the last 20 years. More airports means areas that had no (literally…NONE!!!) traffic in the 70’s and 80’s have MUCH more now. Also, with online shopping, there are many times more planes flying freight than there were 15 years ago. This whole thing is just so ridiculous.

    “The pics on this site that claim to be of “persistent” chemtrails are only nillisecond snaps of time. Every photograph shows us something “persistent’ since they are frozen in time. I want moving pictures, criss-cross patterns and the like. Thanks”

    Watch any “chemtrail” video on the internet and you’ll see persistent contrails behaving as they have since the first airplane encountered the conditions necessary for persistent contrail creation. Just because the people call the trails in those videos “chemtrails, doesn’t make it so! I see NO evidence that anything from these trails has EVER been collected at ground level. Feel free to prove to me that anything found in our air, soil or in our water has come from the trails in the sky. That would be a neat trick! Just because we don’t have an old video of such an occurrence, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. I know I saw these trails with my very own eyes when I was a very small boy. there is no way you can convince me that I didn’t. There were less of them, no doubt about that.

  35. Search flickr, prior to 2003 for sidewalk gum, result 1 photo, of actual gum:


    Search AFTER 2003, and there are THOUSANDS of photo, some of gum, but most of the black chemspots:


    What happened in 2003? Don’t tell me there was a huge increase in gum eating in 2003, and people just did not notice the spots before. And why is the “gum” black? Our innate intelligence and life experience tells us that gum is white, or some bright color.

    These are chemspots!

  36. Time lapse video of chemspots. Look at the iridescent sheen. It’s not natural.


    Nobody made “gum” art until now. What’s changed?


  37. “Scientists” tell us that the chemspots are just normal discarded gum, that has gone black over time. Well, that’s patantly false. Gum does NOT go black over time. As PROVED by the Seattle gum wall, where gum has been stuck to the wall for DECADES and is still brightly white or colored. NOT BLACK.


  38. MikeC says:

    Sorry dude – you can’t call them Chemspots – that word is a trademark for an existing conspiracy – http://www.trademarkia.com/chemspots-85154206.html

  39. Yes, by Accelrys, who make “various molecular modeling and simulation software”.

    Which is used for……



    Clearly it’s some kind of pharmacophore or a type of geometric hash, a drug delivery system, no doubt the outgrowth of MK-ULTRA, etc. Keeping the populating in check, or maybe delivering some kind of killer vaccine. This is just the type of thing they have done before.

  40. Ben says:

    I like this site, it’s crazy how fast i got multiple responses, some humorous, in literally just a few hours. And honestly, I’m not sold on contrails being chemicals,but the sky has many,many more persistent contrails than it used to. But,In the same way I can’t prove anybody DID see the same phenomenon in the 70’s or 80’s, nobody will be able to convince me that what I’m seeing is now the exact same thingas when i was a boy. I have an amazing memory BTW. I was the nerd always watching clouds, looking for birds ect. I remember following the contrails with my eyes and watching them dissipate until the plane was out of site. The idea that there is not at least a few incidental, or even accidental videos from years past that mirror what we see today almost daily doesn’t really make sense to me. People have metnioned various scenes in movies as having had persistent contrails. IT would be nice to see a collection of those clips. But, movie scenes don’t last very long either. What about air shows in the past? UFO videos? Ther has got to be something somewhere. You should put it out that you are looking for these types of videos.
    Also, the fact that many geo-engineers are on the circuit now talking about doing this very thing only fans the flames. If it is business as usual with the government, they DO first and then ASK or TELL us afterwards. Has anybody solved the issue of global dimming and the relationship to contrails. Like i said earlier, the traffic in the sky blots out the sun regularly where i live, and it sucks

  41. I remember following the contrails with my eyes and watching them dissipate until the plane was out of site.

    But how many times? Maybe you spend a few idle weeks one summer watching the skies, and those weeks happend to only have short contrails, and then your attention shifted to other things as you grew up, but that one hot summer became fixed in your mind, the idealized skywatching summer, the representational summer of all your childhood summers, blotting out all other memories.

    Think of other things you remember from childhood – like riding your bike – do you remember ten distinct years of childhood bike riding, or is it dominated by a few particularly memorable seasons?

    There are reasons you might not remember something other than “it never happened”. You’ve forgotten a lot in your life.

