Do contrails sometimes persist and spread out?
Yes, see the Encyclopædia Britannica article on vapour trails (contrails):
Contrail, streamer of cloud sometimes observed behind an airplane flying in clear, cold, humid air. It forms upon condensation of the water vapour produced by the combustion of fuel in the airplane engines. When the ambient relative humidity is high, the resulting ice-crystal plume may last for several hours. The trail may be distorted by the winds, and sometimes it spreads outwards to form a layer of cirrus cloud.
vapour trail. (2007). In Encyclopædia Britannica.Retrieved May 4, 2007,from Encyclopædia Britannica Online:
(The above quote is from the current EB. However, a Google books search dates the inclusion on the EB back to 1983)
Also see “A Field Guide to the Atmosphere“, by Schaefer and Day, 1981:
“Sometimes [contrails] are ephemeral and dissipate as quickly as they form; other times they persist and grow wide enough to cover a substantial portion of the sky with a sheet of cirrostratus“ (Page 137)
Are spreading contrails a relatively new thing?
No, it has been exactly the same for decades, the only change has been the size of jet engines (producing bigger contrails), engine technology (burning fuel more efficiently in high bypass jet engines creates cooler exhaust which is more likely to condense before it mixes with the surrounding air) and the amount of air traffic (producing more contrails). Spreading contrails have been mentioned consistently through the history of aviation, including in the popular press. Like Sports Illustrated , Nov 6th 1989:
Now, late in the afternoon, the hatchery explored and the fishing over for the day, Crooks points to the sky. Blue all day, it has now turned hazy. “Contrails,” he says. “The haze is caused by aircraft contrails that have gotten spread out till they cover the sky. This is a major air route from the East Coast to the West.”
For scientific discussion, see, for example, all these articles on contrails. In particular the one from 1970 titled “Airborne Observations of Contrail Effects on the Thermal Radiation Budget”
The spreading of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a familiar sight. Often, when persistent contrails exist from 25,000 to 40,000 ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge into an almost solid interlaced sheet.
[….]
Contrail development and spreading begins in the morning hours with the start of heavy jet traffic and may extend from horizon to horizon as the air traffic peaks. Fig. 1 is a typical example of midmorning contrails that occured on 17 December 1969 northwest of Boulder. By midafternoon, sky conditions had developed into those shown in Fig. 2 an almost solid contrail sheet reported to average 500 m in depth.
Airborne Observations of Contrail Effects on the Thermal Radiation Budget
Peter M. Kuhn
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 27, Issue 6 (September 1970) pp. 937–942
(Click on any of the images in this article for a larger view)
Then a few years later, in 1975, we have the article : Multiple Contrail Streamers Observed by Radar, which again has photos (taken in 1971) of spreading and persisting contrails, as well as extensive discussion of these observations.
Multiple Contrail Streamers Observed by Radar.
Konrad TG, Howard JC (1974)
Journal of Applied Meteorology:
Vol. 13, No. 5 pp. 563–572
Here’s a description from 1970, from a local newspaper, the Arcadia Tribune, April 29, 1970:
Aircraft contrails begin to streak the normally bright Arizona sky at dawn. Through the day, as air traffic peaks, these contrails gradually merge into and almost solid interlaced sheet of cirrus cloud – an artificial cirrus cloud that is frequently as much as 500 meters deep.
One of the earliest reference to contrails covering the sky is from the Mansfield News Journal, August 11, 1957, Page 29:
“Within the past few years, the weather bureau has begun to report the trails as actual cloud layers when there are sufficient trails to cover a portion of the sky.”
Here’s a description from 1955:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=SosSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=pvYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=851,1486793
An extremely persistent con trail might stay in the sky all day
But even earlier, and with a perfect description of what “chemtrail” theorist claim cannot happen comes this account from 1944:
The News, Frederick, MD, March 7, 1944
“Contrails frequently have a tendency to cause a complete overcast and cause rain. In Idaho I have seen contrails formed in a perfectly clear sky and four hours later a complete overcast resulted“
Below is the entire top of the page of that newspaper, in case you want to look it up.
And from the book “Flight To Arras” by Antoine de Saint Exupery, written in 1942 about a military mission in 1940:
The German on the ground knows us by the pearly white scarf which every plane flying at high altitude trails behind like a bridal veil. The disturbance created by our meteoric flight crystallizes the watery vapor in the atmosphere. We unwind behind us a cirrus of icicles. If the atmospheric conditions are favorable to the formation of clouds, our wake will thicken bit by bit and become an evening cloud over the countryside.
Another from 1958
Ahhh, excellent! Please post a link to the Anderson Cooper and Al Gore samples/articles (as well as the others if you have the links handy).
Thanks!
Forgot to mention that they used high powered light sources as well and were able to see alot of particulate matter.This is why I try to wear a mask when outdoors,to lower inhalation exposure.Things turning up in outdoor air samples include ionized metal particles,fibers,polymers and various molds.Its a sad and scary fact,but it seems our atmosphere is being “used” for official purposes.The ionizable metal particles(delivered by aerosols)are what allows it to be used..as a conductor.It would appear our skies are not ours anymore,but a tool of the air force.The question is,can an atmosphere modified into a “tool” support planetary life? If the increased alkalinity of soils and die-off of certain tree species is any indicator,the answer is no.
Mist precipitation is visible by flashlight at night.
It seems at odd with what you are saying that the rate of respiratory diseases has not increased significantly.
Please, if you are going to make bold claims, at least link to some evidence. If there was metal in the atmosphere then it could easily be detected. The fact is that it has not been. It’s not in the water supply either – and that’s tested tens of thousands of times a year across the country. Nobody has ever found anything like what you are talking about.
Can you link to one actual lab report that shows unusual level of the things you mention?
That is simply not true.Metal HAS been found in the atmosphere and at alarming levels.Whats more,the types of metals found like barium,aluminum,titanium,etc.seem to fit with the patent descriptions and insider testimonies of government aerosol operations and their objectives.So its no longer a question of is it happening,but what will be the long term effects on human health and the environment and what can we do to protect our lungs and bodies right now.If the public has no say in this,then we need to learn how to reduce our exposure while it goes on.I havent decided if this site is a legitimate community of skeptics or a deliberate disinformation site,but I know that the aerosol operations are real.I would provide links,but I suspect you would only attempt to discredit them.
What were the levels that were found? All the tests I’ve seen show normal levels.
I suspect you are not providing links because there are none. It hardly makes your argument hold more water if you refuse to provide any evidence for your claims.
And I presume you don’t mean this test:
https://contrailscience.com/chemtrail-non-science/
?
If you are truly interested in the truth then you need to be open to an examination of the evidence. If you are confident in what you believe and you have evidence to support it, then you shouldn’t be afraid to have it scrutinized.
Just saying it is so doesn’t make it so.
I can not believe this questioning the facts is still ongoing.
Benjamin is totally correct, we are being sprayed like bugs.
Day and night we are watching jets emitting long lines, circles and other configurations.. aerosol spray.
Sometimes, not only to cover the sky as far as the eye can see, but it even turns into whiteout.
