'Chemtrails' not real, say leading atmospheric science experts

August 12, 2016
Condensation trail, or contrail, left behind an aircraft. Credit: Mick West.

Well-understood physical and chemical processes can easily explain the alleged evidence of a secret, large-scale atmospheric spraying program, commonly referred to as "chemtrails" or "covert geoengineering," concludes a new study from Carnegie Science, University of California Irvine, and the nonprofit organization Near Zero.

Some groups and individuals erroneously believe that the long-lasting condensation trails, or contrails, left behind are evidence of a secret large-scale spraying program. They call these imagined features "chemtrails." Adherents of this conspiracy theory sometimes attribute this alleged spraying to the government and sometimes to industry.

The authors of this study, including Carnegie's Ken Caldeira, conducted a survey of the world's leading atmospheric scientists, who categorically rejected the existence of a secret spraying program. The team's findings, published by Environmental Research Letters, are based on a survey of two groups of experts: atmospheric chemists who specialize in condensation trails and geochemists working on atmospheric deposition of dust and pollution.

The survey results show that 76 of the 77 participating scientists said they had not encountered evidence of a secret spraying program, and agree that the alleged evidence cited by the individuals who believe that atmospheric spraying is occurring could be explained through other factors, such as typical airplane contrail formation and poor data sampling.

The research team undertook their study in response to the large number of people who claim to believe in a secret spraying program. In a 2011 international survey, nearly 17 percent of respondents said they believed the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric spraying program to be true or partly true. And in recent years a number of websites have arisen claiming to show evidence of widespread secret chemical spraying, which they say is linked to negative impacts on human health and the environment.

"We wanted to establish a scientific record on the topic of secret atmospheric spraying programs for the benefit of those in the public who haven't made up their minds," said Steven Davis of UC Irvine. "The experts we surveyed resoundingly rejected contrail photographs and test results as evidence of a large-scale atmospheric conspiracy."

The research team says they do not hope to sway those already convinced that there is a secret spraying program—as these individuals usually only reject counter-evidence as further proof of their theories—but rather to establish a source of objective science that can inform public discourse.

"Despite the persistence of erroneous theories about atmospheric chemical spraying programs, until now there were no peer-reviewed academic studies showing that what some people think are 'chemtrails' are just ordinary contrails, which are becoming more abundant as air travel expands. Also, it is possible that climate change is causing contrails to persist for longer periods than they used to." Caldeira said. "I felt it was important to definitively show what real experts in contrails and aerosols think. We might not convince die-hard believers that their beloved secret spraying program is just a paranoid fantasy, but hopefully their friends will accept the facts."

Explore further: Puerto Rico sees spike in Zika as it weighs aerial spraying

Related Stories

Jet contrails affect surface temperatures

June 18, 2015

High in the sky where the cirrus ice crystal clouds form, jet contrails draw their crisscross patterns. Now researchers have found that these elevated ice cloud trails can influence temperatures on the ground and affect local ...

Recommended for you

The world needs to rethink the value of water

November 23, 2017

Research led by Oxford University highlights the accelerating pressure on measuring, monitoring and managing water locally and globally. A new four-part framework is proposed to value water for sustainable development to ...

'Lost' 99% of ocean microplastics to be identified with dye?

November 23, 2017

The smallest microplastics in our oceans – which go largely undetected and are potentially harmful – could be more effectively identified using an innovative and inexpensive new method, developed by researchers at the ...

125 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

julianpenrod
1.3 / 5 (41) Aug 12, 2016
"Experts" and "authorities" like those who refused to admit Iraq didn't have the infrastructure for mass production of banned weapons systems, the ones who promoted the discredited "body mass index" and "food pyramid", the ones who said to expose children late to allergens to build a tolerance, which resulted in peanut allergies supposedly exploding 250 percent in number?
Among other things, consider that there are no pictures of more than a couple at most trails before 1997, and few of those, and those seem mostly crop dusters or air shows. In 1997, as many as a dozen chemtrails at a time began to be seen simultaneously, in hundreds if not thousands of pictures. And that year was the beginning of the rapid fire staccato of events associated with climate change, from the worst hurricane season ever to the largest year-to-year drop in Arctic sea ice coverage to the warmest years on record to abnormal clouds like the undulatus asperatus.
Osiris1
1.3 / 5 (31) Aug 12, 2016
Was not the Carnegie founder a huge predatory capitalist? Seems like the best minds that our government secret services could buy or at least rent maybe have a part in this shadowy study in secret disinformation. Few names and lots of insinuations that what we see 'is not there'. Kind of like the secret campaign of the old Air Force 'Project Blue Book' Think lots of insane asylum inmates were originally free men and women who spoke up until the government shut them up by locking them up under dubious legal process to say the least.
cgsperling
4.8 / 5 (40) Aug 12, 2016
Never attribute to malice, that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. Or water vapor condensation.
Osiris1
1.4 / 5 (31) Aug 12, 2016
See the secret police shills are out with their one liners pretty quick.
Captain Stumpy
4.9 / 5 (31) Aug 12, 2016
insinuations that what we see 'is not there'
ROTFLMFAO
@osiris
ok... they didn't say "contrails" weren't real, they said "chemtrails" weren't real

where is your evidence that the vapor tail left by a jet or aircraft contains secret chemicals that will geoengineer the planet?

