Contrails & Chemtrails
 

Anyone know about Contrails vs. Chemtrails....and the conspiracy linked to these? Saw this elsewhere on the Net and it scared the bejeebus outta me.

Various universaty lab weathermen and independent scientists (and theorists, of course) have collected photos showing abnormal patterns in the skies behind legal daily airplanes in the US and these scientists claim the government is testing chems on demographic areas that cause test data for these covert studies and the discussion goes on to use the words culling, weather and population control with such seriousness that I've had nightmares about this ever since!

Strange days indeed.

the chemtrails theory is what happens when you get 20 stupids in a room and let them talk. If they wanna test chemicals, they'll put it in the water supply. Dispersing them at 40,000 feet would be moronic - the high altitude winds would carry them who-knows-where, so you wouldn't get any reliable results.

That added to the fact that I've crawled all over disassembled jetliners and have never seen anything to indicate they have a chemical dispenser system.

And one man who knows all and sees all.

Here we go again.

1. The vehicles of dispersion are not airliners.

2. Its not about intentionally dispersing chemicals for the sake of dispersing agents to the population. What falls just happens to be hamful to living organisms. (unfortunate collateral damage)

3. For the sake of going in circles of scientific data that supports and disproves the "trails" composition being ice or various other harmless particles- heres an experiement anyone can do right outside their home: Over the period of 7 days- document how many trails you see EACH day. Post your findings.

4. Heres a group of at least 20 crazies that may have some credible foundation to examine


This subject has been previously posted:

Itshttp://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38268&perpage=20&pagenumber=1


<embed src="http://www.melaman2.com/tvshows/mp3/X-Files.mp3", loop=TRUE, hidden=TRUE>

I rally hate it when people so easily dismiss things. Tests from residue, and yes, there is residue which you can usually find strung all over your car in the early morning before the sun melts it, has been shown to contain high amounts of boron. Personally, I think they are just doing weather experiments. I've heard theories that they are trying to lower global warming effects by producing boron clouds to block out sunlight/radiation. Anyways, if you're still skeptical, check out http://www.carnicom.com/contrails.htm

With slight occassional variences, Ive observed a pattern of one day each week the sky over my city is free of trails.

Since theres obviously the same consistent amount of air traffic on that day; what does that say about proper conditions being nessesary combined with altitude? What are the odds?

Is there anyone that doesnt believe HAARP exsists?

HAARP is the big thing nowadays. The airborne chemical tests were more of a 1970's thing, when declassified documents prove that "harmless" bacterial agents were dispersed over NYC, Chicago, and LA to test the spread of these biological agents in the cities. The harmless bacteria cause flu-like outbreaks in some sensetive people and at least three reported deaths.

I can't discredit the chemtrail theory completely, as I've seen some myself. I documented some of it in this thread:

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...threadid=38268

Actually, I almost forgot about mentioning the TARFOX program. There are little gems all over the web that give evidence that chemtrails are real. Here is an actual military site that suggests they are: http://geo.arc.nasa.gov/sgg/tarfox/ .

I read in Discover Magazine that they did a study of temperatures following September 11, 2001, when all the airplanes were grounded. With no airplanes in the sky, the daily temperature range across the United States was about 2 degrees Fahrenheit greater than normal.

I had posted an experiment a while back and was wondering if anyone had done it; and what the results were.

Thanks for the link Church.

I'd say it's much too small of a data set to make a clear judgment. Correlation does not equate to causation, but it's possible that it does. If another event caused planes to be grounded for a few days and the temparature were 2 degrees higher than normal, you might have found a theory worth pursuing.

I've only ever seen it a couple times , maybe the folks around here don't need culling. :) Lots of US military planes fly over here making white streaks, i saw two on different occasions last summer made black streaks. I stopped on the side of the road and watched, similar speed and travel direction as the other planes.

I wanted to inquire if anyone had pictures of themselves or family members prior to 1984 with sky showing; and if there were any "trails" in the pictures.

(not asking you to post them- unless you want to ofcourse, I'm just curious if anyone has them in their photos)

This is Tilted Paranoia. Remember? As in "things that can't currently be substantiated" or are "unreasonable".