Pharmaceutical companies are raking in a fortune, selling “Advair” alone, so people can breathe. The ionization of the atmosphere is evident, and nanotechnology is building up in our bodies.
The only thing I don’t understand is: Even those who are taking it upon themselves to spend the taxpayers money this way, have to breathe the same stuff. How do they protect themselves?
That is the only thing I don’t understand, the rest is no longer under question, but a horrendous fact.
By the way: has anyone noticed, that behind every anchor on TV there’s a screen with chemtrails? And on every add, each and every TV show. Is this to brainwash the masses to believe this is a ” normal” sky? Whatever “they” are doing, noone I know thinks this is normal, people are very aware and getting upset. Too late, of course.
check this video at the 4:25 mark. Why is the large jet leaving a trail and not the small fighters?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psdg3OAw_a8#t=4m20s
They are leaving trails. Just they are closer to the camera, so the gap looks bigger.
Indeed, notice that the left wing tip of the large plane is visually in front of the fighter in the middle.
Also keep in mind that the engines on the large jet are different than on the fighters, which does make a difference when it comes to the size and type of contrails they leave.
Those fighters are “Delta ” wing single engine ,this type of fighters are not in service with USAF since some decades ago ,probably those are Mirage 2000 french built fighters ,in Europe the only armed forces with this type of fighter are France and Greece
Just spent far too long reading all this damn stuff and I have no idea what to think … but I thought I’d say two things. I was sitting on a patio in downtown Toronto, Ontario … perhaps around 2003 … but I believe it was 2002, when I noticed a thin trail in the sky descending upon me. I’d never seen anything like this before and watched as it fell closer. I phoned a friend to see if he knew what it could be … and I THEN remembered hearing something about chemtrails … and left him a message … somewhat freaked out as I’d NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT BEFORE. I’ve never had a cloud trail fall on me before. It fell around me … my health didn’t suffer to my knowledge.
I look to the skies quite often because in 1993 I saw the damnest thing ever. I saw a plane, flying over head, but it wasn’t moving. I was in a car driving toward Windsor (the exact date can be found by finding out when Ween played Detroit that year) when we more or less drove under a plane in the sky that was completely still. Though the other three people in the car were reluctant to pull over they all did admit that the plane wasn’t moving in the sky … and they wanted NO PART OF IT! It looked like a commercial Air Canada plane. I’m a graphic artist and understand perspective … I kept my eyes on it until we had driven out of eyesight and at NO POINT did it manage to fly over the highway. It was stuck in the air … defying gravity … like a bus shouldn’t”
Hundreds of cars were on that stretch of highway and I imagine others saw the same thing they didn’t wish to acknowledge just like my friends in the car.
I’ve seen other strange things … but the falling trail really spooked me. I’ve really noticed the white out effect lately … usually in the morning or evening and I don’t like it. If the cars on my street made it foggy through out the day, everyday, to the point that I couldn’t see down the street, I’d start lettin’ out their tires.
I do have a picture I snapped of a UFO over Vancouver in 2004 … but no others.
Thanks and good day.
If you were in moving vehicle as you calim there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY you can tell how fast the aircraft was moving.
We used to make our planes stand still all the time- I’ve even flown backwards a few times but it’s confusing and disorienting so I didn’t like it. It’s not hard but has to be done under very specific atmospheric conditions.
We used to go out at night and do fake ufo runs over small towns in Oklahoma but no one ever reported them so we stoped having fun. Again- not difficult to simulate ufos- you just have to take advantage of the general public’s almost absolute ignorance of everything aviation.
The airplane wasn’t moving. It was poised to fly over the highway … it was maybe … I’m a city boy so bare with me … anywhere between 10 to 20 city blocks south of the highway pointed north … it might have been anywhere between 20 to 35 stories above the ground … these are guesses based on a twenty year old memory … I first noticed the plane because it was so low. Then I noticed that it was NOT flying, not flying straight, not passing the highway, not moving at all. We drove past it and I stared right at its nose as it just hung there in the sky. I then turned around in my seat to continue watching it as it continued NOT to fly over the highway. Strangest thing I’ve ever seen. I’m not saying there isn’t a gimmic behind it … billboard … sales balloon … but it wasn’t a balloon, it had no teathers and the trees beneath it were still. Neat trick. I’ll never forget it.
Anyway … that is why I watch the sky.
I’ve used the name “X” since 1992 and the first time I ever saw large white “X” con/chemtrails in the sky was 1999. I called them the “X signal”.
The ufo I took a photo of in Vancouver has no wings. It’s shaped like a tiny black pumpkin.
Thanks
Must have been the same type of holographic plane that hit the world trade center.
See- this is another part of the problem with chemtrail observers. Before, you firmly stated that it was an aircraft standing still and now you admit that you don’t really know what it was. How often we read posts and websites where people promise that they’ve seen something and are upset when we question if they really interpereted what they saw correctly. Now virtually everything else you say will have to be taken with a large grain of salt.
Sooo boring …
toodles,
X
Reality is a little boring sometimes. Perhaps that’s why people like to spice it up with speculation.
Just wanted to say thank you for maintaining this blog of yours for years on end Uncinus, and for intelligently debating these folks for so long. Must get super boring seeing as how all they’re capable of is bringing up the same tired, unqualified points with absolutely zero evidence to back it up.
Tho, I fear it’s a battle you can’t win, there is an endless stream of these imbeciles on the Web (youtube seems to be home to millions of them alone lol), and you’re just one person, but thanks anyway. I’ll be sure to link everyone I come across who believes in this junk to this page, as well as the page that led me here (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread294087/pg1).
These two pages pretty much completely dismantle this myth. Some people are so gullible.
Note to conspiracy theorists: “I’m right and if you disagree you’re part of the conspiracy” is not a legitimate argument
Anon:
That was an interesting read. Especially the end date – in 2007.
That first video on that blog clearly shows two ships with afterburners on and off. Middle ship never turns his on I guess. I would imagine they can only keep them on for short bursts in level flight to avoid going supersonic. But man that video sure looks suspicious if I didn’t know about that kind of stuff.
@Jazzroc, so are you implying it’s irrelevant because the discussion ended in 2007? Did you actually read it, or no? I’m assuming no, it doesn’t agree with your paranoid beliefs, so you’ll ignore it. That’s what you guys are best at!
Fact is, this page and the page I linked to at ATS show clear, solid evidence dismissing many of the mainstays of the chemtrail argument. The biggest being the baseless claim that “contrails don’t persist and spread, chemtrails do”.
If you google search just the word “chemtrail”, you’ll come to a pretty large, elaborate website with many articles supporting the chemtrail belief. I read quite a bit of it myself, I even started buying some of it since it was so well-written. (that is, until I came to the part where the dude believes if you “pray” to these things in the sky they’ll come and make the chemtrails “go away”; I knew then to close my browser lol). This website’s writer bases pretty much everything he writes off that claim, that chemtrails don’t persist. But this is a lie, and can easily be seen as such. Why is one of the largest chemtrail belief sites on the net founded on a lie? Who is it spreading disinformation again?