  42. No, nobody has solved the issue of global dimming and contrails. But the thinking is:


    It is thought that global dimming is probably due to the increased presence of aerosol particles in the atmosphere caused by human action.[2] Aerosols and other particulates absorb solar energy and reflect sunlight back into space. The pollutants can also become nuclei for cloud droplets. Water droplets in clouds coalesce around the particles.[3] Increased pollution causes more particulates and thereby creates clouds consisting of a greater number of smaller droplets (that is, the same amount of water is spread over more droplets).

    The precise effect of contrails in this is still uncertain. But I’d worry more about the ground based pollution sources.

  43. Ben says:

    I think i understand where you are going with the memory thing but we are talking about the sky here. The “cap’ on our world. The very thing that caused the indigenous peoples to worship the gods (stars) and ponder their place in the universe. The stuff of poetry,legend and lore. The sky is possibly the single most romantic notion and our only avenue off this planet. Think of how many references to clouds, sky and trees you find in song and poetry. I’m glad you brought up bicycle memories, it caused me to recollect and I remembered dozens of them I hadn’t thought about in years as if by some magic trigger. You are dealing with person here who literally remembers where i was when i heard every single song i have ever heard. If you are correct, we simply did not have enough contrails in Green Bay, WI for me to have noticed. I would have, and i would have remembered. Feel like tackling the global dimming issue? This should be front and center on this site.

  44. Ben says:

    looks like you put something up on it while i was typing…..I don’t much like Wikepedia, truth be told. I find it to be political in it’s motivations. I’ll read this though

  45. MikeC says:

    In these parts it definitely is not business as usual for the Govt to do first and talk later.

    According to wiki dimming aerosols in the atmosphere have been decreasing since Mt Pinotubo – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_dimming#Recent_reversal_of_the_trend

    So the correlation between contrails and dimming is that contrails are increasing and dimming is decreasing!

    Not that one causes or is in anyway related to the other – but that usually doesn’t bother the hoaxers – the mere fact that they occur in the same time frame is usually considered enough!

    Persisteant contrails being blown in the wind are visible in this 1941 Pathe newsreel at about 20 seconds in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuDN4WNwmJ4&feature=related

    Or this 1944 US newsreel from the Battle of the Bulge – there’s X’s here! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q48AEDwFBoY&NR=1

  46. Ben says:

    ummm….The first video doesn not look anything like what i witness on a daily basis. Also, the film is cut and the formation changes. In regards to the second video, certainly war planes flying in tight formation could leave grid like or VERY straight line patterns, but for how long? The poster of this video felt it necessary to slow the flim down to make the point. And anyway, were the engines in these 1940’s planes much dirtier in terms of exhaust? I can show you an 88′ Plymouth Reliant K car with a chemtrail like you’ve never seen! The idea of possibly connecting global dimming and contrails is certainly relevent. Even the Wikepedia page on Dimming chose to put a picture of jet contrails.Persistent contrails blot out a certain amount light reaching our planet like anything else that hangs in the air.

  47. MikeC says:

    Why would you expect it to be the same? this is 1941 England – the contrails are probably combat a/c manouvring, not commercial jets flying nice straight routes.

    You noted in a previous post that contrails are only incidental in old footage – yep – so this is what you get from it being incidental – it is not a study of contrails!

    the 1944 one shows X’s – which is aircraft generating contrails at angles to each other – that there are multiple contrails in each from a formation is irrelevant as far as I can see – what is relevant is:

    1/ there are contrails in the 1940’s that are persistant (which you can tell by how long they are!)
    2/ they are odd shapes, including X’s
    3/ thus blowing appart the idea that this is something new.

    Dirt has nothing to do with contrails – they are water vapour. The petrol burned in WW2 piston engines generates water vapour as a by product of combustion just as the kerosene burned in jet engines does – only the jet exhaust is much hotter.

    Smokey exhausts are not contrails – whether from your car or an engine. But yes cars do produce contrails at ground level if it is cold enough, as do some industrial processes and people – just look up “alaska ice fog”.

    Did you read what I wrote about dimming?? There is LESS dimming now viz say 1990, even accounting for Pinatubo. So the only time-series relationship between dimming and contrails is that more contrails coincides with LESS dimming.

    So if there is any effect from contrails that increases dimming it is being significantly outweighed by decreases in dimming due to other factors.