What's unreasonable is to expect that the government will do things like this at some incredible cost involving countless people and yet not have one bit of tangible evidence for it. You'd think that at least one of the thousands of people involved would be willing to risk blowing the whistle......

Thats called a conspiracy.

If you have time or interest, here are 3 links to sites that are unrelated (source wise), dont mention any kind of government program, or even the word chemtrails. There is however a common denominator.


healthandenergy.com/asthma_triggers.htm


http://www.joem.org/pt/re/joem/fullt...VvLglg2L5j6yrw
(im working on fixing this link)


http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?re...12018&page=195


http://www.aklung.org/air-quality/anchorage-air-quality







Does this prove the government (or someone) is lacing the skies with harmful elements? It boils down to what you consider proof, and who you find providing the proof as credible. There lies the issue of why so many things are debatable. Allot of individuals I know base everything on what they see in the news. (Example: If GWB and Cheny had anything either to do with 911 or deliberately not preventing the events; it would be all over the news.)


Im just trying to clarify your point; are you stating its unreasonable because a whistleblower has not made headline news- thus putting the military and top leaders on trial for criminal acts, or are you stating it must not be true because there is no reason for "chemtrails" to be a reality vs contrails.

An interesting clip---

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6-RMuc0-fpc&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6-RMuc0-fpc&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

probable debunker point (its a home video there is no way to tell the varied height of the aircraft- one is simply at an elevation that will evaporate the crystals)

My response post debate after debate after debate (do the research, seek mulitple sources- avoid conspiracy sources that just openly state YES CHEMTRAILS EXSIST VIA NEW WORLD ORDER AGENDA) look for points that seem to present themselves over and over again.

As I state last year a simple experiment you can see first hand: If you live in a city where you see "trails- for the sake of the conversation". Start observing the one to two days you dont see trails. One might think that not seeing them a day out of the week is any big deal. Keep observing in the weeks to come and you will notice that every week has a trail free day.

If the trails were just ice crystals lingering behind; atmospheric conditions that would cause them evaporate one day and linger another would be a reasonable explanation. What are the odds that those conditions would only happen once or twice consistently EVERY week?

Are they girl airplanes or boy airplanes?

Could be a hormone thing.

Sorry couldn't help it.

3 years slow on that response will.

they are of the male gender, dont mention it- nothing a nice daily dose of boron wont cure, Im sure you have had yours, unless you live in the Grand Canyon.

I was aware of it the whole time. There are like 5 threads on 9/11 in paranoia and 1 in politics. If you look carefully, you'll see that they're different.

Will you really need to lighten up.

I was taking into account the cumulative correspondence between you and I on the subject. I wasn't sure if you were jesting or not.

Sorry Sun, I'm still not buying it. I have a hard time believing that the gubment would spend countless dollars planning, protecting, and executing something of this scale when it could achieve the same thing in a much more efficient means at a greatly reduced cost. That is not to say that the gubment doesn't spend gobs of cash on silly/sinister things, but simple logic tells me that when there's a way to do something like this and still have enough money left over to buy everyone involved a yacht, then that's the way they'll do it.

Of course, applying "simple logic" to anything the government does is probably my failing point......

Before I can agree or disagree, which theory are you picking to disagree with? I ask because I want to know which "thing" you are talking about the government would save money doing a different way.

Firstly, don't expect a first-rate debate from me, I simply don't care to put a lot of energy into this subject.

Secondly, the whole concept that the government or "new world order" is taking the funding and time to poison the population from the tail end of aircraft is what I'm calling BS on.

Who knows if they are real. But the fact remains that many people have seen these trails in the sky with there own eyes. I have several pictures of them that I have taken as I like to take pictures of them when I see them. They are not like normal contrails as they do not disappear after 15 or so seconds, they last hours. I live in Calgary and they end up here fairly often, but a couple summers ago I took a road trip across Vancouver Island and they were all over the place. I would see planes just going back and forth across the sky and none of the trails would disappear, they would just spread out and stay for hours.