Edit: I meant to write, if you google search “chemtrail”, the first link in the list will be that pretty large, elaborate website
Dangit, I messed that up again, the first link is the wiki page, the second link is the site I’m referring to. It’s called educate-yourself.org
Anon:
I had the misfortune to wend my way through the comments. I was looking for hard evidence. I found none, only references to other claims. Where was the actual report? What did it actually say? Who were these people?
So isn’t the conclusion to be drawn simply that water in the town is safe, that volcanic ash polluted snow samples, that a number of activists made a few unsubstantiated claims?
How could the local stream flowing through town be fresh and uncontaminated if overhead “chemtrail” spray truly existed?
Hmmm…I have seen these trails over my house for almost 40 years and have never noticed any illness associated with the trails. Nor have any of my friends or family. What makes you so sure it isn’t coincidence?! Where is the evidence of any “particulate matter”?! Aside from the conspiracy sites, and the KSLA report where some guy collected rain water in a jar and assumed the particulates came from the trails, where is there ANY evidence that the trails contain ANYTHING but combustion gases and water vapor? And as far as “particulates” with “metal” go, can you think of the MILLIONS of sources of such particulates right down here at ground level?! Assumption and speculation mean NOTHING!
“Its clear to them that an artificial particulate matter of some sort is being dispersed by these airplanes”
Actually, it isn’t.
Suntour:
I beg to differ. Quite the reverse. The wingtip of the fighter covers the wingtip of the tanker.
The two fighters are flying side-by-side at least a hundred feet behind and beneath the tanker. The photographing aircraft was equally behind and beneath the fighters so they all lined up – ish.
Oops, looks like I replied to a very old post. I have to remember to make sure I’m on the last page of comments when I start replying. At any rate, the new layout looks fantastic.
“I beg to differ. Quite the reverse.”
I agree.
The new layout was part necessitated by technical reasons – particularly some posts having too many comments. There seem to be a few issues though, and it does not always go to the right page of comments.
Thank you Uncinus for all your hard work and excellent information. I remember first noticing contrails in the early 70’s when I was a kid. I did some reading back then and learned about why they form. Pretty basic stuff it seemed to me. Sad to think conspiracy theories outweigh science.
” Pretty basic stuff it seemed to me. Sad to think conspiracy theories outweigh science.”
Quoted for truth.
When I was 10-12 I used to go down to the beach in New Brighton, in Christchurch New Zealand. B737’s weer new here then, and the flights from Dunedin (south of chch) to places north (probably Wellington) would be at their greatest altitudes almost directly overhad leaving lovely long contrails.
These lasted for quite some time as I recall – sometimes the ones from teh flight north would still be there when the south-bownd return flight left another one.
This is about 1968-70 or so.
Then I became and aircraft engineer, and found the truth……aircraft leave contrails, and no B737 in New Zealand ever had anything on it to spread any kind of anything except exhaust – and I worked on every single one of them.
Damn I hate it when no one tells me I was part of a conspiracy 25-30 years before it began…….
Hello, I merely wish to join in on this to learn, and not prove anyone wrong. I rarely take sides.
Now then, there has been ‘spider’ webs left behind, and people only stating what was in them, stating there to be chemicals. Is there any way to prove for real these spider webs really had what people say was in them..? Also, is there a way to prove if these trails have chemicals in them (if not the fog created) – the amounts – and also with the best credible source or absolutely proven? I know that water in the sky creates rainbows. Is there visible evidence of these chemicals shown in pictures, or in videos?
This ‘red sun’ effect, can that be created by earth’s normal atmosphere, or the same chemicals people say is created by these chemtrails?
These ‘spider webs’ left over- are they still present today? I’ve never seen them anywhere outside before. We do have white sky, and ‘haze’,
Also, could it be that they’re only trying to actually benefit plant growth as plants benefit from UV rays. They ‘patch’ up the sky in order to increase plant growth-? Provide evidence if this could be possible.
Thank you for your time =D My only goal is to learn from both sides and any information regarding evidence is greatly appreciated.
You could fly up there and take samples. If “spider webs” fall to ground then taking samples of them would be much easier.
I think someone on here mentioned spectrography of “chemtrails” revealing nothing more than “normal” exhaust products, so that can be done too.
when you say “tcould it be that they’reonly trying to….” you are presuming a couple of things:
1/ there is a “they”
2/ “they” are doing something specific with aircraft emissions othe than using them to get from A to B
There simply is no evidence of either premise.
Quote by Jazzroc – “I beg to differ. Quite the reverse.”
——————————————————
Of course you’re right…and I think that I simply didn’t do a very good job of explaning myself in my post. I said “notice that the left wing tip of the large plane is visually in front of the fighter in the middle.” When I said “in front” I meant that as in…the larger wing is actually IN FRONT of the fighter and didn’t realize that it could be taken as “in front” as between the smaller plane’s wing and the camera.
Not sure why I’m commenting now though, this is an old thread, but I try to make things right.
“You could fly up there and take samples. If “spider webs” fall to ground then taking samples of them would be much easier.
I think someone on here mentioned spectrography of “chemtrails” revealing nothing more than “normal” exhaust products, so that can be done too.
when you say “tcould it be that they’reonly trying to….” you are presuming a couple of things:
1/ there is a “they”
2/ “they” are doing something specific with aircraft emissions othe than using them to get from A to B
There simply is no evidence of either premise.”
Well… Interesting, thank you 🙂
‘They’ I see it as ‘the group of people’ working together to produce chemtrails whilst referencing them, assuming they exist. If it is every single aircraft, I wouldn’t believe they’d use chemicals anywhere in them as i’ve heard from aircraft mechanics and people who built the aircrafts that no chemicals are capable of being put in and acting as byproducts.
Uncinus,
I follow the exchange on your site with interest for some time now, and I like your approach regarding good communication as opposed to just fire back at people. I got the impression that some discussion participants with less cool heads may be driving inquiring chemtrailers away.
I had my first shots at trying to communicate with a hard-core chemtrail believer, but I realized I have to work on it – there was a lot he understood differently than I intended …
Anyway, the reason for my post is really a suggestion:
I noticed that many chemtrail-convinced people refer to a hazy – “dirty” – sky (or even with bad weather following) in connection with spreading contrails. I know this situation is quite common in Western Europe during the approach of a warm front. (I’m in Germany BTW and do some glider flying.)
I want to suggest a new topic on your site referring to what happens if a warm front “rides up” a colder, often dry air mass. How the lifted warm air reaches saturation and how contrails there may persist even at lower altitudes, mixing with the developing cloud layer. If this happens in the afternoon and the front is coming from the West (it mostly is), then the sun is gradually blocked, often sun dogs emerge and the result is that “dirt” or “pollution” look.
I found the drawings in my meteorology textbook very helpful when I studied for the theroretical exam. May be there are some similar images freely available ?
Unfortunately, I have already more self-induced obligations than I can handle, otherwise I’d prepare an outline for such a topic myself.