it's not hard to prove... all ya need is a GCMS and a sample

why don't you get a few samples and send them to a few different labs labeled with numbers only and containing controls of bottled purified water to prove your conspiracy?

it really isn't rocket surgery

... i suggest not using a parachute though.... speed is essential in the collection process

enjoy
cantdrive85
1.1 / 5 (27) Aug 12, 2016
Operation Cloverleaf....
Captain Stumpy
4.9 / 5 (29) Aug 12, 2016
consider that there are no pictures of more than a couple at most trails before 1997,
@julithe pseudoscience TROLL
1- aircraft fly much higher now than in the past

2- i can debunk your argument with a single photo "Contrails from Aerial Combat
Battle of the Buldge, 1944-45"
http://www.billdo...ge3D.jpg

whoopsie for your delusional argument from stupidity, eh?

Like i told oh-siri above, unless you can actually validate your argument with actual evidence, especially and including " the vapor tail left by a jet or aircraft contains secret chemicals that will geoengineer the planet" proven empirically by GCMS or other means, then you're talking out your *ss about your private delusional beliefs, not reality
AKron
4.9 / 5 (29) Aug 12, 2016
Why are we wasting time on this nonsense?
antiantigoracle
Aug 12, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Phys1
5 / 5 (25) Aug 12, 2016
The trolls must dispose of entire encyclopedias of nonsense.
jp, cd85, osi, there any nonsense that you _don't_ believe?
MR166
1.2 / 5 (17) Aug 12, 2016
So let me get this straight, someone on a grant wasted the time of 77 other people on grants and called it "A Study".
julianpenrod
1.1 / 5 (34) Aug 12, 2016
Despite what Captain Stumpy insists, higher up, the air is far less dense, and intensity of sunlight can be greater, so any water condensation from jet vapors would sublimate all the quicker. Too, it's a lie. Modern jets fly at the same height as those from 1997 and before.
With respect to the one photograph from wartime, those were tracers to make the position of the planes. Are we at war over the U.S. now? Note, too, photographs of planes during World War II don't show the extent of their trails. The pictures only show a couple of plane lengths of space. There is no evidence the trails go on to the horizon like chemtrails do. Too, in the wartime picture, these are conventional planes, which would not operate at the altitudes modern jets supposedly go. So why would they have supposed long, persistent trails? Also, I mentioned hundreds or thousands of chemtrail pictures, Captain Stumpy offers only one in "rebuttal".
MR166
3.7 / 5 (18) Aug 12, 2016
Iv'e been around since the beginning of passenger jets and they ALWAYS left a contrail. If you want to worry about government sponsored pollution and mind control worry about our educational system.
tinitus
Aug 12, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
MR166
3.9 / 5 (22) Aug 12, 2016
"There is no smoke without fire."

I think that the medical marijuana thread is on another website.
MR166
3.8 / 5 (17) Aug 12, 2016
The other thing to consider is that modern jets are a lot heavier than the jets of the 50s and 60s. Thus they burn more fuel and produce more water vapor.
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (28) Aug 12, 2016
Well, let's not forget that the AGW Cult's "scientists", in their infinite ignorance, have actually proposed this.
SciTechdude
4.4 / 5 (14) Aug 12, 2016
"There is no smoke without fire."

I think that the medical marijuana thread is on another website.


If you don't like my fire, then don't come around! ;)
geokstr
5 / 5 (18) Aug 12, 2016
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-military-tested-bacterial-weapons-in-san-francisco-2015-7 staged by the United States government between 1950 and 1969. It was neither the most heinous, nor the deadliest.