So they are disperse chemicals in a trail that doesn't disperse for hours and hours?

That or atmospheric conditions were such that they would just stay longer becoming basically man made clouds.

Contrails are as old as high altitude flight.....

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/9076/contrailqj8.jpg

http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/7...ntrail2jn4.jpg

http://img340.imageshack.us/img340/3228/con3qm8.jpg

So either they are 'really' chemicals and have 10000's of people hiding it for 60 years....

Or the crazy websites are wrong and the scientists are right.

contrails generally disappear in about 30 seconds. Chemtrails seem to expand and become cloud like.

But what the hell do I know. It just doesn't look right to see checkerboard patterns in the air.

Here is a picture that I took, can't really tell with the low res but you can really see it on the high res version. Checkerboard pattern of clouds dispersing into a thin cloud-like layer. Picture taken on September 15th 2005 at Calaway Park outside of Calgary, Alberta.

Happens in Vancouver too. And being just across the US border makes me wonder where they are going or coming from to be criss crossing like that.
I used to think they were maybe military jets heading between Alaska and Seattle or maybe Idaho but sometimes the trails go east and west.

Yeah, the trails are there a long time.

I used to put IMO, or history as I’ve interpreted it in front of allot of what I posted. I did this because I became irritated when someone would post historical information as if the same data wasn’t available to the rest of the TFP community. It didn’t take a Phd to google something or go to a library, or any other source that wasnt classified information. Therefore it came down to how a person was going to interpret something. I wanted anyone reading what I posted to know I wasn’t getting on a soapbox and telling them “how things were”. In my time as a member I’ve have posted some things that weren’t very nice, always reactionary and retaliatory. While I felt good initially, I usually never felt the same after going back and reading it.

People are going to respond how they will, its not my place to judge- and I know it wouldn’t matter to anyone if I did; rightly so. “IMO” it seems people post to argue, to create one, or just be generally aggressive. Their demeanor can be seen through their presentation of words. I’m working at not taking things personally, so instead of replying to this in a fashion that my first reaction would guide me to do, I’ll word it differently.

I’m looking at the statement I wrote and I’m trying to determine how the verbiage would escalate a response such as yours. When I stated I needed clarification into which theory, I meant it literally. If that sounded like I was being a smart ass, it wasn’t my intention- I don’t know how I could have worded it any differently.

Firstly,
I specifically stated to avoid sites or sources that talk about a NW
O referencing chemtrails. I wanted to know if you were talking about their application to radar and atmospheric manipulation (nothing NWO).

Secondly,
I wont expect a first rate debate from you. A good debate produces an arena where hopefully both sides may learn something. Its obvious you don’t read posts in their entirety, so that tells me you didn’t stop in here to debate. You want to give your opinion, great- you did. Other than promoting your opinion why put any more energy into than that. To restate something you have already made apparent. OK, I’ll save you time- I really, really know and understand you think a New World Order Conspiracy behind chemtrails (even though I’ve never stated that) is BS. Thanks for your 2 cents.


Ustwo, thanks for the pictures. They confirm contrails. All except the last one clearly show the trails dispersing after a distance. The last one IMO would further clarify itself if it were footage. Who’s lying? Where are the questions being asked? Does the government deny this? It always goes back to the very question of what sources are going to start someone to question what they are being told (if even a little).
I go back to the response you gave (about the woods) allot when I’m thinking. My reply with a video was a poor choice because I think the point you made is valid and well based.

I say that because I know I would be generally happier if I didn’t question things. I’m well aware if a person seeks darkness in things they will find it. I don’t want a life of darkness. But I’ve witnessed things both in and out of the military that have given me the reality just because I choose not to believe something doesn’t mean its not happening. People like push pull will not investigate something because to them its crazy or a “waste of time”. That’s fine that’s their choosing, but when they haven’t taken the time, it may also suggest in doing so, they may find things to didn’t want to know.