Uncinus, back to my suggestion:
I like this image about the warm front process:
http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfjps/1400/FIG09_004.jpg
The site states it’s from “The Atmosphere, 8th edition, Lutgens and Tarbuck”:
http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfjps/1400/fronts.html
It visualizes how you can get the “dirty” sky which is of course the cause, not the consequence of eye-catching contrail “congestion”.
I’m honestly getting no where with actual evidence and true claims, and all I’ve heard is fights/arguments or trying to prove each other wrong. All talk and no evidence, so what’s there to fight about? Heh. Things have been the same as they ever have been involving what i’ve experienced and heard, I know people who work outside every day of their lives for 50 years and they didn’t suddenly fall dead because of chemtrails or anything like that. Perhaps it reduces our lifespan from the early years human life began to be in the 80’s or what not, but that’s just normal these days. I’m just babbling, carry on with arguing or doing whatever, but I dont see such a huge issue big enough to be worth fighting over is all i’m saying. There needs to be clean evidence, and ways to prove it to others, and then there can be an “Oh, i’ll help fight this cause” or whatever, or supportive evidence. *shrug*
If you talk about “clean evidence”, you mean the claim that contrails are something other than water ice crystals?
I probably should have more on the site explaining how contrails relate to weather conditions. I think probably the thing that confuses people most is how contrails can form (and persist) in a clear blue sky.
You are welcome to use this:
It is important to understand the difference between water saturation and ice saturation. As you cool the air (say by lifting it to a higher altitude), ice saturation is reached first (at a warmer temperature), then water saturation.
This is in the context of temperatures below freezing (0°C, 32°F).
In the atmosphere there are plenty of condensation nuclei – aerosols made up of smoke, salt and dust particles. So a water-droplet cloud will form as soon as water saturation is reached. The water vapour condenses on the condensation nuclei, and the cloud becomes visible.
But there are very few freezing nuclei. The aerosols that are freezing nuclei like soot are vary scarce. Air in the atmosphere can be ice saturated (but not cool enough to be water saturated) and no cloud forms because there are no freezing nuclei for any ice to form on.
There can be large regions in the upper atmosphere that are cloud free and ice saturated. These can form ahead of weather systems where there are large areas of moist air rising and cooling. These areas will have cirrus streaks through it where the RH is high enough that it is water saturated. As the weather system gets closer there will be more and more cirrus, even without the contrails that may be there.
The number of persistant and spreading contrails over the desert southwest today was more than I have seen in a long time. All of them were at the same altitude. I don’t know what altitude that was because we never got higher than 27000 feet today. I suspect it is because of the deep low that is parked off the coast, spreading moisture to the east.
Yes, there were a LOT of contrails yesterday and today. Yesterday there was a quite spectacular display of cirrus clouds by the end of the day.
Check out this satellite photo showing the cirrus band (and a few contrails in there)
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=USA5.2010300.terra.1km
I was recently talking about warm fronts further up, and voilà: we just had one in SW Germany right from the book (except that it eventually dissolved).
“Dirty” sky, spreading contrails, a sun dog almost like piece of rainbow and – probably – uncinus clouds. I have to ask the professionals first …
Unfortunately I had only my cell phone camera at hand. And I had to stay inside at my work place. The images are unaltered except scaling down a bit.
Here is one with a nice contrail shadow and the sundog:
http://www.draisberghof.de/files/warm1.jpg
And here is one which I believe has uncinus clouds (which I did not know before dropping in here):
http://www.draisberghof.de/files/warm2.jpg
The straight “bar” right of the center is the reflex of a lamp behind (inside).
I would like to point this article:
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/JAM2325.1
It is obvious the spreading contrail phenomenon is not only well known, but also intensively studied by meteorolgical sciense. No conspiracy here.
Wow!! What a fantastic article. There is so much information there.
Yes, that’s a great article, it’s one of the articles linked in the section on the left. One of the most telling things (for the “chemtrail” crowd) is the long list of references at the end.
Unfortunately it’s difficult to get people to read scientific papers. Some people are suspicious of them, or just find the language a bit impenetrable.
I had a good field day yesterday watching evolution of contrails. There were many of them forming during the day in all directions. It looked like every passing jet was leaving a very long contrails across the sky, which was fairly clear.
To my surprise, the atmospheric conditions appeared to be rather patchy, causing segmentation of contrails. In some areas of the sky, the segments of contrails were quickly dispersed by wind, in others they were dissipating more slowly. Also, there was a patch of the sky, where contrail segments persisted and accumulated, spreading eventually into a thin sheet of clouds.
Later I checked the MODIS satellite photos of our area (http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=United_Kingdom_Ireland.2010345). I do not know how to read them, but they seem to support my observation of the patchiness of atmospheric conditions above my place (Cambridge, UK) on the date.
And finally I managed to identify a couple of planes spraying us with aerosols. These were Santa’s little helpers: Rudolph Red Nose jets of Norwegian Air Shuttle 🙂
[img]https://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/P1010223c.jpg[/img]
Not the best looking paint scheme but definately identifiable. Nice pic
Uncinus and Mike,
Thank you very much for your historical backgrounds and research into contrail behavior. Your wisdom into the aviation field is much needed and appreciated on this site! Please continue!
As an engineer with little bits of flight background myself, I fully believe the vast majority of the odd contrail behavior can be fully explained due to the basics – lots of high flying plane exhaust and unique atmospheric conditions.
Yet, I have to point to a very strange condition I observed about a year ago, near Magic Mountain in the LA area. No other contrails were present at that time (roughly 1pm).
But I pulled off the freeway to watch a plane leaving an intermittent contrail directly overhead.
I will attempt to mimic this pattern with dashes as I observed it. Each dash (or space) shown below, represents about a second in time.
———————- ——– —– — — –
My girlfriend and I were both watching this odd event on that clear and almost cloudless day, and watched the plane as it continued to fly from that last remaining “puff” or contrail discharge, but the plane left NO MORE CONTRAIL residuals after that last “puff” point.
Now if there was some type of a jet stream blowing through causing these breakups, I can see that the contrails would have a bit of “smearing” or “streaking” of these trails. But these were CLEAN trails, free of any hint of smearing. It was almost like the plane was “sputtering out of chemicals” and was running empty on what it was spraying (that is, if it was spraying anything at all).
Hopefully I can remember where I stored the poor quality picture I took of this event, and could share it in the future.
Then, to awaken my curiosity even more, I noticed many unique days of patterns over the Cleveland National Forest area in the LA area, with many jets making “O” shaped contrail patterns! That was really odd I thought….
Other days manifested trails with sharp 45 degree and 70 degree contrail bends in the flight patterns. I fully recognize that these sharp bends could seem sharper than they actually were, due to the angle of viewing.
I tend to doubt that these trails were caused by passenger jets. I think the passengers would have felt a bit uncomfortable with this sharp of a turn!
These events occurred over several weeks in the August of 2010 time frame, if I remember right.
Any idea what would cause this sputtering or “O” shaped flight patterns and trails, or the sharp turns?
Had it not been for the appearance of this sputtering trail, or these O patterns, I would not give the chemtrail discussion much weight, based on the science presented in this forum.
