Home » chemtrails » Where are all the Chemtrail Photos?

Where are all the Chemtrail Photos?

Some people think that persistent spreading contrails are somehow unusual, and are actually something dangerous being deliberately sprayed on the US people by the government, or perhaps for weather control purposes. They call these persistent contrails “chemtrails”.

Some of them are very insistent that this is a practically constant assault, saying the sky is never blue any more, and there are “chemtrails” constantly criss-crossing the sky.

I think this is simply a case of observer bias.

It’s easy to amass a large collection of photos of persistent contrails. I’ve got a lot myself, and I live in Los Angeles, where we don’t really get very many days when the conditions are right. All you have to do is only take photos on days when there are contrails persisting, and it will seem like there are “chemtrails” every day.

To get a real picture of what is going on, you need to take photos every day, and then see how many have persistent contrails in them. To be really accurate, you should take photos all across the country, and even across the globe, and see how many have contrails in them. What we need is a huge database of photos of the sky taken at random places and times.

Luckily, with the advent of digital photography, we have several such databases in the form of Flickr.com and picasaweb.google.com, and several other sites, which contain millions of photos that have at least some sky in them.

How many contain contrails (persistent or otherwise?) well, it turns out that practically none of them do.

Of course if you search for “contrail” or “chemtrail”, you’ll find a bunch. But that’s just you selecting them. How do we get random photos of the sky?

A good way it to search for things where the photographer is looking up. Like, “skyscraper“, “radio tower“, “kites“, or “skyline“. This gives you a very nice random sampling of millions of photos of the sky in all different weather condition, in all different locations, over the past decade or so. Some of these tend to have a narrow field of view, which you can expand with the keyword “fisheye”, like “fisheye sky“.

And what do we find? ALMOST NO CONTRAILS!!! I had to look at hundreds of photos before I finally found ONE that had a contrail in it. Even more rare was finding a photo with several persisting contrails, and I never found one with anything like a “grid”.

Several things can be deduced from this. Firstly contrails are actually pretty rare across the country. Of course this depends on where you live, but basically on average, there are not that many visible contrails in the sky.

Secondly, there’s still lots of clear blue sky and fluffy white clouds. All kinds of skies actually. Nothing has changed.

Thirdly, “chemtrail” theorists often say “why are there no photo of contrails before 1999/1990/1980/whenever”, seeing as they can’t find any in their family photo albums. The answer is of course that there ARE photos of contrails, all through the history of aviation. You don’t see them in the old photo albums for the same reason you don’t see them on Flickr.

224 thoughts on “Where are all the Chemtrail Photos?

  1. The Stig says:

    Haha, I don’t have time to read all of the comments here, but I can clearly remember being fascinated by contrails as a child 20-30 years ago. I would lie on my back and, in addition to clouds, watch the contrails blow around for hours, spreading out just as much and for just as long as they do today.

    Do I think that contrails contain harmful carbon particulates with adsorbed carcinogenic fossil fuel residue? Yes, definitely. Do I think that an average diesel truck driving on our highways spews the same pollutants? Yes, definitely. Should we reduce emissions of both? Yes. Is this surprising news? No.

    What interests me would be whether the increase in the number of contrails, in general, over the past 50 years or so, and the extra clouds that they have seeded or formed, have affected the earth’s reflectivity and affected global weather.

    But keep the educated opinions coming, please…

  2. CloudyMcNoggin says:

    This premise is beyond ridiculous.

    What I know is that once every few weeks areas of the sky over Los Angeles is filled with criss-crossing white lines that take hours to dissipate.

    But maybe what I see isn’t really there.

  3. SR1419 says:


    …no…what you see IS there…but there is a proven scientific explanation…as opposed to speculative reasons based on fear and ignorance.

    Learn the science of the atmosphere if you want to know what it is you see….

    googling “chemtrails” will not help you…

    try “contrail cirrus” for starters….and/or “supersaturated persistent contrail”

    If you are a diligent learner you will come to know why contrails sometimes persist, spread and cover the sky in a haze of man-made cirrus clouds…and these have been observed for over 60 years…and why there are more of them now than ever before…

    Hint: sometimes flight paths cross.

  4. Adam says:

    the main reason you dont see them all the time is they only last a few minutes, i had one near my house that was gone in 10 mins give or take

  5. shilltastic says:

    Adam, they last as long as the atmospheric conditions, in the spot they are created, allow. They last ANYWHERE from 0 seconds to several hours depending on said conditions. Just as ALL contrails have since the first ones were created 70 or so years ago.

  6. Teh awesomeman says:


    Does anyone know about what this might be? I have never ever seen anything quite like it…

  7. See:


    Norwegian astronomer Knut Jørgen Røed Ødegaard says it’s 99.9% safe to say that it’s a rocket out of control, while some newspapers and TV channels are quoting Russian military sources, confirming that this is a failed Bulava missile launched from a nuclear submarine in the White Sea.

  8. Shilltastic says:

    And of course, there are thousands who connect this to HAARP and “chemtrails” and will forever be convinced that they are “right”. No one on the planet can convince them otherwise and must be “shills” for trying to do so.

  9. JazzRoc says:

    It looked to me to be coming towards us. And it had developed a leak, and had a high rate of spin. This wouldn’t be normal from the off. Something had had to have gone wrong early in that flight.
    Just the visually beautiful consequences of human error – surely?.

  10. Teh awesomeman says:

    Actually, I became pretty convinced it was a rocket too, once I dug up some pics from another angle…

  11. Patriot says:

    Ok, It’s only normal vapor trail, (water vapor) thats been seen comming out of aircraft forever.
    Can someone tell me why several jets working together are making grids,tic tac toe, and parallel lines over the same area for hours on end?Why more jets return and continue this process until the sky is covered? Why the trails are sometimes radically curved?How this occurs in areas with no airports and little air traffic?Why do chembows appear after long periods of concentrated spraying.
    Let me tell you about the new contrail theory.For 10 years wordwide spraying has compromised everyones immunity systems.So in jan. when the new improved (lab born) avian flu suddenly appears our bodies over react and CYTOKINE STORM kills millions and millions across the planet.But it’s only water vapor so YOU have nothing to worry about!

  12. shilltastic says:


    Popular air routes. Do you understand anything about aviation navigation?! I didn’t think so.

    But, if your paranoid scenario works for you…so be it! Be the master of your fate! Don’t let them take you! Do the job yourself! That’ll show ’em!

  13. Ben says:

    I`m convinced chemtrails are real,from the “insider” reports,interviews,and independent analyses.Barium,aluminum,and other metallic compounds seem to be described the most,but there are also apparently some biological agents being deployed as well.