Connecting the dots is a persons choice. Like for this subject you don’t go to sites that promote chemtrails as a real conspiracy, starting with information that is free from conspiracy sources provides a clearer “real” trail, and then going from there.


http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...186&RS=5003186


http://www.google.com/patents?id=v14...m=4&dq=3899144


Ustwo, with your training do you really think there is nothing to seeing a consistent one day trail free every week?

Perhaps if you think they are chem trails you should wear a gas mask all the time to not only protect yourself from the 'chemicals' but also raise awareness.

If I thought something like this were true I wouldn't take it like a sheep and post on TFP while doing nothing, I'd ACT!!!

Go, I'll even help you...

http://www.approvedgasmasks.com/

You can get an entire biohazard suit to protect yourself on those 'days'.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...threadid=38268
Wow, I sure was paranoid three years ago. What's next, a thread from when I was still religious?

:lol:

Sometimes I wish I could see how I would react to this stuff if I were still <24.

Utswo, while I don't think some huge conspiracy is afoot I still think its kind of fishy. Seeing checkerboard patterns in the sky turning a clear day into a cloudy one is always strange, I didn't know mother nature worked that way. I know they used to "seed clouds" in southern Alberta all the time to try and stop hail storms from ruining crops so this is probably something similar. I suppose it is just something neat to take note of.
If you honestly think that someone would run around all day in a gas mask you have to be insane (or they do). But if you think about it, it really couldn't hurt, I mean what with all that crap cars spit out and factories pump into the air. Maybe I should get a gas mask. With the shit people are wearing nowadays I would probably just start a new trend. Hell, if we could convince Paris Hilton or one of her cronies to wear a gas mask for a day half of North America would own one the very next day

The Paris Hilton thing would be amusing on so many levels.

But really my main evidence they are nothing, besides the science of how they form is that people are not THAT good. I could see this working short term if it were 'real', you could cover up a flight here and there and get away with it, but this would require a multi-decade policy threw different hands, and 1000's on the ground, all sworn to public secrecy. I would have to really really stretch to think how this could happen, all of which would be something for the public good because if it had nefarious purposes there is no way it would be kept quiet. It would be a conspiracy that would make faking 9/11 seem simple by comparison and thats ridiculous enough as it is.

Governments have sprayed stuff from Aircraft they shouldn't, that I suppose is what helps fuel this, but the scale of such a project just wouldn't make sense.

How thoughtful, thank you for your concern. You forgot to mention http://zapatopi.net/afdb/ . . . shouldnt leave home without that either, right?





Part of acting is gathering data. Part of gathering data in an arena such as this is HOPEFULLY drawing from the experiences and knowledge others have to add to my own. I brought this thread up again, because I wanted to know if anyone else out noticed or documented 1-2 days each week that are consistently trail free, and asking for images. I attempted to be civil thanking you for what I viewed as excellent images, and tried to gain some information from the climate expertise you boast so much about. Doing nothing is exactly that; doing nothing- out of sight, out of mind.


Im posting this to replace what I had here before. What I stated previously was done in anger and counterproductive. I should take posts like this with a grain of salt and not let it get to me. This is off topic, but considering what I had here before it suits me better. This does correlate to my point. I am a former Christian. Years back I was ultra conservative and believed the Bible. Fast forward, after several trips to Israel with an archeologist, and countless hours of research, the Bible is nothing more than mythology to me now. I still have many Christian friends however. I’ve learned I can not engage into religious conversations with them because its frustrating for me to try and show them the facts I’ve learned revealing what I have found to be true. I gave up because the agitation factor becomes to great when factual information is presented and is countered with what I view is blind faith. While the topics here are founded with information I view as credible, I wonder if the feelings are similar to someone that doesn’t believe in conspiracies. I just came to peace that some people out there will wait their entire lives for a rapture to occur, and still have faith on their deathbed in the reality it never came.

I not going to respond in anger again to anything posted in this fashion. If I post a conspiracy I have to accept and expect the different ways people will post. I hope the contributions are more like the images you found. I had scoured the net looking for something similar and was unsuccessful. If they are like what you posted above-so be it, everyone is has their methods, and actually are usually humorous.



I will still leave this question, I hope you answer it at some point. I’m respectfully curious, not set up for sharp sarcasm from my part.