Comments on these odd patterns are much welcomed!
Virtually all of what you mentioned has been discussed but as far as “sharp” bends or turns- unless it’s a fighter or some type of tactical aircraft there’s a lot of restrictions on how sharp an aircraft can turn. Firstly, all transport catagory aircraft (passenger jets) flying at altitudes “should” be on autopilot. Autopilots restrict the bank angle to 25 degrees or all the way down to 12.5 degrees as high altitudes. Autopilots also restrict the G forces to 1.25 g’s if I remember correctly. That said the turn rate/bank angle should lead to fairly “rounded” turns at altitude. If, however, you were viewing 100 miles of contrail the turn portion may appear to be very sharp due to perspective as you mentioned earlier.
As far as O’s- either the aircraft was directed to make a 360 which I have been told to do in a few cases for traffic seperation, spacing etc. Or (more likely) the aircraft was directed to enter a hold and very shortly after was directed to leave the hold so the typical racetrack pattern ended up looking round. Hope this helps and remember- as I’ve said a dozen times on this site- there is NO SUCH THING as “normal” flight patterns. And that is sort of misleading but it sounds better than saying there is no such thing as an “abnormal” flight pattern. It’s a big sky and if I ask for something- I will most likely get it. If I want to draw a picture I could do it.
NOTICE on the above posted comment:
The dashes and spaces did not show up properly from what was typed.
Just envision the trail as moving across the sky in the following manner as a clock:
11 o’clock to 12:30 = constant contrail
12:30 to about 12:45, about 2 seconds of time, zero contrail
then about 6 seconds of constant trail stream
then about 4 seconds of zero contrail
then about two seconds of contrail
then about two seconds of zero trail
then about one or two seconds of contrail
then a second of zero trail, and a final brief “puff”.
I hope this helps to clarify a bit.
Doesn’t sound strange to me. As an aircraft turns, to make up for the loss in lift it must increase the amount of elevator used. All of the turning forces work to slow down the plane. In order to maintain speed either the aircraft commands an increase in power or the pilot slightly pushes the power up. The inreased power may be just enough to cause contrail formation.
Short turns don’t really require an increae in power whereas long turns do. If you say he is making what sounds like a longer turn this scenario seems plausable.
Either that or his chemtrail button was sticky. Or maybe it was the chemtrail valve.
If you look at that phenomenon through suspicious eyes anything looks suspicious.
Please allow me to clarify the above contrail history a bit….
The event near Magic Mountain was around the April, 2010 timeframe, and the jet was flying straight as an arrow. No other contrails were present. Very few clouds of any type were present that day, and the trail existed well before the 11am angle in the sky, I just used that as a starting point for the example.
Also note, another jet was present at a slightly different altitude , my guess, and region of the sky, & had no trail behind it. It was obvious that no acceleration of the jet was occurring. Just constant speed, straight-line flight.
Just a very, very odd and suspicious condition on that Magic Mountain day! (That one I admit, is not as easy to explain away!)
The “sharp-angled-trails” and “O” events in the approximate August 2010 timeframe were over the period of several weeks, noticed while driving down the 91 freeway, and observing the trails left in the later afternoons, usually.
The “O” was quite odd. A small light trail leading into the “O”, but virtually no trail noticed upon the exit of the “O” pattern. I noticed this odd “O” on two occasions. It lasted for hours into the setting sun. It slowly became larger and more dispersive over time.
The sharp right angles or turns have been noticed on many, many occasions over the LA/ Orange County areas, in addition to the Cleveland National Forest area, in the 2010 timeframe.
How aircraft contrails form cloud:
This series of satellite images appeared in the beginning of the year on the BBC News website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8309629.stm
Wildblue, the broken contrail you describe should like it might be due to a plane flying at the boundary between two regions of air – one above the other. Then the boundery between the two will not be flat, so a plane could be going rapidly in and out of the contrailing region, while still being in level flight.
This might be accented by gravity waves. Basically the plane is clipping the peaks (or troughs) of the waves.
Uncinus- when you say gravity waves you don’t mean actual waves in the earth’s gravitational field right? That doesn’t sound like it could happen. You need to spell that one out for me.
No, a gravity wave is just a wave that relies on gravity – waves in the ocean are gravity waves and you get the same kind of waves in the air.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_wave
See also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_wave (which are gravity waves)
and
http://www.windows2universe.org/earth/Atmosphere/clouds/kelvin_helmholtz.html (which are not)
@Uncinus
[img]https://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/P1010305.JPG[/img]
Would these wavy clouds be an illustration to your comment above, or they are not relevant?
They look like some kind of wave cloud, probably a Kelvin Helmholtz cloud.
Now these waves can exist in the air, and theoretically not form clouds. So imagine a plane flying through that structure in your photos, and leaving contrails only on the peaks.
I think that’s unlikely, but possible. More likely is an irregular boundary between the air layers, which will lead to fairly random dashes of contrail.
Thank you for the comments so far, and inputs.
No….The photo shown offers no similarity whatsoever. The trails were too “clean cut” as I would call it.
I doubt the “multiple wave theory” you discussed, would hold on this event. The start and stop trails would have been more distorted and show some subtle or mild signs of “waviness” or some other atmospheric event.
It was just as I described. A VERY straight line of broken trails.
Just imagine that someone actually WAS spraying something, and the storage tank was starting to run dry and sputter out. That is the best way to describe it.
Normally, I would have dismissed many of the contrail/chemtrail sightings as explainable and just everyday flying.
But when I saw this broken trail – in action for myself, in real-time, on those days unique days I described, I began to wonder is there really is something to some of these chemtrail claims!
I have to admit, this one is hard to dismiss.
Give me a few days to search for the photo, and see where I stored it. I think my camera lens was inadequate to capture a decent shot, but I will dig and see what I can find.
This is where I wish I had my video cam battery charged up and ready to shoot and zoom in on that event!
The photo just shows the shape of the air masses, and not the shape of a trail through them. Such a trail would be a perfectly straight line, with sharp on and off demarkations. Like a long needle through crumpled cloth.
Photo/video would be great!
Anything like this:
Probably a similar mechanism at play.
Close….But not quite the same.
Clear and distinctively sharp start (and stop) contrail lines was what I observed.
More of a trail breakup at the very last “sputterings” – meaning less clear and distinct trails…. but after the “supposed” tank emptied, why would there be no sign of any trail for the remainder of the flight that afternoon.
That is what I find very bizarre!
I’ve found the article commented at the BBC News website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8309629.stm). “A case study of the radiative forcing of persistent contrails evolving into contrail-induced cirrus” was published at the end of 2009 in J. Geophys. Res. (I’m sending you its pdf by email).
From the abstract:
“A single aircraft operating in conditions favorable for persistent
contrail formation appears to exert a contrail-induced radiative forcing some 5000 times
greater than recent estimates of the average persistent contrail
radiative forcing from the entire civil aviation fleet.”
Presumably it was the AWACS aircraft that had flown 10 complete circles of 40 km diameter above North Sea (and a layer of low clouds). Its distinct coil-shaped contrail was blown by wind toward the England cost and evolved into cirrus above the land.