  14. Which reports? Can you provide links?

  15. Benjamin says:

    There are an abundance of chemtrail photos from all over the USA that have been compiled at various sites.They show many familiar designs,forms and shapes;all indicative of a fake sky with fake cloud cover.Most of these photos are taken in humidity too low to produce real clouds.In fact,in many places where we would expect to see normal clouds because of humidity,we dont.Why? Because one of the traits of metallic salts,like those in chemtrails,is that they are dessicants,which dry the moisture from the air.This phenomenon is truly depressing.You walk out your door expecting a clear day and you see nothing but fake clouds and haze and spread-out chemtrails from hours earlier.This is not natural rain cloud overcast,I`m talking about man-made overcast created by layers and layers of chemtrails.

  16. Suntour says:

    By Benjamin:
    “There are an abundance of chemtrail photos from all over the USA that have been compiled at various sites.They show many familiar designs,forms and shapes;all indicative of a fake sky with fake cloud cover.”

    “you see nothing but fake clouds and haze and spread-out chemtrails from hours earlier”

    Ahh I see, the old “these look different to me, so they must be ‘chemical’ trails/clouds”. Your observations from ground level greatly outweigh any historic or scientific evidence. Excellent deductions…do you believe the earth is flat as well?

    Let’s face it, when start to read this site, which both shows and explains in great detail how trails and clouds aren’t “chemtrails” or “chemclouds” you close your eyes, hands over your ears and chant “LALALALALALALALAL I DON’T BELIEVE YOU!!!”.

    You aren’t even using logic, just belief, that sounds a lot like religion to me.

    By Benjamin:
    “Most of these photos are taken in humidity too low to produce real clouds.In fact,in many places where we would expect to see normal clouds because of humidity,we dont.Why? Because one of the traits of metallic salts,like those in chemtrails,is that they are dessicants,which dry the moisture from the air.”

    You do realize that humidity at ground level has no bearing on humidity five miles in the air, right?

    Also, the temperatures at that altitude are well below zero Fahrenheit. Once the small amount of moisture that is actually in the air gets sucked into a jet engine, it’s turned to steam (expands). It freezes (almost) instantly once it exits the jet and hits that sub zero air…creating visible ice crystals…contrails.

    See, it isn’t covert or scary, it’s man and nature interacting.

  17. Chemtrailresearcher says:

    You are as ignorant as the woman who accidentally gave birth to your blinded life………….grow up and do some real research and contact all government departments, take some rain samples hire a HEPA filter and plane then come back and try again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PRICK

  18. Chemtrailresearcher says:

    All of you do yourselves a favour and don’t even return to this government lover fucking site……………he feels secure in his own knowledge that everything is as it should be……………he’s probably an Obama lover as well.

  19. JazzRoc says:


    You are as ignorant he’s probably an Obama lover as well

    An object lesson in aeronautical engineering and atmospheric science.

    (0% for the name…)

  20. Suntour says:

    Chemtrailers have NEVER given any verifiable evidence to support their claim that “chemtrails” and persisting contrails are visually different, because they don’t have any. If they did, they wouldn’t resort to name calling and making fun of peoples Mother the internet, they would post their evidence for us to chew on.

    *psssst they don’t have any evidence*

  21. Faithinscience says:

    To call oneself a “chemtrail researcher” is the equivalent of calling oneself a “leprechaun inspector”. I’m with Suntour on this….I have yet to see even a single shred of evidence to support ANY of the “chemtrail” believers claims. Everything they write is easily explained with simple science or basic knowledge about aviation. These people will NEVER understand how pathetic they, and their cult, looks to those who are knowledgeable on the subject of persistent contrails. If there was even a SINGLE piece of evidence to support the claims of the “chemtrail believers” ( I will refrain from calling them what I usually call them), I would consider changing my position. I have been reading about this and watching silly videos for a few years now and NOTHING has even come close to convincing me that the trails I have seen in the sky for my entire life are anything but persistent contrails.

  22. MyMatesBrainwashed says:

    Chemtrails are a reality.

    They make you angry, obnoxious, and downright rude.

    Scientists are currently looking at links between chemtrails and tourettes.

  23. grow up and do some real research and contact all government departments, take some rain samples hire a HEPA filter and plane then come back and try again

    If you’ve done this research, or know of anyone that has, then please post the link, so I can add it to this page of “Best Evidence”


    I look forward to seeing your evidence. Especially lab reports.

  24. Artyom says:

    Yawn… suckers are born everyday. California has a high amount of CONTRAILS(obviously a lot of uneducated people). California has the highest population in the US out of all states. Think a lot of air travel occurs over California? Now what’s West of California? Pacific Ocean? With satellite imagery and flights listed this should be a real non issue with real scientific data available to the public via the internet.

    Seeing something and knowing what you see are two different things. No one has EVER shown any evidence worth its weight. This is the most sad conspiracy theory ever created by mankind. People hang onto it this theory because they believe the government has, can, and will test chemicals on them. All Agent Orange, DDT, and other government sprayings with C130’s have been documented, filmed, and looks NOTHING LIKE CONTRAILS!!!!!! Weather Modification, one university has studied it in 1950. They fire rockets to disperse cloud seeding materials or fly planes. The weather modification planes are shown on this site.

    Even memoirs of American Civil War soldiers make mention of rain following heavy cannonade and tried to understand if gunpowder was linked to weather. Clouds and weather are thoroughly studied and there is no chem clouds. Every video or photo has scientific explanations. Chemtrail believers now think attaching a battery to a chrystal will erase clouds and chemicals? Did a 4 year old contrive the schematics with his youthful imagination?

    As for all the tests done, they are all ground samples which voids their value all together. If you test something in the river, you’d assume you have the possibility of obtaining all substances that are located upstream of your location. Now with air mass it is even more complicated. And when people that actually have an education in this field try to teach, they get ridiculed and scoffed at. I’m sorry, but if you all want to be paranoid of the sky, go ahead and lock yourself in your homes. Too bad most upholstry and fabrics are now synthetic and slowly give off CFC gases that are cancerous, but we wouldn’t want to let the chemtrails in our home now, do we?

  25. faithinscience says:

    Artyom, please don’t mention the fact that these people are uneducated. Uncinus doesn’t like to use that fact against these people. He believes it to be an insult to point out to these people that they haven’t taken the time to properly learn the facts in this matter. It’s called “pussyfooting”. We have to protect those who insult OUR intelligence by not “insulting” them about their obvious lack of education in this SPECIFIC subject. You and I both understand that these people have NOT attended a single class about aviation or atmospheric science…we just aren’t allowed to point that out. Apparently it’s mean to present the truth/facts in this “debate”. The truth that these people have “educated” themselves through youtube videos and conspiracy sites is NOT supposed to be discussed here! If you continue to post such facts, you will be censored…trust me…I know that for a fact.