You have made references in other threads (government conspiracy threads) that you do believe the government has done actions it shouldn’t have. That there is probably conspiracies to some degree that linger out there. In this very thread you state the government probably has sprayed things in the past it shouldn’t have. Yet a majority of your perspective is nothing is going on. I don’t have to ask you where you stand. I just want to know what your threshold is. What is the gauge that says this isn’t right for you. A little conspiracy here and there is OK. What is the “OK’ point with any of it? You believe the Warren Commission, but in the same breath will admit you think there is some minor wrong doings.

In this thread you state you think there has been some spraying going on. Why? What leads you to believe the government has spray in the past. Can you provide any info on what would lead you to believe the government has ever done such a thing?

Like www.gulfweb.org/bigdoc/rockrep.cfm for example.

Where in the timeline do you think they stopped? If you think there has ever been a conspiracy, then there has also been the point for you to decide you're OK with it and further convince yourself there is nothing more to it.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OiE8ntEWc30&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OiE8ntEWc30&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>




As far as action, while I would like to do much more I’ve a signed petitions to Congress to let them know it’s not OK. Does it mean much? I dont know, but being a sheep as you stated produces eventful results.

www.geocities.com/cactusmailbox/CACTUS.html


http://www.petitiononline.com/t401/petition.html



For anyone else:

A point to bring up--** and to the best of my limited knowledge as I do not claim to be an expert-

Contrails are produced by

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m...e_diagrams.jpg


The “imaginary chemtrails” are produced by one of these patents.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m...enerator-1.gif

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m214/bushwhip/3.jpg

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m...ound3Forum.jpg

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m...et-spray-s.jpg

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m...ails_radar.gif


There are professionals that are experts in various areas that support the trails are not diabolical and not even secret claiming they are being dispersed to counter global warming. Another claim involves radar purposes.

ROBERT McCORMICK ADAMS, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

GEORGE F. CARRIER, T. Jefferson Coolidge Professor of Applied Mathematics, Emeritus, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

RICHARD N. COOPER, Professor of Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

ROBERT A. FROSCH, Vice President, General Motors Research Laboratories, Warren, Michigan

THOMAS H. LEE, Professor Emeritus, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts

JESSICA TUCHMAN MATHEWS, Vice President, World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

WILLIAM D. NORDHAUS, Professor of Economics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut

GORDON H. ORIANS, Professor of Zoology and Director of the Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Washington, Seattle

STEPHEN H. SCHNEIDER, Head, Interdisciplinary Climate Systems, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado

MAURICE STRONG, Secretary General, United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, New York (resigned from panel February 1990)

SIR CRISPIN TICKELL, Warden, Green College, Oxford, England
VICTORIA J. TSCHINKEL, Senior Consultant, Landers, Parsons and Uhlfelder, Tallahassee, Florida

PAUL E. WAGGONER, Distinguished Scientist, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven

PETER BREWER, Executive Director, Monterey Bay Aquarium and Research Center, Pacific Grove, California

RICHARD N. COOPER, Professor of Economics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

ROBERT CRANDALL, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.

ROBERT EVENSON, Professor of Economics, Yale University, Economic Growth Center, New Haven, Connecticut

DOUGLAS FOY, Executive Director, Conservation Law Foundation, Boston, Massachusetts

ROBERT A. FROSCH, Vice President, General Motors Research Laboratories, Warren, Michigan

RICHARD GARWIN, Fellow, Thomas J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York, and Adjunct Professor of Physics, Columbia University, New York

JOSEPH GLAS, Director, Vice President, and General Manager, Fluorochemicals Division, E.I. du Pont, Wilmington, Delaware

KAI N. LEE, Professor and Director, Center for Environmental Studies, Williams College, Williamstown, Massachusetts

GREGG MARLAND, Scientist, Environmental Science Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

JESSICA TUCHMAN MATHEWS, Vice President, World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

ARTHUR H. ROSENFELD, Professor of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, and Director, Center for Building Science, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California

EDWARD S. RUBIN, Professor, Mechanical Engineering and Public Policy, and Director, Center for Energy and Environmental Studies, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