  48. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    Unfortunately not a film, but this picture shows the sky as similar to what we witness these days. From 1958 -> http://www.life.com/image/50575971

    This photo’s quite good too. From 1952 -> http://www.life.com/image/50652824

  49. SR1419 says:


    here is a video from 1959- its not a “grid” nor do they focus on it for a long time- but it is a trail that is not dissipating. If you filmed it today and called it a “chemtrail” you would have lots of people nodding their head in agreement. watch it at 1:40


    and again on this one at 7:30


    moreover- there are a ton of current vids from the cockpits of planes that clearly show commercial planes leaving persistent contrails such as these:




  50. SR1419 says:

    I have always been fond of this picture from 1983:


  51. Ben says:

    @SR1419, the first two movie pics do not last long enough to be conclusive. Although, in the second one, right towards the end, the contrail starts to fade already. The second batch are not very long either and are very high above the cumulus clouds would would likely not be seen too well from the ground anyway. I don’t know that anybody back then would have had cause to train a camera on the sky long enough to show what I’m talking about. Surely somebdy must have done a time lapse time shoot somewhere in these decades. What’s more beautiful than that?
    @mymatesbrainwashed, The “Life” pictures look like clouds. I;ve been reading up and looking at lots of cloud pictures, found a bunch of old ones at the library that show clouds of this nature, can’t remember the name of that type. I’m not saying that clouds cannot look like contrails and vice versa. What i am saying is…3 times a week i watch planes go in every direction starting very early in the AMand watch until the contrails completely cover the sky into a silvery,frosty haze. IF it’s just regular planes,spreading regular old contrails, I’m still pissed. It sucks. I almost never see the big, white,fluffy cumulus clouds anymore. Back this summer in WI i saw them a few times, I almost broke down and cried they were so pretty. Here are some pics i took the other day in philly. A bunch of people were looking up at these and i started asking old men and ladies it they remembered the sky looking like this growing up…all of them said they thought this type of contrail display was new…..maybe they are

  52. Ben says:

    If this type of sky was around when i was growing up, i missed out on alot of living!

  53. Ben says:

    hmmm……my pics upload and appear on the page befor posting “leave comment” and then they don’t post to the site. Am I retarded?

  54. TheFactsMatter says:

    “IF it’s just regular planes,spreading regular old contrails, I’m still pissed. It sucks.”
    I can’t say that I blame you. No one should be able to discolor our sky like that. What i did long ago was learn to appreciate the trails and how beautiful they could look in certain conditions. to some it is certainly a sort of visual pollution…just as there are some faces that i don’t want to look at…or crap in the neighbors yard that is unsightly.
    I also have a deep appreciation and admiration for anything to do with aviation.
    My suggestion is to arm yourself with knowledge, as you are obviously attempting to do, and USE your government the way it is meant to be used. Try to spread the word that “they” shouldn’t be allowed to blot out the sun/blue sky and that they need to respect the wishes of the folks on the ground. Get enough people to complain about it and they’ll have no choice to implement policy to avoid contrails. But, at what price? If the pilots need to fly around/over/under areas where the conditions are conducive to persistent contrail creation, then it will require more fuel, time, money and contribute more CO2 to the atmosphere, as well as some other exhaust ‘chemicals”. Not to mention the nightmare of constantly correcting altitude in areas of heavy traffic, just because people don’t want to see man made clouds. To stop persistent contrails completely would result in some scary airplane rides.
    My point is, you DO have a way of fighting this. But, spreading the chemtrail hoax as a fact doesn’t help the cause. In fact, if people associate the trails in the sky with “conspiracy theorists” and “nutters”, it just gives them that much more incentive to ignore the trails altogether. “The people” would be better served to fight the trails as what they are, persistent contrails, and then maybe they’d be taken seriously.

  55. Sorry about the pics. I was trying a new feature. I’ve rescued on of the pics you uploaded.

    I think that what you are experience is a combination of the trails being more frequent, and you simply noticing them more, now your attention has been drawn to them. There’s plenty of evidence that these things happened before. They have been described as a “common sight” back in the 1970s.

    But look at people around you now. Hardly anyone looks up at the sky and wonders what these things are. If you stop them and ask them if they remember it being like this, then they may well tell you that they don’t remember. But that’s because they never gave it much thought 20 years ago.

    If you look back at old photos, you DO see skies like that (if taken in a region with flyover traffic). If you take the number of photos taken into account, there’s really not that dramatic a difference in the number of contrails that just happen to show up in random snapshots.