  26. Artyom says:

    Is ignorance and being uneducated an insult? I am ignorant in a lot of fields. My greatest weakness is in mechanics. I would love to be able to open a bonnet of my vehicle and work on what lies beneath, freeing myself of a lot of maintenance costs. It is a FACT that once a person utters the word, Chemtrails, it exposes an ignorance and/or misunderstanding of what goes on above us in the skies. That ignorance places a responsibility of a person to learn and come loaded with questions not statements. I refrain from real insults, but happened to receive endless amounts of them. I’ve seen you also receive plenty while you had a brief stay amongst their breeding grounds, on YouTube. If they are too sensitive to learn, why they come here on their own volition? I personally hope they come to learn. Everything on this site covers every aspect, yet if one opens a science book it ends the discussion.
    I have something for them to think about. I live here in Moscow. I see about 1 or 2 persisting contrails every week or so. Not often. We are mostly a destination city. I live on a air base and between 2 major airports. Our government states openly we modify the weather. We clear the skies on the holidays especially on May 9th. Knowing they are doing this, how many “chemtrails” should be over the city where I live? I think one needs to listen to pilots, meteorologists, and those who know these fields as you say and not conspiracy sites. This really is the most embarrassing conspiracy ever created.
    I really hope many of these people aren’t too lazy to make a phone call to a meteorologist. I am sure they wouldn’t mind explaining. My friend who believes in them, however, will not call or go any other place then the usual conspiracy hangout sites. Atleast, my friend doesn’t claim I am shill like others. That’s the funniest thing. I think everyone trying to share their knowledge here are just trying to help. I furthered my time in biology, chemistry, and human anatomy. I trust scientific explanation and not WOW I see it!!! I also saw it when I served in the Air Force, but I know it through science. Science isn’t a cult, but knowledge that is open to anyone willing to study it.
    Anyways, FaithinScience, you had some good videos that were actually educating. Most of your viewers didn’t want to listen. I thought your video about the crystal thing was absolutely hysterical!!! Atleast a few viewers appreciated your knowledge gained from your own education in aviation(if I remember correct). Take care! Живи Счастливо))))

  27. I’ve not attended a single class in atmospheric science. I have no education in the specific subject besides my own Googlings.

    Unfortunately the word “education” is both emotionally loaded, and open to interpretation. Most people who subscribe to the chemtrail theory consider themselves to be educated just fine. They also consider that they have done a lot of research. They will even tell you to “do some research”, and often give you specific topics they feel you should research. If you do this, and search for “chemtrails”, one of the first site that comes up is educate-yourself.org, which contains a vast amount of “science”, “research” and “education” of the most ridiculous nature.

    Chemtrail believers also cover a wide spectrum, from the sylphs and orgone at one end, through NWO and population control, to fairly benign weather modification. There’s a range of types, and a range of eduction levels. Lots of them think that they know something you do not. Telling them they lack education, after all the research they have done, is just going to irritate them. The best way to reason with them is to show them specific examples where they are wrong. Even then it’s often a lost cause, as the “paranoid style” is essentially immune to science and reason.

  28. faithinscience says:

    The fact remains. They “believe” they have “educated” themselves, but provide NO peer reviewed evidence for their beliefs. YOU personally have properly educated yourself because you had an actually desire to learn the subject. You PROPERLY accepted the science as it’s written in so many publications, you apply the right pegs into the right holes because you were interested in aviation and clouds. You are “educated” with the KNOWN SCIENCE as KNOWN SCIENCE is known!~ The “youtube educated” have accepted their indoctrination from OTHER people who have never bothered to learn about these subjects form ANY other point of view other than that of conspiracy…to prove their point! They don’t NEED to have an education, in their minds, they can see it with their own eyes! People who believe this way ARE uneducated…and need to be reminded of that from time to time. Give me my own page where others can come chat with me, If they don’t like what I write, they can go to another section. I’m telling you…as a peer…It is VERY importance for ALL of us to accept our own ignorance about so many subjects. Censoring the message of that truth is ridiculous.

  29. The problem is that when you feel there’s a nefarious conspiracy at the highest level of power that has been going on for decades, then the normal sources of education become suspect. Schools and universities are tools for indoctrination. Television programs and films have subliminal contrails in the background. Scientists are cowed by threats of ridicule to go along with the mainstream story. Sites like this one are simply “disinformation”. I am paid by the government to steer impressionable minds into the brainwashing of my “education”. “Debunking” is a dirty word.

    Telling someone they are “uneducated” will have no effect, and might be counterproductive if they take it as a simple insult. Showing people where they are wrong might be a better approach.

  30. faithinscience says:

    “Telling them they lack education, after all the research they have done, is just going to irritate them.”

    They DESERVE to be irritated about that! And they NEED to know that what they are doing isn’t research, at all. But information gathering and UN-educated deciphering of what they observe in the sky. It’s a disgusting example of the blind leading the blind. I think by reminding people that there is a REASON for peer review is a VERY important lesson. Could they be right? Yeah…but I still see NO evidence to support their claims. All I’m asking for is an example of what was told to them to make them “believe” in “chemtrails” and their reason for believing they have the education to REJECT the known science. REMINDING others that their backgrounds in the subjects aren’t all that impressive, is just a courtesy. They NEED to be reminded!

  31. Sure, but my argument is that telling them is counterproductive, and it’s far better to show them.

  32. faithinscience says:

    They don’t know they are unqualified to discern truth from fiction. They need to be reminded of that.

    The truth is never counterproductive.

  33. That seems like a bit of a paradox. If they are unqualified to discern truth from fiction, then how are they going to discern that truth?

  34. JazzRoc says:

    Hey. A nice piece of introspection. I wish I could help, but I’m torn each way about it at every turn, as well. I reckon a mixture of both has to do.
    Thanks to the both of you. You’ve both made me laugh on occasion, and given me much pleasure.

  35. JazzRoc, you have, of course had some success with your approach:


    Back in Tenerife I carried on corresponding with fellow chemtrail-believers and posting blogs and wrote a hubpage article on the subject. Now I have a friend who lives on the island called Tony Duncan but who posts on the Internet as JazzRoc and one day I was surprised to find that he had found my chemtrail blogs at Myspace and disagreed so much with them that he was calling me a “fool” and “deluded.” He said that he was “going to fight me on this.” And he did!

    JazzRoc, who is a scientist and does know what he is talking about, started posting his opinions in the comments area at all chemtrail videos he could find online and very soon got a name as a “debunker” and a “paid disinformation agent.” He was also being called a “CIA employee,” a “shill,”and accused of “working for the government.”

    I knew this was madness from people who knew nothing about him at all and in fact the last job I knew he had was a community gardener – a far cry from CIA employee! JazzRoc was adamant that chemtrails didn’t exist and that what we were calling such were no more than persistent contrails and were made up of water vapour. He also explained that the phenomenon has been caused by a vast increase in air traffic and that contrails like this were nothing new but had been recorded and photographed at other times in the last century.