MILTON RUSSELL, Professor of Economics and Senior Fellow, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, and Collaborating Scientist, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

STEPHEN H. SCHNEIDER, Head, Interdisciplinary Climate Systems, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado

EUGENE B. SKOLNIKOFF, Professor of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

THOMAS H. STIX, Professor, Department of Astrophysics and Plasma Physics Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey

EDITH BROWN WEISS, Professor of Law, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. (resigned from panel October 1990)

GEORGE F. CARRIER (Chairman), T. Jefferson Coolidge Professor of Applied Mathematics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

WILFRIED BRUTSAERT, Professor of Hydrology, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

ROBERT D. CESS, Leading Professor, State University of New York, Stony Brook

HERMAN CHERNOFF, Professor of Statistics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

ROBERT E. DICKINSON, Professor, Institute of Atmospheric Physics, Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson

JOHN IMBRIE, H.L. Doherty Professor of Oceanography, Department of Geological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island

THOMAS B. KARL, Meteorologist, Climate Research and Applications, National Climate Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina

MICHAEL C. MacCRACKEN, Physicist and Division Leader, Atmospheric and Geophysical Sciences, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, University of California, Livermore

BERRIEN MOORE, Professor and Director, Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space, University of New Hampshire, Durham

So, what's more likely?

A) The government(s) is/are involved in a conspiracy in which billions of dollars and tens of thousands of people throw crap into the air via the most costly means available. (And for what purpose exactly?)

or

B) Nature actually works, and our galloping through creates some interesting effects.

For a refresher course in how this works, please see
http://www.docweather.com/2/show/40/

I'll even take it one step further....I will flat out state that the government has the ability to cause chemtrails, but can anyone give me a solid answer as to WHY they would do it? And before you tell me that I'm not reading, all I've seen so far is multiple speculations with no hard evidence for any of them.

How would you explain 1 to 2 days each week where there are NO trails in the sky other than the standard contrails. No criss cross patterns, no varied degrees of expanded trails, nothing but true clouds or completely clear sky. Im not talking about a 3 to 4 week run. I started noting this 2 years ago. I will make a prediction, next week there will be a day that no trails will be over my city. This will happen the following week as well, and the week after that, etc. Why only a day? Why not 4 days or 6 days? Why isnt there 3 weeks between them? 3 months? How do these conditions happen every week? What are the odds? If you validated this for yourself to be true, would you even begin to find it odd?

Its not just the US govenrment. Why do allot of things happen? Why isnt Congress creating our money instead of a institution? What is the need to continue manufacturing nuclear weapons when there is already enough to destroy Earth several times over? Why doesnt the US protect its own borders with the same effectiveness as South Korea, but promote concern for security? There are allot of why's indeed. If you have researched this subject from all angles then more power to you.

What is solid proof to you? You've stated you feel the government has the ability to create chemical trails. In order for this to be true it would mean the governemnt is lying about it, right?

Why does the wind blow from the SSW where I live? How come the clouds nearly always seem to form over the mountains before being dispersed in my area? Why is it that every July through September we always get more storms and precipitation? Why are there 4 seasons every year? Nature has a cycle. It may not be clockwork in every case, but it's there. If you were to post, say 3 months, worth of notes from your "no trails once a week" observations, and they CONSISTENTLY showed that EVERY Friday, or EVERY 4th day was trail free, or 5 days on, 1 day off, and so on, then I might be convinced. But I'm more convinced that this pattern you are witnessing is nothing more than nature at work.

Also, why is it that these trails also show up over areas that contain little human element? Why is the government wasting the time to dust the wastelands with chemicals?

The nice thing about conspiracies is that there is never enough proof from one side to another to prove or debunk anything. (which I must admit works very well for the government....) With that said, I suppose that we are going to have to agree to disagree.

Why disperse it at 39 000 ft? You couldn't determine the affected area, unless the government has a super-secret-quantum computer that predicts weather patterns perfectly! Crap... I'm wasting my time with the climate predictor on BOINC if the government has a computer that all ready predicts weather perfectly!