What fascinates me most is that a single plane, hardly noticeable to a casual observer on the ground, is capable of producing in right conditions such a great effect, “spraying” nothing but engine exhaust. If this is true, who needs chemtrails?
The full article is available here:
http://www.nerc-essc.ac.uk/~rpa/PAPERS/Haywood09JGR.pdf
The articles suggests that such events are rare.
But there is a high degree of uncertainty as to the global net forcing effect of contrail induced cirrus.
“If this is true, who needs chemtrails?”
Presumably anyone who actually sants to poison us, or induce mind control through electromagnetic waves bounced off artificial reflectors painted in the sky, or big pharma who need to increase sales of blood pressure medicine. Maybe others who have yet to be identified by the fearless oppoents of het NWO.
I think Wildblue is describing aerodynamic contrails.
Yeah, I was thinking that might be so, as you see the kind of “instant” on-off with full-wing aerodynamic contrails a lot more. I’d hesitate to say that though, as that area (Valencia, like 50 miles north of LA), is not far from where I live (Santa Monica), and I’ve never seen an aerodynamic contrail forming, that I know of.
@MikeC
Well, these activities need not to produce visible effects, unless the NWO goal is not their coverup but the intimidation of opponents.
I was thinking more about potential applications in climate engineering. Why one would want to spay chemicals in a grid-like fashion over a large area to trigger the cirrus formation, if the same effect can be achieved by a tiny number of planes flying circles around a few carefully selected points?
Sorry Alexey – I was being just a bit sarcastic……:/
I’m sure someone will come up with an “answer” – but since the chemtrail hoax is..er…..a hoax…there really can’t be an explanation, because it isn’t happening!
Well, there have been real suggestions to modify flight schedules and/or altitudes to manipulate the contrail-cirrus effect. Having a plane fly in circles in a particular area might be the most effective way of focussing the effect, but it’s also the most expensive. Better to use existing passenger and cargo flights, and just tweak the schedules and altitude to maximize the effect on radiative forcing. The paper linked above discusses this a bit.
Nobody is actually doing that, of course, as it would be rather expensive for the airlines (relative to their razor-thin profit margin)
There is no way the airlines would allow schedule or route manipulation without gov’t subsidy. Everything is pointing toward LESS manipulation of routes. Free flight is getting closer every day. Or at least something closer to free flight.
So Wildblue- are you satisfied or…?
I was thinking about this today and I think the problem is you are asking us to come up with an answer based on one limited set of details. Even when we have people post here who have lots of information we are often forced to make speculations couched in the realm of probability and sometimes even reaching into the area of possibility. It’s a bit like trying to determine whats wrong with someones car based on listening to them describe the sound its making. Sure you could tell them its their CV joint or something but we couldn’t be sure.
Everyone does bring up good points in many of the last posts and links.
I really appreciate the the satellite photo of the circling AWACs plane, and the contrail “smog” that particular plane left behind for hours and hours.
That is an excellent clip that one would share with major doubters – and get them to re-think what is possibly going on.
There is the possibility, that the plane over Valencia, was activating elevators or other flaps in an altitude adjustment manuver, and that could cause a broken trail, as discussed. I guess I would have to get more commercial pilots to jump in and comment on this possibility.
Problem is, for large commercial planes, and military planes, adjustments are not abrupt.
They are more “gradual” in nature.
The “sharpness” of that unique, start-&-stop trail creation, still makes me wonder if it could be caused by flaps.
I have seen photos of extensive piston-engine based contrails blanketing the sky from WWII era planes. WOW! Pretty amazing to view. I wish more people would see these.
Another issue that comes to mind, is the comment by someone earlier in this trail, (over a year ago?) about collecting a sample and obtaining test results on JP4 fuel, and detecting trace amounts of metals at a test lab.
Hmmm….IF that is true, there is something very bizarre in that finding… Very odd.
Regarding the immuniologists and other “very credible” people who have researched this subject, with claimes of “abnormally high levels of pathogens” detected, and metals detected on the collection of fallen samples from ground and water….. and the “webs” falling from the sky…. I just don’t know. It is odd. I cannot validate or invalidate their research. If there was more consistency in the findings, then more credibility to the findings.
These extra factors add to the confusion on this whole matter. Something IS going on, just not quite sure what it is.
Somewhat akin to all the UFO sightings over the many years.
A large percentage can be debunked as planes or other factors…. BUT, when one REALLY researches these findings with an open mind, and looks at the details of all the tens of thoursands of bizarre photos that have been taken with cell phone cameras, etc.
One can easily come to the conclusion that there is something really strange going on in our world…. I cannot believe that this large of a number are faked with the details collected and observed. Sorry. Won’t go there.
Merry Christmas! Let’s see if Santa leaves a few contrails this year!
Really? Where are these tens of thousands of bizarre photos? If you do a google image search for “chemtrail”:
http://www.google.com/images?q=chemtrail
Then there are NO images that you can’t put forward a perfectly reasonable explanation for. Go ahead, pick the five most “bizarre”, and I’ll explain them.
Was your on/off anything like any of these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh5z4a_eGs0#t=0m33s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxSbcPtOXno
“Something IS going on..”
Still waiting for ANY evidence to support that claim. Why do you make statements of fact without backing them up with anything at all?
Isn’t it possible that you’re mistaken?
“A large percentage can be debunked as planes or other factors…. BUT, when one REALLY researches these findings with an open mind, and looks at the details of all the tens of thoursands of bizarre photos that have been taken with cell phone cameras, etc.
One can easily come to the conclusion that there is something really strange going on in our world…. I cannot believe that this large of a number are faked with the details collected and observed. Sorry. Won’t go there.”
You just did!
Yes there is something strange going on – and that something strange is the world.
It is not well understood – and it is even less well understood by people who don’t try to understand it!
Unicus (and others),
When I comment on the strange and bizarre photos, I was commenting on the UFO shots collected by thousands of people at thousands of locations over the many years. Yes, LOTS of things we do not EVEN begin to understand. But I won’t go there. Let’s stay on topic here.
Regarding the YouTube video links. (Thank you!)
The second link was a bit closer to the observed, but not quite. The videos I have seen so far, tend to show a faint trace of a contrail in what I would call, the “off” periods. What I saw was clear ON, and OFF trail generation. With “sputtering out” at the end of the trail.
The second video link you posted also offers an interesting perspective and linking to this “Indirect Aerosol Campaign”.
It appears that various universities, NASA and others, are all working together on this campaign. A good link to one of their papers (23 pages) is noted below:
http://www.asp.bnl.gov/ARM_ISDAC.pdf
Now, I can see how this campaign would be an indirect source of information collection to the US AirForce, who wants to control the weather. I can fully understand the wartime advantages of weather manipulation….And potentially, a better understanding to this global warming thing. (which I believe is also very questionable, and only part of the truth is debated).. But this weather control thing can also open up a pandoras box, should an agressive adversary gain control before the US military does. (another topic that I will not dwell on in this post. Let’s stay focused.)