    There was no room for agreeing to disagree with him and at one point because I considered him to be very rude I blocked him from my contacts at Myspace. We also got into a heated argument at hubpages and by e-mail.

    Meanwhile JazzRoc had become so infamous as a “professional debunker” that he managed to get himself banned from YouTube and was later to repeat this at the David Icke forums.

    However, in the course of our argument he asked me if I realised that halos (of sun and moon) were caused by ice crystals, and also pointed out that dust and solid particles, which chemtrail-believers say are in the trails cannot create halos or rainbow effects of any type at all. Chemtrail-believers even have a new term “chembow” for colours being seen in the new artificial clouds made from the trails.

    That was all it took to break the spell I was under. I knew that halos around the moon were made of ice crystals so it was obvious they were what caused the sun halos too. I knew also that solid particles cannot create halos or rainbow effects. On this island we get dust clouds from the Sahara that are known as calimas and whilst they make the sky really foggy looking they never ever have halos around the sun or moon.

    I could see that somehow my belief system and association of sun halos with what I was calling chemtrails was wrong and that my belief had blinded me to logical reasoning. I had to apologise to JazzRoc and thank him for teaching me something that all my research had failed to do. I now knew that there were no threats from chemtrails because what we are seeing are contrails as the authorities have maintained all along.

    But I’d contend it only worked because the Bard is a friend of yours. Even he blocked you at one point. Still – different approaches, different sites. Good job the Bilderbergers can afford all of us!

  36. SR1419 says:

    I tend to agree with Uncinus’ approach. Believers do tend to get really defensive when you are as belligerent as they are. Their ability to LISTEN to what you have to say decreases with every ratchet up in the flame war…You will never through to them by telling them they are stupid.

    It is hard because debunkers are people too 🙂 – and we have feelings, emotions and it is easy to get defensive as well- especially when we “know” we are right…Dealing with this topic with Believers has taught me how to me a more effective communicator.

    It has been said often but deserves repeating- Unicinus ability to rise above the fray- so to speak- is impressive.

  37. Artyom says:

    Uncinus position, is understandably politically correct. I understand his points very well. On this particular theme though, there is nothing about this that is even smart. This is the most silliest conspiracy ever. There is NO smoking gun at all. I let my friend try to persuade me they are real. I listened to all the arguments. Not one is even convincing. The best they come up with was a few water tests of barium. It is undescribable how silly taking ground samples to prove what’s in a contrail from the sky. Only contrails directly tested with an aircraft would tell. There is not ONE chemtrail plane shown that isn’t thoroughly explained. The biggest thing they have is “I See So Therefore I Know”. Which does NOT Qualify as being knowledgeable in contrails or what they call chemtrails. My friend says the long lasting contrails are the chemtrails. Even though they are thoroughly explained scientifically. The too big to be conspiracy is correct with this one too. What do these people do with their “education”? They go outside with video cameras and video tape contrails and post them on Youtube and write absolute nonsense about something they have NO idea about. This site is great though as it really just shows things in simple ways. It is very informative as it shows some photos like spray attachment from the icing modificaiton to test icing on wings which was used as proof of an aerosol sprayer. These things give the whole picture and doesn’t manipulate minds, but informs them. If they so educated themselves, in this economic situation, I am sure many jobs await these people in environmental science, meteorology, and other various positions. They would definitely find them useful. See, that’s the education we’re talking about. And they have the answers, but they don’t want to listen to them.

  38. Artyom says:

    @SR1419 There is a HUGE difference between calling someone uneducated or ignorant and Stupid. Huge! And the theme is contrails and what they believe are chemtrails. I didn’t call anyone stupid.

  39. Well, I’d not say that I’m trying to be politically correct here, just an effective communicator.

  40. SR1419 says:

    Arty- I agree- …and I wasn’t referring to you specifically- just in general-

    Having said that- it takes very good communication skills to let them know that just because you called them ignorant doesn’t mean you called them stupid- In their defensiveness they often take it the same way.

  41. Artyom says:

    @Uncinus. Well, isn’t that the art of being politically correct? To take the lowest denominator, take this person’s sensitivities, and make sure they take no offense to the information given? I appreciate your work and even more, your patience on this subject. A lot of the people who come here still call you a shill or a dis-info agent. Though hopefully, it does help with some.

    @SR1419. I understand now you are just continuing the theme. I guess it does take good communication skills and reading text immediately handicaps people’s perception as they can not hear inflections and read body language. However, the world has an English dictionary available. No shame in opening it. I always do to expand my own vocabulary.
    We could call NASA scientists ignorant on certain things. Like what’s on Mars and so forth, but they send rovers to remedy these questions and follow a scientific protocol. Their observations and questions go through the scientific method. It is the answers from this method that we listen to not the man itself.
    So even avoiding these facts and not using these words, is in itself insulting as it insinuates a lack of intelligence, yes? ex. “he doesn’t know the difference between ignorant and stupid so lets be quiet”. If people want honest information, I found this site gives it to them.

    Faithinscience is correct, the truth is never counter productive. Some of their minds are in a state of paranoia. It is getting so sad that one woman filmed light refraction from a garden hose and then continue on ignorantly about chemicals. Yes, there are chemicals in water, but to keep bacterial growth from forming in the pipelines that could cause health problems. Some chemicals are chlorine, but they evaporate and some cases don’t last further away from the purification plants so they are replacing it with Chloramine. Letting water stand does NOT let chloramine leave the water. The woman needs to learn what light refraction is before she even begins to study chemicals. Not qualified. Light refraction explains what they are calling chembows. Light refraction is nothing new. This woman is ungrateful she has clean water. There are still places in the world where people get very dirty water.

  42. Truth is never counterproductive in science, but in casual debate it’s generally not helpful to say things that you know the other person will take offense at. That’s regardless of if those things are true, or if you personally find them inoffensive.

    The bottom line is that pointing out people’s lack of education upsets them, and makes them resistent to argument. That’s what actually happens. What you think should happen is irrelevant.

  43. faithinscience says:

    When someone makes claims of “fact” (as the chemtrail theorists do often), I think it’s important to point out that they don’t possess the qualifications to make such claims. Yes, you have admitted that you don’t have a formal education in these subjects, but you learned from those who do by accepting the peer reviewed truths of aviation/the atmosphere. I think it’s VERY important to point out that others (chemtrail believers) are accepting information form those unqualified to teach anyone, anything. Go ahead, continue to justify your censorship, it doesn’t change the fact that these people believe in “chemtrails” because they are VERY poorly educated in the specific subjects they CLAIM to understand. It’s just mind boggling to me that people who haven’t bothered to PROPERLY learn something have the NERVE to continue to spew BULLSHIT when it’s OBVIOUS they are uneducated in the subject! How is that “insulting”?! It’s the FACT! These people NEED to be reminded that they have accepted crap they have “learned” from OTHER uneducated people as fact, and they shouldn’t have! Honestly, I don’t give a shit if they feel insulted or get defensive. They deserve it. They are spreading lies based on their ignorance. I’M offended by THAT! Are you going to censor their lies as to not offend ME?!