I like the idea that if the government was going to test chemicals on us they would put it in the food or in the water supply---save us unwilling tax-paying guinea pigs some cash.

What proof arer you looking for? There has been samples taken showing elements. There are clear distinctions between the two trails with planes flying at the same time. Yes there are scientists that dont agree and there are just as many that do. Humans are causing global warming; no they're not.
One day every week theres no vectoring with an area this size stands out to me. As far as the populated/unpopulated areas you seem to keep refering that this is against the human population. While its already been established that has occured in the past, its not the case now.

According to the science in the article you provided (which was good information- thanks) there is nothing unusal that on what would normally be a cloudless day; the same conditions that should support cirrus formation (but isnt hence cloudless) support human made trails (nothing morre than clouds according to the article) that turn into an eventual hazy overcast covering the entire area. The article is stating while the process is forced the nuclei produced are the same as mother nature would produce the rain making process. Yet when refering to end results which it states are the same; natural conditions are selective? I dont buy it- actually to state it in a more humble manner, I dont understand how that is possible, maybe you do.

There is also the factor of large traces of elements found that are not from auto exhaust and synthetic fibers collected. There may be an explanation, I havent found it yet, perhaps you have which explains your certainty.

The aircraft is adding turbulence, temperature differences, and particulate matter. Nature isn't being selective, she just needs a stirring stick and a seed for crystal formation.

Think of it as a supersaturated liquid.

Do you know if the fuel is the same across the board for all airliners?

All jetfuels are basically kerosine but with several variations. Commercial airliners use Jet A and Jet A-1 normally in the US, Canada uses Jet B too (lower freezing point). Military uses JP 1-8 which is basically the same stuff with some either anti-freezing, anti-corrosion etc additives.

According to the science that promotes lingering trails as nothing; all fuel type behave the same. It references exhaust information in general terms, and does not reference a point of there being differences in visible residual ice crystals from one fuel type to the other. Do you know if one variation will produce ice nuclei that survive longer than others?

Not a clue, though an educated guess would say its the local conditions that determine how the trail behaves.

According to the science that promotes lingering trails as nothing; all fuel types behave the same. It references exhaust information in general terms, and does not reference a point of there being differences in visible residual ice crystals from one fuel type to the other.

Do you know if one variation will produce ice nuclei that survive longer than others?


The science doesn’t explain how human made “clouds” (the title many mainstream scientists are giving the lingering trails) being emitted from a jet that is clearly at a higher altitude than one producing a disappearing exhaust, survive their expanding descent. They are stating that the end product is essentially the same as mother nature produces in microcrystalline salt crystals formed by breaking ocean waves as well as volcanic dust and other particulates are driven aloft by updrafts. That would make sense. . . if the aircraft was lower than the jet emitting a disappearing trail. It falls short in explaining how ice nuclei survive the tropopause on their descent when the other trail clearly did not.

How do ice nuclei that were sensibly created at 35,000-40,000 feet continue to fall without melting or producing any type of moisture other than what the trail itself is being classified as. The other trail is behaving within the laws of the science some of the mainstream experts are explaining. It makes sense that different thermal layers will allow one jet to have a disappearing trail that is lower, but to have a higher trail linger, expand, and descend surviving past the same point doesn’t obey the very laws they are promoting.

A difference in fuel types could offer a feasible explanation for this, but if it were the case why wouldn’t they just state that? Aside from element samples collected (which are agreeably debatable) this would be easier to pass off than the assumption they seem to take that "you’ve seen one fuel, you’ve seen them all."

I think push-pull skipped over my point without giving it a second thought. Since you have more training in this area than anyone also here, your perspective would be interesting. Since I can offer no proof, and I don’t expect you or anyone to take my word for it (and that is completely reasonable), I will phrase this as a theoretical question:

Yesterday, the sky was completely trail free. I did notice two standard disappearing trails. Under any sensible circumstances, not seeing the other kind would be no big deal. Weather conditions yesterday did not support them. I can with great certainty, and complete accuracy predict that in 7-8 days another day of such conditions will occur. Still not a big deal. I can predict even further that the same thing will happen the following week, and the following week, and so on. Each 7-8 day cycle only producing 1 day. NOt 2 or more----just one. Its not ESP, but simple observations of the skies over my city for the last 2 ½ years. Some of those “clear days” did have normal clouds. I’m referring to being clear of trails.