  56. I almost never see the big, white,fluffy cumulus clouds anymore.

    Except for three days ago:


    Your photo is in Philadelphia, looking due west. So the planes are flying the SW-NE route. Looking at the map, Philadelphia is right between New York and Washington DC, so that’s exactly where you’d expect to see a lot of traffic leaving contrail in that direction.

    And when looking at the weather, it helps to look at the big picture. Check out the daily satellite photo for your area:


    Now keep clicking on “Prev”, watch the date. Go though a few months.

  57. kelly says:

    let the filthy be filthy still,… this is for one in a thousand. let your friend know something is going on

  58. nick says:

    I tend to look for halos. However, before I knew they even existed, or whem I didn’t bother to look for them I NEVER saw them. Now I am an avid observer and see usually over 15 a month! I don’t think the illogical idea that they may have spontaneously started appearing a year ago.

  59. JV says:

    How come the planes that spray the trails that last long are mostly unmarked white planes?

  60. Danny55 says:

    Any photos JV?

  61. Jay Reynolds says:

    Most planes are white, generally. This fellow identifies 42 planes by type, owner, destination, speed and altitude. He thought they were “chemtrails”, evidence of spraying, but what he has found evidence of is actually the ordinary variation in contrail persistence of commercial jets. Since he stopped after a few months, I think he figured that out.

  62. And most planes appear “unmarked” if sufficiently far away. Generally they seem windowless as well, as the windows are very small. Upon closer inspection the identity of the plane is always revealed.

  63. SR1419 says:

    Its also something consider that in this day and age of fiscal frugality that airlines are increasing limiting the colors on their planes to reduce maintenance costs…:


  64. Jay Reynolds says:

    It is possible to get very clear photos showing the details of aircraft maing contrails. The “Holy Grail”, actually identifying the unknown planes by registration number, would put an end to the chemtrails conundrum, “WHO In The World Is Spraying”.

    Here is how to do it:

  65. MikeC says:

    One airline is bucking the trend for white a/c 🙂 – http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/new-zealand/6212827/Air-NZ-goes-all-black-again

  66. I’m 82 and when I was a kid we looked up at the sky a lot. Also I’m a walker, with or without a dog.
    I agree with the person who said “I almost never see the big, white,fluffy cumulus clouds anymore.”
    Also I saw this last fall: five planes simultaneously criss-crossing the sky, pulling white trails that hazed out. Within less than an hour, an entirely blue sky day had turned into an entirely clouded over day. One plane was still working in the one small patch of blue sky left.
    I could see the planes so they weren’t six miles up.
    This is in a small city in a rural state and 30 miles from an airport of any size.
    I’m agnostic about what these trails are but the official explain-away doesn’t work.

  67. Coralie,

    Lots of people DO remember the trails. I trust you when you say you don’t – but maybe there are other reasons for you noticing them now?

    You can see planes at six miles up, planes are pretty big.

    Living 30 miles from an airport does not affect the contrails you see – it’s the flyover traffic that leaves contrails, not local traffic. Have a look at your region on FlightRadar24, there’s a LOT of planes going over every little corner of the US

  68. “Lots of people DO remember the trails. I trust you when you say you don’t .”
    I don’t think that’s what I said in my post.
    Of course I don’t remember them from the ’30s and ’40s! No jets up there then.
    I do remember seeing short contrails in the past, not these things that go totally across the sky and criss-cross each other.
    They are easier to see if you live in high apartments, or where there aren’t a lot of big trees.
    Several people have told me that today was a very big day for “chemtrails” around here. Unfortunately, I was stuck inside most of the day and missed it.
    What sort of air traffic is it that constantly crosses back and forth in the same brief period of time?

  69. By “the trails” that people remembered, I mean the long persistent trails that some people now are saying are “chemtrails”.

    Lots of people remember those trails from back in the 60’s and 70’s, and there are lots of old photos of those trails.

    Air traffic that crosses back an forth could simply be planes going in opposite directions, or it could (occasionally) be planes in racetrack holding patterns.

    Have a look around here. Many of your questions might already be answered.


  70. Jay Reynolds says:

    Would you tell us which city and state. Even town exactly like your lie under very busy flight paths, even places where nobody lives are under flight paths. Have a look at this short youtube video and find your location. You may be able to see what sort of traffic you could expect to see over 24 hours:

  71. Anonymous says:

    Coralie wrote:
    “Of course I don’t remember them from the ’30s and ’40s! No jets up there then.”