  44. JazzRoc says:

    That’s what actually happens. What you think should happen is irrelevant.

    Quite right. On this site it works perfectly.
    However, elsewhere, and with onlookers watching, perhaps some remonstration wouldn’t go amiss.
    After all, the whole hypothesis is repugnant and ignorant, false and harmful. It generates fear and feeds lies, just as unmanaged garbage spreads disease and feeds flies.
    We need to free ourself from this distraction to deal with REAL concerns.
    Clean it up and move on…
    …were it not so interesting…

  45. Honestly, I don’t give a shit if they feel insulted or get defensive. They deserve it. They are spreading lies based on their ignorance. I’M offended by THAT! Are you going to censor their lies as to not offend ME?!

    It’s not about avoiding offending people, it’s about promoting science and reason. I don’t care about offending. I don’t care if you are offended, or if other people are offended. I just care about effectively communicating the facts about contrails and the “chemtrail” theory.

    If you give people the perception that you are insulting them, then that does not help that goal. If you really feel the need to point out people’s lack of education, then there’s plenty of opportunity to do that elsewhere.

    I don’t particularly mind people insulting me or you, because I’m not trying to promote their pseudoscience.

  46. faithinscience says:

    And part of “the facts of chemtrail theory” is that they are spread by the ignorant. There is no “help” toward a “goal”. No matter how much you pussyfoot around to promote happy-happy joy-joy feelings and “effective communication”, it won’t change anything. These people aren’t here to be manipulated by your kind use of the English Language! They are here to prove their ignorance! Hiding that fact from them is doing nobody any favors. I DON’T really feel the “need” to post the TRUTH about their education. I just don’t think I should be censored for posting that truth! And writing the word “Ironic” when a chemtrail believer suggests OTHERS aren’t educated is, again, posting truth. It IS ironic when a chemtrail believer suggests anyone else is uneducated about anything! Does it REALLY deserve censorship?! gimme a break…

  47. Artyom says:

    I have been thinking it could be offensive for someone who has sought a good education to be called uneducated. However, this “Chemtrail” theory is incomprehensible how it has existed this long or at all to begin with. I certainly due hope people don’t get defensive, take a look at their materials, and compare what they think they know to this site. All of it will come to a completion here as most things are sold to them in halves to present the truth.

    As for where are the contrails in photos? I personally looked through my photos for past 3 years and only have one I took few months ago when I finally found a contrail go overhead, it lasted quite a long time too. There is also a power plant on the horizon that has the plumes of rising moisture from the cooling towers which are very similar to contrails in nature.

  48. It would be interesting to do an actual scientific survey of how the sky has changed based on casual photos. Of course the amount of photos taken has greatly increased, but you’d think that the average contrails/photo ratio for a given year should be proportional to the amount of air traffic.

    Someone could probably do an automated system with image recognition. There’s probably all kinds of interesting data mining opportunities in the Flickr photo pool.

    Personally I’ve got thousands of digital photos going back to 1999, and scans of photos before that. But I have to look very hard to find photos of contrails. I’ve not found any in my pre 1999 photos, which on the face of it would support the contrail theory. But not if you look at the actual relative number of photos, seing as only about one in a thousand of my modern photos have an accidental contrail in them (of course I’ve got hundreds of shots I took deliberately, when actually looking for contrails).

  49. Artyom says:

    Yes, the images will change in appearance, but more likely due to changes in technology with the photo-cameras rather than the sky itself, but the documentation of increase air traffic or more cloud cover than usual? That is definitely an interesting idea.

  50. faithinscience says:

    “I have been thinking it could be offensive for someone who has sought a good education to be called uneducated.”

    Yeah, this happens to me with every encounter I have with a chemtrail believer. I studied hard and paid LOT’S of money (in 80’s dollars) to learn about aviation and the atmosphere from those qualified to teach me, and I’m supposed to turn the other cheek when some dullard tells me I’m “wrong” simply because he/she found videos on the internet?!? I’m looking forward to more censorship and the inevitable banning I will receive here for sticking up for myself and defending the truth against those who are unable to recognize it.

  51. Artyom says:

    I’d enjoy talking with you, FaithinScience. I understand Uncinus and you. I posted many times on Alex Jone’s site since I found it referenced many times. I was afforded no respect or equal voice on the subject. I saw how they’ve treated you on youtube. Your last account was actually hysterical, but it still held factual information(still remember your comment about on and off trails and one section targetting a community LOL). Many people treat Uncinus poorly through out these pages. The problem is those who do come here we want to learn and not be the type you found on Youtube. I do want to bite my tongue though for Uncinus sake because I think his efforts here are important. The whole premise is we understand that this whole chemtrail theory is based off of ignorance. That said, anyone who loves the sky and reads about contrails does so because they want to know about it. They are at first ignorant of what a contrail is and then learn. The passion for learning is the desire to fill the emptiness of ignorance with knowledge.(hopefully proper knowledge). A true wiseman is one who asks questions.

  52. faithinscience says:

    Had I not been censored, I’d have no problem. And I believe it to be VERY important to point out that there isn’t a single soul on the planet who HAS been formally educated in aviation and atmospheric science AND “believes” in “chemtrails” (not that I have been made aware of anyway). What these people (chemtrail believers) do is NOT “research” on the internet, It’s information gathering with confirmation bias. They “believe” they are “educating” themselves. They need to understand that THAT, isn’t “education”. They (chemtrail believers) START with the belief that “chemtrails” are real, and then accept anything that supports their position as “fact” and anything that goes against their beliefs, as “disinformation”. Just as religious folks accept everything that says their “god” is the ONLY correct deity while rejecting the pleas of others to consider THEIR god. I think it’s VERY important to point out that someone who makes claims of fact, with NOTHING to back it up is showing their ignorance. Awwww….the truth hurts?!? Too bad! If I were to start spewing crap on a forum about Nuclear Radiation and I was screwing it all up and posting nonsense, WHY would I be upset when an EDUCATED person sets me straight?! WHY would I be upset when someone points out my ignorance on the subject?! Don’t these people want to know if they are on the wrong track?! Don’t they WANT to learn the facts about these subjects from someone who is QUALIFIED to teach the subjects?!? If not, why?!? I’ll answer my own question…because they WANT to “believe” they are the victim in some government led campaign. It isn’t ABOUT the truth about aviation/atmospheric science…it’s about the need for some people to live in fear of things they don’t understand. They WANT to feel oppressed! They don’t care about the truth in this matter!!! Again, had I not been censored…and someone gave me a VALID argument why it’s wrong to point out that someone hasn’t properly educated themselves, I wouldn’t be harping on this issue. Out of all the things that could be censored on this site, mine was the most offensive?!? I find that VERY hard to believe.