I can easily see how this Indirect Aerosol Campaign can be an occasional source of misinterpreted “over-exuberance” by someone in the “Angry Chemtrails are Posion Camp” and not willing to spend time to research possible alternate-explanations on this subject, or planes used for testing. I can see how a plane modified to spray some level of experimental “tracers” into the sky, could be used to understand high altitude air patterns by these researchers. That MIGHT explain SOME of the photos and videos that are stirring the pot on this whole Chemtrail argument… And the pot needs better, fully explainable discussions by someone who has public credibility, otherwise this will continue to boil and boil…
Therefore, let’s focus on your comment that “I pick any Google images”, and you can explain any of them.
I will take you up on that offer….
1. The photos of the plane with brass colored “beer keg” like tanks inside of the plane.
What “SPECIFICALLY” is all of that apparatus used for, what experiment, an when was it done?
(What was IN the tanks, and what specifically was it used for. Need to put this exact specifics of this photo and YouTube video to bed quickly, if it has no merit)
2. The photo of the “REVERSE” facing pitot tube, or spray nozzle facing the rear of the plane. (Note: I have seen photos of MUCH larger nozzles facing aft than the one on Google Images).
What the heck is (or are) these used for. Can you vouch that this is a test plane for the Indirect Aerosol team? Or, what specfic experiement are these “unique” nozzles specifically used for?
3. Key issue: The large, excessivly spreading and LINGERING contrail (or claimed Chemtrail), relative to the much thinner and quickly dispersing contrail right beside it. I will just limit this discussion to three photos for now.
What complicates many of these arguments, is the circular trail patterns, or “sharp-turn” patterns caused by many jets. If we only had the ability to zoom in adequately enough to determine if these are commercial jets, or military jets causing this, I believe that would help “cool the pot” down and explain things a bit better to many who are on the fence.
If you want to comment on the reasearcher who took samples of JP4 and found chemicals in it, or any of the other supposed researchers who find odd results as noted previously above, please, by all means try to explain. I am open and willing to hear both sides!
1) Water, for weight and balance testing of pre-production aircraft.
2) Water, sprayed for icing tests, or inlets for N701BN
3) Contrails are at different heights.
1 & 2 – https://contrailscience.com/contrail-or-chemtrail/
3 – https://contrailscience.com/why-do-some-planes-leave-long-trails-but-others-dont/
Chemicals in fuel?!? Oh, the horror!
Yeah, let’s focus on that and ignore the billions of others sources of chemicals right under our noses…literally.
So, where is the evidence that anything in JP4 has anything to do with the long white, long lasting trails we see in the sky? Where is the evidence that these chemicals are any danger after combustion? Well, any more danger that the millions of OTHER combustion engines that surround us at any given moment. I don’t doubt that there is combustion happening in the sky and that there are additives in the fuel for whatever reason. So?
And when you refer to someone as a “researcher”, what qualifications do you require in order to put any weight in anything they “believe”?!
Sorry, we’re ALL “researchers”, and to be honest, the title is meaningless. Peer review and the scientific method are the only things that matter in the quest for truth. I’d LOVE to see some peer reviewed scientific data that shows that the trails in the sky are anything to worry about and are intentionally deposited.
Will anyone be providing anything anytime soon?
And some people need to make up their minds..are they USING the trails in the sky to convince others that airplanes pollute the air or are they legitimately concerned about the trails in the sky? “Chemtrails” and pollution are two completely different/separate things. ALL planes pollute regardless of whether or not we see a trail behind them. If one is concerned about pollution, I have to ask WHY IN HELL do they ignore all the pollution around us in order to (pinpoint) focus on the jet exhaust. It’s like whining about someone placing a needle in your haystack! There are so many sources of chemicals and pollution all around us at ground level that it seems INSANE to concentrate on a few trails that are 30,000 feet above us. And I do mean a “few”. In the grand scheme of things, persistent contrails are rare!
(Assuming you mean JP8 there) What did they find, exactly? What quantities? Is there a link to the test results?
The campaign is to measure existing aerosols in the atmosphere, that’s all.
“The campaign is to measure existing aerosols in the atmosphere, that’s all.”
YUP!
It’s funny how so many will see that word “aerosol” and jump to so many conclusions. They don’t even bother to read the papers they reference that CLEARLY explain that they (actual scientists who give a crap about the environment) are measuring and studying, not “spraying”. Honestly, what does that say about the chemmie who uses that info as “evidence”?! That they don’t actually CARE about the truth, they only care abut the belief. It’s just plain silly!
That would be a good subject for another article. What an aerosol is, where they come from and the misconceptions that SO MANY have about them.
Even kicking up dust with your boots creates an aerosol! There are billions of sources, and that is an understatement.
All valid points that Unicus and FactsMatter bring up.
Yes… Those comments you provide, are possible and potential explanations.
I must say, I myself have been quite a skeptic of this whole chemtrail issue over the past few years. It also makes total sense to me, that the law of unexpected consequences could be in play here….
That is, the higher numbers of these high-bypass ratio jet engines, are generating higher levels of water vapor, due to the cleaner burn, and consequently adding to the total contribution of water vapor in the higher atmosphere. Since water vapor is 4x more of a greenhouse gas than CO2 is, then we are creating something that we don’t fully understand….
And these persisting contrails are due in large part to these newer engine designs with higher water vapor outputs. I wish I had access to a turbofan test engineer who could answer here!
Yet, I also have to admit, the science and investigative journalism, and research performed for the documentary film “What in the World are They Spraying” is significant, and DEFINITELY warrants some time to watch.
I believe that that documentary is why many people are so passionate about this whole issue.
At a minimum, just the first part (1 of 7) is worthy of some time spent to briefly investigate. The YouTube link is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K9rXydMmfw&feature=&p=9196110D432BDF79&index=0&playnext=1
It all centers around geoengineering based research.
Once you see the movie (hopefully all seven parts), I then have to ask…. Maybe there IS something else going on, that can be justified to address at a deeper level.
(I personally don’t give much weight to the attempts to interview congressional reps on the “spot”, done in the documentary. Congress people rarely give an answer unless it has been polished by their staffers)
I have some acquaintances who are going up to Mt Shasta this week, and may follow thru on collecting some snow and water samples, to verify the findings outlined in the documentary.
If you know of anyone who wants a to test a sample of the snow-pack or water, let me know, and I will have them send you (or an associate) a sample.
I understand that Ethylene dibromide and aluminum are showing up at much higher than normal levels.
(Note: Regarding the jet fuel testing by someone in this message trail, refer to this link from the trail above, and copied below:
I don’t know what to make of this comment and the data that was collected. I agree, it is questionable. I wish that person would step forth and clarify their personal research a bit more.