My question is, if you observed this phenomenon yourself, would you at least question the odds of it happening? If you saw this to be true for yourself would it be in anyway puzzling to you? If not, is there an explanation how this could occur?


According to push-pull, the geography of a region could produce results as consistent as this. A geyser at Yellowstone going off at consistent intervals makes sense. A uniform break in mother nature to not support conditions that support aerial vectoring makes no sense. I’m striving to make some out of it though.

I've seen trails every day this week so far, I've been looking, other than when it was raining and I couldn't see the sky.

Its also been very clear, cold, and low temperatures.

I deny that they only happen on certain days with regularity. If they did that would be odd, but its a lie.

I have only made the statement Ive been seeing this over the city I live in. Im not traveling t ovarious regions and staying there to observe. Beyond that I simply asked if anyone would just observe and post their results. Forums can be useful for gathering such information. From my viweing it is odd, and has been alarming to me for some time. While my intentions for posting have varied in the past, my purpose is to gain information that others have, on both sides of any given issue. Its easy for anyone to go to a search engine and look something up, but many times some have provided links that I didnt find. Instead of getting mad about being called a liar, I'll just say thank you for at least looking for a week. Because I value your knowledge about environmental conditions, I'll will also add the first part of your last sentence only strengthens my suspicions.

Has anyone noticed a drop in "trail" activity over the past 3 months. If you havent been looking or noticed could you look over the next three days. If you could note whether you have seen the ususal criss cross pattern, only a couple, or none at all. I saw one the evening. It had been the first one I had seen in 91/2 weeks with the air traffic remaining the same.

They tried to make a gay bomb...anything is possible.

Is that a yes, no, or just your two cents?

It's a, "I don't know but I'm open to the possibility and wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be true." As far as what I've noticed, I haven't seen them in awhile.

I wont even call them "chem trails" for the moment, just trails. Thank you for the information. As I stated earlier I havent seen them in weeks where Im at either. Usually they increase and thicken when the temperature drops.

I hate to dissapoint you but normal trails can also last for hours. It's just an indication that the air is more humid.
http://www.cdli.ca/CITE/contrails.pdf

Anyway if someone wanted to spray us all with they would presumably want to do it in a way that makes sure they disperse over a wide area rather than stay in nice straight lines. Perhaps it's the ones that dissapear quickly you should worry about :)

I'm glad you posted. Enough information is out there that either someone thinks they are more, or not. It doesnt have to related to intentionally poisoning the public. They re finding enough medications in the water supply for that. My last point is there are no lingering trails in the skies. I've seen 2 in the last three months, and even those did not have the long lasting fall and fade effect. I've talked with other people and this sounds like its the case in their areas as well. Can you please watch over the next week to see if you see any of the common criss cross patterns or any trails at all and post here? Thank you.

Well they have started again. The skies had the classic criss cross patterns today. After several months of clear skies (perhaps 3 trails in total that I saw) and I record daily. For any that contibute these as water crystals do you find any aspect of that odd? Traffic was still present during those months the trails were not. I can only speak for my city. I wish others would have just looked up and reported their findings.

There is actually a meteorologist out in California that somehow has sources to get when spraying is going to happen. He has a website for his forecasts, and hes almost always right.

CHEMTRAIL ALERT SYSTEM - OWSweather.com

Wow, saw a really strange one a few days ago. A huge streak across the sky, literally about 5 times wider than normal. And darker too, like a dark purple. Was definitely not natural (far too straight), yet like nothing I had ever seen before. Anyone else see it? I'm in Arizona.

What part of AZ? I spend the half of each year in AZ. I saw a trail 2 weeks ago that looked identical to the missle test done years ago off the CA coast. I went from the ground up and had the very same characteristics. There was not a report of missle testing though.

Phoenix