  53. The problem is NOT being offensive. There are far more offensive things that I have left up.

    The problem is simply one of effective communication. You, with the best of intentions, and with total accuracy, say someone lacks an education in the subject. They, being perhaps not the best reasoners around, interpret that as you saying they are uneducated and hence stupid. They get angry, and they stop listening.

    Now of course they are wrong. Of course you are right. But if communication fails to happen, then what’s the point? Can’t we just take it as read that they lack education in certain fields, and then provide that education for them. Why bother stooping to their level, angering them and failing to communicate, when you can make the point far more effectively by showing them where they are wrong.

    Remember JazzRoc and the Bard?


    JazzRoc started out badly, alienating his friend, who blocked him. But then eventually science won the day when JazzRoc mad a good point about solar halos. But I’d suggest it was touch and go, and if they were not friends to start out with then the argument would have led nowhere, as JazzRoc has a rather unforgiving method of communication.

    And I believe it to be VERY important to point out that there isn’t a single soul on the planet who HAS been formally educated in aviation and atmospheric science AND “believes” in “chemtrails” (not that I have been made aware of anyway).

    I point that out all the time. I make the point that such a conspiracy would require the complicity of all the scientists and meteorologists in the world, as well as a retroactive re-writing of all the science books in all the libraries in the world.

    So please, continue point out ignorance where you find it. I simply ask that you be polite, in order to facilitate communication, and that you show them how they are mistaken, and not tell them they are ignorant. You might not agree with this approach, but I respectfully request that if you continue posting here then you keep it in mind.

  54. faithinscience says:

    “They, being perhaps not the best reasoners around, interpret that as you saying they are uneducated and hence stupid. They get angry, and they stop listening.”

    So, I have to pussyfoot around and pretend that I don’t understand the nuances of the English language so that ignorant people will communicate with you, and STILL not understand that they are wrong?! OK, got it! Stop deluding yourself into “believing” that you have helped anyone in any way. These people look at this site as a joke! It’s a site that you created to prove that YOU have accepted the “government story”. It only serves as proof to them that YOU are the uneducated one…that YOU have failed to see the truth because YOU have been tricked into believing the nonsense that they are teaching in schools. The Bard Of Ely is a VERY rare case! Again, you are deluding yourself if you “believe” you have helped anyone. If you think pointing out a complete lack of education is a SPECIFIC subject is impolite, I have news for ya…it’s not..it’s simply stating the fact. I am COMPLETELY uneducated in astrophysics and if someone pointed that out to me, I would agree.

    I will “try” to be respectful from now on.. But, if they insist on insulting MY intelligence and suggesting I’M the uneducated one, I will be defending myself and the truth about the lines in the sky. If YOU want to “effectively communicate” with these people…go for it. Don’t FORCE me to do the same. I don’t pretend to speak for you!

  55. Cool. So, since everyone is here, I was thinking of writing a post about the connection between the major “chemtrail” popularizers and quack medicine. Things along the lines of:

    William Thomas -> USANA

    Scott Stevens -> Blue Water Alchemy

    Alex Jones -> Super Natural Silver

    The idea being to show how people might have ulterior motives for promoting the theory, beyond simply being noble citizen scientists.

    Any other suggestions?

  56. huemaurice1 says:

    Hi !

    What temperature formed the chemtrails? And the contrails?
    “-40 ° C”? And -39 ° C or-41 ° C not?
    Why are there no 87.000 chemtrails by days in the USA?
    A quelle température se forment les chemtrails ? Et les contrails ?
    “-40°C” ? Et à -39°C ou à -41°C non ?!
    Pourquoi il n’y a pas 87.000 chemtrails par jours aux USA ?

  57. -40 (both C and F) is a useful rule of thumb, but it’s not a hard limit. It also depends on the engine characteristics (the “contrail factor”), and the humidity and pressure.

    There are not 87,000 contrails per day because not all planes fly through air where the conditions are right for contrails.

  58. SR1419 says:


    I think it is about what you are trying to accomplish- If you want to actually succeed in convincing them the error of their ways then it is more effective to take the higher road. Yelling at them that they are “ignorant” only makes them defensive. Getting into insult laden flame wars only makes them defensive and accomplishes nothing.

    I know its hard when they are calling you shill this and shill that-I have too often taken the bait and the discussion degenerates into a shouting match- but if you only give them facts, sources and logic and do not return insults then they really have no footing for argument. I am not saying do not defend yourself…but the facts speak for themselves and they need to come to that realization on their own…you can just show them the path.

    If you just want to fight then by all means have it at…

    As for quack medicine- I think Carnicom and his Morgellons meme is a major one:


    and a Dr. Staninger is knee deep in it as well:



  59. Yeah, I saw Carnicom, but he does not seem to be selling anything. He does ask for donations though.

    Staninger on the other hand seems to be selling all kinds of quackery to treat “exposure to aerial emissions”, thanks for the link.

  60. huemaurice1 says:

    Hi and thanks,
    It is true that this would be a mistake to manufacture and say that they are for spraying aircraft Boeing. Thousands of employees in the secret, etc, etc.
    But… that manufactures aircraft for the spraying against the GW?
    Secret? Thousands of troops are in Iraq & Afghanistan… the secret.
    They are not the comments in the press.
    The cloud seeding with… with what? By whom?
    If it were water or orange juice: they would say!
    C’est vrai que ce serait une erreur pour Boeing de fabriquer et de dire qu’ils font des avions pour épandages. Des milliers d’employés au secret, etc, etc.
    Mais… qui fabrique les avions pour les épandages contre le GW ?
    Secret ? Des milliers de soldats sont en Irak & Afghanistan… au secret.
    Ils ne font pas des commentaires dans la presse.
    Les ensemencements de nuages avec… avec quoi ? Par qui ?
    Si c’était de l’eau ou du jus d’orange: ils le diraient !

  61. huemaurice, I’m afraid I don’t understand your point. Perhaps you can give a reference or a link to show what you are talking about? What is the GW?

    Cloud seeding is done with silver iodine.


  62. huemaurice1 says:

    GW = Global Warming

  63. Okay. But I’m still not sure what your point was. There’s no evidence of any large scale climate change operations going on.

    It is possible. But there is no evidence. So why believe?

  64. huemaurice1 says:

    “Cloud seeding is done with silver iodine”? You’re sure? It is you who verify each aircraft?
    Because I have seen videos of coffins in Georgia & Texas. With coffins plastic black for 5 or 6 people! (12 or 15 children?).
    In fact, what tell elected officials on the applications by aircraft? “ChemtrailGate”?