“Written by name on April 12, 2008.
interesting site! however, could u please elaborate some more on JP8 fuel and the use of additives such as aluminum and barium in millitary jetfuel? u see ive been to a local AFB and found a huge empty tank there, next to the fuel-tank cars, and i retrived a sample of whatever was stuck on the bottom of the tank. it was a white sticky substance. it was obvious it had been used as an additive in the jetfuel and i live in an area with daily persistent trails (in europe that is) anyways, ive gotten the sample analysed and you can see the reults here:
http://internet.phobic.no/chemtrail.pdf unfortunatly i couldnt afford a full spectrum analysis, but at least they found what i was looking for. ” )
“I have some acquaintances who are going up to Mt Shasta this week, and may follow thru on collecting some snow and water samples, to verify the findings outlined in the documentary.”
What a waste of time. I have VERY little doubt that what is reported to be found on Mt Shasta was actually found there. The problem here is this…Is it logical to assume that whatever is found in the snow/water came from the trails in the sky?
Absolutely not!
Also, is it logical to assume that IF these chemicals are being dropped from airplanes that only the planes leaving visible trails are actually “spraying” the chemicals? Couldn’t planes that are NOT leaving any tell-tale trails be “spraying” something?! Why does the chemtrail hoax community assume that one has to be able to SEE the chemicals coming from the planes? The “chemicals” could easily be distributed in such a way that they would be invisible to the naked eye while the planes are flying overhead.
Again, I’m open to the idea that we are being “sprayed” for whatever reason, but the evidence presented so far is terribly unconvincing and sad. Finding chemicals on the ground and assuming they come from the trails is completely unscientific (and quite stupid, in my opinion). I’m embarrassed for those who collaborated on that “documentary” (LOL!!!!) known as “What in the World are they Spraying”.
doc·u·men·ta·ry (dky-mnt-r)
adj.
1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on documents.
2. Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.
n. pl. doc·u·men·ta·ries
A work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration.
Please notice the second definition for the word. Sorry, “What in the World are they Spraying” can NOT be called a documentary. It contains VERY little factual information. It’s pure paranoid fantasy designed by the creators to sell books and DVD’s to conspiracy theorists.
Wildblue:
All valid points that Unicus
Uncinus.
I wish I had access to a turbofan test engineer who could answer here!
Engines eight times more powerful make trails eight times as large. An engineer isn’t required.
geoengineering based research.
Isn’t geoengineering.
aluminum
Aluminum comprises 8% by weight of the earth’s surface – insolubly, until acid rain comes along. Then it gets detected.
it was a white sticky substance
Which is typically an aluminum corrosion product. Part-empty fuel tanks in ambient conditions will almost always condense water at night.
From Wiki:
1,2-Dibromoethane, also known as ethylene dibromide (EDB), is the chemical compound with the formula BrCH2CH2Br. Although trace amounts occur naturally in the ocean, where it is formed probably by algae and kelp, it is mainly a synthetic. This a colorless liquid with a sweet odor, detectable at 10 ppm, is a widely used and sometimes-controversial fumigant.
Uses
The once-dominant use, although one that has faded, is as an additive in leaded gasoline. 1,2-Dibromoethane reacts with lead residues to generate volatile lead bromides. It has been used as a pesticide in soil and on various crops. The applications were initiated after the forced retirement of 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP). Most of these uses have been stopped in the U.S. It continues to be used as a fumigant for treatment of logs for termites and beetles, for control of moths in beehives, and as a preparation for dyes and waxes.[1]
1,2-Dibromoethane is used in organic synthesis as a source of bromine, e.g., to brominate carbanions and to activate magnesium for certain Grignard reagents. In the latter process, the 1,2-dibromoethane is converted to ethylene and magnesium bromide, exposing a freshly etched portion of magnesium to the substrate.[2]
A white sticky substance found in an empty tank of some sort “next to” a fuelling area….and you don’t know what it was….but it is “obvious” that it is a fuel additive and you assume it is part of a vast conspiracy to spray us with something that is unknown, for purposes that are unknown?
Pin my nostrils with a clothes peg and call me Godfrey, but doesn’t it strike you that there’s just nothing connecting any of that series of bits of information to each other?
You will find all sorts of chemicals around fuel farms – sealants, greases (yes there are white greases!), test kits for water (although they’re pretty simple & I don’t think they would be white & sticky but who knows these days!) cleaners straight off the top of my head.
What you will actually NOT find, is any additives – because all the chemical analysis & composition is done at the refinery – all the on-airport storage do is store the stuff and check it for water content.
“Pin my nostrils with a clothes peg and call me Godfrey, but doesn’t it strike you that there’s just nothing connecting any of that series of bits of information to each other?”
I LOL’d
But, there is one thing that does connect all these things together. Paranoid assumption. As a matter of fact, it will connect ANY two pieces of information to form a government plot. No evidence required.
Wildblue
Is there something in it I did not cover in my review here:
https://contrailscience.com/what-in-the-world-are-they-spraying/
It’s funny how much disinformation is out there on this subject. The bottom line is: the government HAS a military weapon called “Chemtrails” (ref- H.R. 2977), and the Geo-engineers have already admitted that this IS happening, and they also admit that it’s Aluminum they are spraying, and casually admit that they haven’t done any studies of it’s effect on the human body. You can no longer ignore or dispute the FACTS!
Everything you wrote is belief, not fact.
HR2977 isn’t anadmission of anything. It was written by 2 kooks.
YOU are the only one who I see spreading “disinformation” here.
Since I have found this site for the first time three months ago, I pay more attention to contrails and their evolution and take photos at every opportunity. I’ve made quite a few interesting observations that probably are well known. I apologize in advance to regular visitors of this site if repeat familiar things, but there are some points that I want to clarify for myself.
1. A long contrail is not necessarily a persistent one, it may well be short lived. If its portion lasts just about five minutes after being formed, the contrail will be about a hundred kilometers long from the tip to the disappearing distal end (enough to spread across the sky from end to end).
2. Segments of contrails often persist for longer, presumably, because they have been formed in the areas of high humidity. Their lengths depend on size and shape of these areas. Larger areas tend to accumulate many contrail segments left by different planes.
3. Persistent contrail segments spread over the period of time due to diffusion and convection. Usually, this is a slow process, but they also can spread fast in right conditions, reaching a great width in several minutes.
[img]https://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/P1010855e.jpg[/img]
This is one of my pictures taken yesterday, February 8th, in Cambridge, UK at 11:46 UTC, looking South. The top contrail on the left is 10 minutes old. It crosses a wider, diffused contrail that is about 15 minutes older. This, second contrail has doubled its width since the formation of the first one. The third, thinner contrail is the youngest that hasn’t spread yet.
I took several more pictures in hope to compare them with the satellite images. Unfortunately, Terra past above the area too early, at 11:20 UTC, before the formation of the second contrail, oldest of the three:
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=AERONET_Chilbolton.2011039.terra.1km,
and Aqua was too late, at 13:05 UTC, by which time this group of contrails was blown eastward by nearly 200 km, ending up above the North Sea:
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/subsets/?subset=AERONET_Chilbolton.2011039.aqua.1km
At the end of day, I took a few pictures of sunset. There were a few definitely persistent contrails in the western sky, one of which developed a Kelvin-Helmholtz wave:
[img]https://contrailscience.com/wp-content/uploads/P1010882.JPG[/img]