Sheesh. No wonder tinfoil is so expensive.
richardwenzel987
4.8 / 5 (26) Aug 12, 2016
Before the internet, goofballs like the EU cultists and the paranoids with their conspiracy theories were relatively isolated in their communities, and regarded by their neighbors as harmless village idiots. "Uncle Joe is a bit odd, but harmless"-- that sort of thing. But now the marginally psychotic can connect to others of their ilk on line, and the madness spreads. Sort of what goes on with ISIS, you know? Without the internet, ISIS would be nothing. Without the internet, EU would be nothing and nowhere. Without the internet, chemtrail nut cases would be safely in their places, bugging their neighbors and writing weird letters to their local papers. I have the impression that some people really NEED to be isolated...
cgsperling
4.8 / 5 (25) Aug 12, 2016
Speaking of connecting to other cranks, have any of them thought of pooling their money to hire a plane to go up and collect samples to verify their hypothesis? As in, actually doing some science? I am betting not.
Maggnus
4.8 / 5 (22) Aug 12, 2016
Before the internet, goofballs like the EU cultists and the paranoids with their conspiracy theories were relatively isolated in their communities, and regarded by their neighbors as harmless village idiots. "Uncle Joe is a bit odd, but harmless"-- that sort of thing. But now the marginally psychotic can connect to others of their ilk on line, and the madness spreads. Sort of what goes on with ISIS, you know? Without the internet, ISIS would be nothing. Without the internet, EU would be nothing and nowhere. Without the internet, chemtrail nut cases would be safely in their places, bugging their neighbors and writing weird letters to their local papers. I have the impression that some people really NEED to be isolated...

That's a great comment!
StudentofSpiritualTeaching
3.3 / 5 (7) Aug 12, 2016
One of those conspiracy examples that are very hard to stop, because there is meanwhile so much money making with silly books etc. behind it. There are many reasons why this theory is irrational. Take the point that all the alleged spraying with chemicals has in the last decades been beyond useless in respect of improving the albedo effect. In reality measurements confirm that steadily less sunlight is reflected back. Caldeira's speculation about unfolding climate change with increased temperature, humidity and speed of wind making contrails more persistent is one evident factor, so is increased flight traffic etc.
Captain Stumpy
4.8 / 5 (18) Aug 13, 2016
I mentioned hundreds or thousands of chemtrail pictures, Captain Stumpy offers only one in "rebuttal"
@juli
i proved you wrong and delusional

1- those contrails i posted debunk your "there are no pictures of more than a couple at most trails before 1997" bullsh*t argument with valid verifiable evidence from history

2- if ya can't actually provide evidence then you're talking sh*t out of your belief, not out of any science or even any logical argument

you say "chemtrail" but you can't actually prove anything other than "vapor trail" without proof of "chem" in the "trail"... where is your GCMS evidence?

3- you can't prove correlation

4- nor can you prove it's not just about traffic increase

you have absolutely *no* evidence whatsoever except your belief in delusional conspiracy

you made a false claim - PERIOD
Captain Stumpy
4.8 / 5 (18) Aug 13, 2016
@juli cont'd
With respect to the one photograph from wartime, those were tracers to make the position of the planes
no, it's not, for some very important reasons:
1- you don't put "tracers" on an aircraft in combat because you don't want to make it easy for the enemy to shoot you out of the sky

2- the picture is taken in combat (see #1) and labeled as such (learn to read)

3- it's labeled and specifies contrails over the battle (again: learn to read)
these are conventional planes, which would not operate at the altitudes modern jets supposedly go
never said otherwise, you idiot
like i noted, this debunked your "no contrails" argument with empirical evidence

what this boils down to is this:
you *believe* in chemtrails
you can't prove it b/c (shocker) there is no evidence
-therefore you cling to *anything* that you *think* validates your belief (bias) while refusing to accept any evidence to the contrary (delusion)

again:
GCMS evidence of the "chem" ?
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (18) Aug 13, 2016
So let me get this straight, someone on a grant wasted the time of 77 other people on grants and called it "A Study".
@MR
sorry, but i disagree that this is wasted time (meant to 3 you but page jumped when loading)

sometimes the public needs to have valid information to be able to argue from a position of science over belief... and this is just one demonstration of how that works

of course, any logical person will dismiss the complete delusional argument because there simply isn't any evidence at all to support the claim ... it's not like we haven't had GCMS or similar tech to learn the content of said vapor trail until recently

this is also a way to induce youthful curious into investigating the world around them using a logical methodical approach (the scientific method)

this is like fundamental science:
just because we can't see the immediate applications and merit in the study doesn't mean it's a bad study
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (12) Aug 13, 2016
Okay, in the '13-'14 school year one of my courses was Bio 104, there were two required textbooks: First, "The Biosphere, Protecting Our Global Environment" by Donald G. Kaufman and Cecilia M. Franz, 4th Ed., 2000, 2005. The second textbook was "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson, 1962.