    “Cloud seeding is done with silver iodine.” ?! Vous en êtes sûr ? C’est vous qui vérifiez chaque avion ?
    Parce que, j’ai vu des vidéos de cercueils en Georgie & Texas. Des cercueils en plastique noirs pour 5 ou 6 personnes ! (12 ou 15 enfants ?).
    Au fait, qu’est ce que disent les élus sur les épandages par avions ? “ChemtrailGate” ?

  65. There’s no evidence that it’s not silver iodine. And that’s what is generally used. Besides, the contrails don’t look anything like cloud seeding. They are just normal persistent contrails. Totally different.

    The “coffins” you have seen are grave liners or casket liners. Many states require them around a coffin. Someone saw a stockpile of them in a field and mistook them for coffins, and linked them to the “FEMA” conspiracy theory.

    But back to contrails. What evidence is there that some trails are deliberate spraying?

  66. Artyom says:

    There has been a new story released by Alex Jone’s infowars.com about some anonymous ex-employee who states the Tuscon Evergreen Air company is a CIA front and that’s where they modify aircraft for “Chemtrail” operations. They provide no proof of anything only allegations. This story is now beginning its circulation in the chemtrail community.


    Now one can go to the Evergreen website and see this Airfield is called Marana in Tuscon Arizona. They state that they choose this place due to the dry conditions which are suitable for aircraft storage.


    Here are facts on the Marana airfield


    I don’t think a secret CIA operations base would be available to the public. They are hiring at the airfield.


    I am sure many others here can add more about this place as my work around aircraft ended when I left the military. What is certain is this story can on survive through a person’s willingness to accept a story at face value. They go to a site and believe it.

  67. ANGRY[VERY] says:


  68. Arytom says:

    We can take your observation as proof. Wow, I see tons of these trails myself… All the chemicals I’ve seen don’t behave like clouds but rapidly dissipate or are barely visible…. I’ll take your word for it. Too bad you are the classic LOOK THEY’RE SPRAYING US…type that provides no proof other than your “professional” opinion from a prospective 8000 meters below…. Sorry, I will stick with science, which proves contrails exist… yes they are like clouds and yes clouds are known to block out sunlight, called a cloudy day…. The contrails usually procedes a change of weather, on the cold front side. If you believe in “Chemtrails”, then stop driving your car because your car has exhaust too… It is a combustion engine interacting with the atmosphere. You must be horrified seeing car exhaust in winter trailing down the street from all the cars in traffic…. Damn them, they’re spraying us too…. Electric plants have cooling towers… damn them they are part of the plot too! Do you see those plumes going up to the atmosphere and traveling off to the horizon. We will need the doomsday vault if they build more of these dihydrogen monoxide poison pumping death stations…

  69. Bill says:

    This is not conspiracy theory, this is a fact of life. I have pictures of these chem trails from outside my house in Reno, NV. I have watched the planes and they are not flying commercial routes. They make a grid pattern of trails in the sky. We need to start worrying about the effect of contamination in our food and water supplies.

  70. TheFactsMatter says:

    ” I have pictures of these chem trails from outside my house in Reno, NV. ”

    No, you have pictures of contrails. Unless you have evidence that there is anything “extra” in the trails outside your house, how can you possibly make any such claim and expect to be taken at all seriously?!

    Also, how are YOU able to tell is a plane is flying a “commercial route” or not?! What a ridiculous claim! Where did you learn about “commercial routes” anyway?! Youtube?
    The grids are caused by parallel or intersecting paths within areas of the atmosphere which contain the correct conditions for persistent contrail creation. Your claim isn’t evidence of “chemtrails”. It’s evidence of your ability to fall for a hoax.

    The fact is, there are a lot of people in this world who have fooled themselves into “believing” that an education in aviation and atmospheric science isn’t necessary to understand these subjects. Chemtrails aren’t a “fact of life”. They are nonsense. Please feel free to prove me wrong.

  71. captfitch says:

    He won’t be back. Post and run.

  72. Mike says:

    Way back at the top of this thread Jerry Montgommery in London was building orgone cloudbusters. I would dearly love to know how well they worked – have the chemtrails disappeared from over London??

    A Jerry Montgomery has a few articles to his name at http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/menu.html – I suspect they are the same person, but who knows for sure…apart from him!

  73. ken says:

    I have a photo that I took this past weekend for anyone interested (email me). that shows a jet flying among a sky full of chemtrails (left by aircraft that had passed minutes earlier) and the jet in question emits a normal, quickly fading, contrail (the kind I used to associate with jets flying over head). Same weather conditions, within minutes of each other, and judging from size of the aircraft, probably similar altitudes. This photographed aircraft does not emit a persistant trail as it flies among a sky that is literally streaked full of persistent trails. Someone please explain how this could logically occur. (over the midwestern united states)

  74. Not the same altitude. It only takes a few hundred feet to be in or out of a particular body of air. See:


  75. captfitch says:

    Yeah- sorry, that was me.

    Actually I was thinking about this as I was cruising through the trails yesterday: generally speaking the march of technology in aviation is slowing in one respect- altitude attainment. I would say that up until recently the upper limit of all the various aircraft was pretty varied. Some could only go to the lower thirties, some could make the upper thirties, a few could make the low forties and a very very small number could comfortably make the mid forties. As technology has improved and with the advent of RVSM most aircraft are cruising in the upper thirties and lower forties. So effectively there has been some altitude usage compression. That said, when there is an area condusive to persistent contrails and it corresponds to an altitude that is heavily used there are many more trails than would have existed in the past.

    I hope this makes sense.

  76. So, more planes fly at similar altitudes, so when you get a day when the weather is right, then the number of contrails is much higher, giving a more spectacular and noticeable display.

    When would you say this started to happen?

  77. captfitch says:

    I guess it’s slowly been happening for quite some time and when RVSM kicked in it really compressed everything.

  78. Mike says:

    “Reduced vertical separation minimum (RVSM) was implemented in the North Atlantic
    (NAT) Region on 27 March 1997. RVSM will be implemented in selected areas of the
    Pacific and Mid-Asia regions on 24 February 2000. RVSM is also planned to be
    implemented in the European region in 2001.”

    -from the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority Advistory Circular on RVSM, AC91-4, Rev 1, dated 24 Jan 2000 – http://www.caa.govt.nz/advisory_circulars/ac91-4.pdf

    so perhaps the plan for Europe was a bit optimistic in 2000? 🙂

  79. patthecat says:

    This thread is nonsensical. You say that chemtrailers believe contrails are chemtrails therefore to a chemtrailer all photos of contrails are photos of chemtrails. D’uh.

    SHOW SOME REAL PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE UNCINUS. I want to see old photos that match the skies of today. Where are all the photos that show many contrails across the horizon, where are the grids we see today? You will be hard pressed to show them since by your own admissions the skies today have much greater likelihood of contrails.

    You even show a German photo of testing aircraft engines for contrails. Explain why in your opinion after so much research we end up in a situation where contrails have become so abundant.