    Piston engined aitcraft can make contails too – hence the large clouds formed by bombers ofver Germany in WW2 – and also over England as they formed up their positions.

    Here’s a WW2 film showing that – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CVdslTXRys

    And an article from the discussing the effect of bomber contrails on temperatures over England – http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2011/07/did-colossal-wwii-bombing-raids-alter.html

    Here’s a modern video of 2 P-51 Mustangs making contrails – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFYzHfjTGtk

  72. I watched the film or animation of the 2 P-51 Mustangs, but since it didn’t show the whole sky it was impossible to determine how long or persistent were the contrails.
    Regardless of what was happening in WWII, I wasn’t seeing this stuff back then when my little buddies and I looked up at the clouds and imagined what shapes they reminded us of. Back when there were more cumulus clouds, like you see in old landscape paintings.
    The Jay Reynolds site makes more sense than FlightRadar24, which doesn’t seem to be very navigable.
    Still, questions remain.
    Much of that traffic may be small private planes, not jets.
    If there is so much traffic up there all the time, how come it is seldom visible except when several planes are criss-crossing paths for several hours and leaving persistent trails?
    You say I could see a plane 6 miles up. The largest possible planes, Jumbo Jets, are about 247′ x 65′ high. One would only see the length from the ground. I live about 6 miles from the next town over and doubt that I could see a building 250 ft. long from here (if there weren’t thousands of other buildings in the way).

  73. Planes are most noticeable when they leave contrails. If they don’t then “empty field myopia” maks it hard to spot them. See:


    So you’ll see a lot more planes when conditions are right for contrails. If there is two-way traffic (which there usually is), then it can look like a few numer of planes going back and forth. But really they are just passing over a region of the sky and leave a contrail in that region.

    Regarding seeing planes six miles away – the Statue of Liberty is 305 feet high (ground to torch). The statue itself (the green bit) is only 150 feet high. Five miles from the statue is the Empire State building. So the size of the metal (green) part of the statue viewed from the Empire State Building is about in the ballpark. A lot clearer though, as there’s much less particulates when you look straight up.

  74. Another way of looking at it, if you want to see what a 250 foot long plane looks like at 6 miles, we can convert the six miles to six feet by dividing by 5280 (as there are 5280 feet in a mile), so 250/5280 = 0.047 feet at six feet, or 0.56 inches. So it’s the same as seeing something half an inch high, six feet away from you.

    Or, since a penny is 3/4 on an inch, it’s the same as seeing a penny that’s nine feet away from you. Place a penny on a sheet of paper, and place it nine feet away from you. Can you see it?

    At what distance can you no longer see the penny?

  75. You assume that we are talking about the largest jet, 250 feet, but most passenger jets are much smaller. Especially if you don’t live on a regular flight path between two big airports.
    Also, it is very hard to discover the actual distance between the Empire State Building and the Statue of Liberty. I keep running across the ridiculous figure of 800,000 feet–which would be 151 miles!
    Somewhere I have seen the figure of 6.364 kilomres, which = 3.954 miles, but was interrupted and can’t find the source again.
    So instead ww might be talking about a dime or a centavo on top of a mottled surface about 15 feet away.
    However, this is a side issue.

  76. Coralie, I measured it directly in Google Earth using the measuring tool, and it came out as 5.1 miles.

  77. “…if you want to see what a 250 foot long plane looks like at 6 miles.”
    How about a much smaller, more typical plane at 5.1 miles, with a white nose cone, against a light gray sky that is turning hazy and cloudy? That wouldn’t look like a shiny copper penny on a white piece of paper.
    I wonder whether landscape painters who have been painting for several decades see changes in the clouds?

  78. Jay Reynolds says:

    Just curious. When dd you first notice chemtrails?

  79. nigel says:

    I don’t know what they are but they are left by aircrafts and I hate them. Them deprive everyone the planet of the clear blue sky no matter where they live.

  80. Jay Reynolds says:

    All clouds have always covered up blue sky. Wait awhile, calm down, and the clouds will pass.
    Some people like clouds so much they formed the Cloud Appreciation Society.

    Frank Sinatra sang about “Blue Skies”, but Fred Astair danced in the rain.

Comments are closed.