  80. TheFactsMatter says:

    “I want to see old photos that match the skies of today”

    That would be hard to do considering the fact that the number of planes in the sky at any given point has increased tremendously over the years. There are PLENTY of photographs of contrails through history. There are simply more of them now because there are many times more planes. But, as a boy, I watched all westbound traffic out of Logan International fly over my house and I saw these trails in abundance in the late 60’s on…Tell me I’m wrong and I’ll call you a liar! I know what I saw! Also, in the days of film cameras, why would anyone waste film and processing costs on taking pictures of man made clouds. We all understood what we saw….why bother saving images of contrails?! We’d see more the very next day…

    We see more images of them NOW because of the “chemtrail hoax” and the because there are so many digital cameras out there. Just as we see more “orbs” than we ever saw before. It doesn’t mean “orbs” are any more of a problem than they used to be.
    What people refer to as “chemtrails” are simply persistent contrails. Always have been…always will be.

    The claim that this article is nonsensical only serves to show that you may not have thought this out as much as you should have.

  81. patthecat, did you see these photos?


    I particularly like this one, from the 1970s

    and this one from pre-1967

  82. patthecat says:


    i said it was nonsensical because chemtrailers believe contrail photos show chemtrails…it was a circular joke. Also, there seems to be no argument that contrails are far more common for various reasons…solar effects like halos are becoming more frequent too.

    @uncinus…are those shots both depicting testing?

  83. The first shot is as labeled. The second I’m not sure. It’s from the 1967 book “Cloud Studies in Colour”. I suspect it’s not normal traffic though, due to the number of contrails, and the date.

    There’s plenty of old shots of more normal trails though.

    I’m not sure there’s any empirical way of demonstrating that solar halos are becoming more frequent. Nobody has been counting solar halos per year. Its the sort of thing you notice more if you are looking for it. It’s quite possible though, as contrails can create an ice haze where normally there would be none.

  84. TheFactsMatter says:

    “it was a circular joke. ”

    Oh, ha ha.

  85. atthehelm says:

    Here is the form to fill out to modify the weather in the state of Texas.
    It is called cloud seeding and has been done for almost a half a century.

  86. TheFactsMatter says:

    “It is called cloud seeding and has been done for almost a half a century.”

    Cloud seeding has nothing to do with the trails in the sky.

    Also, the rain clouds that cloud seeding “seeds” are not created by the procedure.

  87. LibertyJewel says:

    Ok you say these “contrails” form at high altitudes at temperatures -40 below and in high humidity, right? Well, how about when the weather is hot and very very dry. That’s when I notice the most persistant chemtrails of all and they are not that high all the time. Your “science” is full of malarkey. These things are not natural and your “science” is flawed.

  88. captfitch says:

    Maybe your observations are flawed.

    I would suggest looking up what lapse rate is.

  89. Stupid says:

    LibertyJewel, have you examined the science ? The answer is in there, as well as elsewhere on this site.
    I could show you exactly where to find such an explanation here or elsewhere, but It would be best if you went and found it on your own.
    Let me know if you cannot find it.

  90. Ross Marsden says:

    Yep, we say these “contrails” form at high altitudes at temperatures -40 below and in high humidity.
    And you say, Well, how about when the weather is hot and very very dry.
    And we say, It don’t matter what the weather is down here; it’s up there that these “contrails” are being formed.

  91. MikeC says:

    Just to add a little information to teh cryptic repleis above…shame on you guys! :p….”lapse rate” is the rate at which the temperature decreases the higher you go.

    Typically the rate is about 2 dec C per 1000 feet. So if it is 80 deg F/27 Deg C at sea level you could expect it to be about -43 at 35,000 feet.

  92. Mike says:

    Science, excuse my French, is bullsh!t.
    Most prominent scientists are media hugry whores who get funded by the big pharmaceuticals/corporations who require a specific outcome, based on theory.
    You can ask three different scientists the same question and chances are, they’ll provide three different answers.

    Give me mathematics anytime: 1+1=2 everytime!

    amazed says:

    February 2, 2008 at 3:18 pm
    dear god. if we were under mind control from the skies, why would they let us think about what are all these lines in the sky.
    hell, if i were to deliberately poison my entire country i would do it in the food or water were its not sitting around for everyone to see for hours on end.
    uncinus, im sorry you have to even disprove this nonsense “

    Amazed – Try researching the health hazards surrounding flouride, soya, vaccines etc etc.

    Most people are too “program”ed with the garbage spewing from the Media and too indoctrinated by the public fool system.

  93. How are you going to research it without referencing the work of scientists?

    Wouldn’t any info on the health effects of fluoride come from science, and scientists?

    And what does this have to do with contrails?

  94. Mike says:

    I stated that most “prominent” scientists are funded by the big Pharma/Corporations like Glaxco, Pfizer et al, who pay/fund for their representatives to pass bills in government in order to make a profit, be it cancer research drugs etc.

    Too many leading scientists and medical parctitioners have been ostracized for speaking out against the norm. It is these scientists research and views that need to also be taken into account as part of the big picture when doing one’s own research, but my point is, you will always get conflicting opinions, as science is based on theory and not fact. This doesn’t help when there’s a fat pay check as an incentive to influence a particular result.

    This has everything to do with Con/Chemtrails, as “science” is the basis on which people lay their (normally unresearched) beliefs, e.g. air density/temperatures, dissipitation and covalence etc etc.

  95. What do you think about the claim of science that a contrail can persist and spread? And if that’s not it, what’s the specific science you disagree with, and why?

  96. Kamran says:

    Let me guess Mike, any science that disagrees with your views is funded by big pharma/corporations, but anything that agrees with them is real science?

  97. Mike says:

    I find it very strange that this site has existed since 2007 trying to disprove chemtrails and disregard people’s opinions as “observer bias”, be they correct or not.
    The fact that so many people feel this way and are compelled to post their comments (myself included), no doubt helps optimize your site through internet search engines and air your views. (hence, my last post on this site).

    If you were content with your scientific research, why do you find it necessary to “carry on the cause”?
    As such, I can only pressume you to be a professional shill.

    All the best my friend.

    Mike (UK plc)

    ps: I think we have a right to clear air and skies and evreyone should have that choice, not just corporations soley bent on profit.

    How about keeping business local, or holidaying locally? Supporting local produce and being part of smaller, more responsible communities, with less government intervention?
    Not the entire solution I know, but a step in the right direction?

    pps: Vote Ron Paul !!

  98. I’m not “trying to disprove chemtrails”. I’m debunking. That means identifying what bits of supposed evidence is bunk. I enjoy doing it, and I like helping people learn more about science and stuff. I also think the tide of unreason is potentially harmful, and that trying to hold it back is a good thing.

    Being anti-big-government does not automatically mean you HAVE to suspect all conspiracy theories are true. Look to the actual evidence.

Comments are closed.