Can anyone here who's read "Silent Spring" tell me what's changed since the 1960s, and explain (in light of those changes) why "Silent Spring" is still required reading? Kindly note that I got an A in the course, and I think "chemtrails" is extreme lunacy, so much so that it discourages and deflects any rational discussions on current practices.

cont'd >
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (11) Aug 13, 2016
> cont'd

So what's changed since the 1960s? E.g., in combating the Zika virus they have used gamma-induced sterile mosquitoes in at least one area, but also plenty of "pesticide" – what's all in it besides pyriproxyfen that might be causing microcephaly? There were 12,000 cases of the Zika virus in pregnant women outside of Brazil with zero microcephaly cases, while Brazil is experiencing an epidemic of them. See https://www.scien...0813.htm
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (12) Aug 13, 2016
Why are we wasting time on this nonsense?
Great question and one of the most highly voted comments on the thread.
rrrander
2.6 / 5 (15) Aug 13, 2016
http://www.busine...o-2015-7 staged by the United States government between 1950 and 1969. It was neither the most heinous, nor the deadliest.

Sheesh. No wonder tinfoil is so expensive.


True. The largest beneficiaries of this lunacy are the APA and Alcoa.
tinitus
Aug 13, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Phys1
5 / 5 (17) Aug 13, 2016
Why are we wasting time on this nonsense?
Great question and one of the most highly voted comments on the thread
This is what the people also say about cold fusion

What cold fusion?
tinitus
Aug 13, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (18) Aug 13, 2016
Let me guess; this lunacy started in America, yes? Wonder what the British (and other) governments were up to in the 60s and 70s, when we lived under the flight path to an English airport? I was always looking at contrails, thinking "look at those lucky people, flying off for a nice holiday. Wonder where they're going?"
Little did they know that they were implicated in some high altitude version of crop spraying! Mind you, if the purpose of the exercise was to render future generations with an IQ deficit, it may actually have worked. At least in some parts of the world.
MR166
1 / 5 (10) Aug 13, 2016
Proto you realize of course that Silent Spring was based on faulty if not purpously doctored reaserch.

http://www.thenew...t-spring
Maggnus
5 / 5 (12) Aug 13, 2016
Why are we wasting time on this nonsense?
Great question and one of the most highly voted comments on the thread
This is what the people also say about cold fusion and many other crackpot stuffs... The collective voting may not be always the most reliable clue... ;-)

It is for this kind of BS Zephir. Chemtrails, EU, cold fusion, all in the same leaky, poorly built boat. http://www.infini...html#Q15
koitsu
4.6 / 5 (11) Aug 13, 2016
"The survey results show that 76 of the 77 participating scientists said they had not encountered evidence of a secret spraying program"

What, what?! Who is the one that said s/he encountered "evidence" of a secret spraying program and what was that person's reasoning or experience? Even though I personally think that the chemtrail conspiracy theory is about on the level of the flat Earth conspiracy, leprechauns and unicorns, I would nevertheless like to hear the whole story. Journalism should be fair, even to the people that are generally believed to be crazy.
pntaylor
5 / 5 (9) Aug 13, 2016
"What, what?! Who is the one that said s/he encountered "evidence" of a secret spraying program and what was that person's reasoning or experience?"

He used to work with Dr. Timothy Leary.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (13) Aug 13, 2016
Journalism should be fair, even to the people that are generally believed to be crazy
@koitsu
yes... but when do you draw the line between "fair" reporting of a story, lunacy & opinion and actual evidence based science news?

one of the biggest problems today is the "fair" reporting of blatant lies and anti-science regarding the global warming problems

is it really "fair" to promote pseudoscience as legitimate or equivalent to evidence based science?

if it was "fair", it would be reporting the facts in either a rational point-by-point science and evidence based argument (ignoring the anti-science anti-global warming idiots like cantdrive, shooty, antiG et al)

OR

it would be giving time based upon the proportion of evidence: 98% of the allotted time would be reporting the science and 2% the opinion based arguments against the science
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.1 / 5 (8) Aug 13, 2016
Evidence you say?

"Between 1989 and 2005, average sperm counts fell by a third in the study of 26,000 men, increasing their risk of infertility. The amount of healthy sperm was also reduced, by a similar proportion.

"The findings confirm research over the past 20 years that has shown sperm counts declining in many countries across the world. Reasons ranging from tight underwear to toxins in the environment have been advanced to explain the fall, but still no definitive cause has been found.

"The decline occurred progressively throughout the 17-year period, suggesting that it could be continuing."
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.5 / 5 (8) Aug 13, 2016
-And...

""No question, the human population is the core of every single environmental issue that we have," says Corey Bradshaw, an ecologist at the University of Adelaide in Australia....The only way to save the world is to stop making more (and more, and more, and more) humans."

-And...

"Summary of Reported Abortions Worldwide, through August 2015
1921-2015 = 1,039,629,073
compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston
last updated 19 September 2015
http://www.johnst...314.html

-And...

"Low-dose BPA exposure affects fertility in next three generations of mice..."

-The list goes on.

The only way to save the planet is to mitigate the reproductive potential of the tropical human animal, by any and all means possible.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (8) Aug 13, 2016
Evidence you say?
@Otto
what, exactly, is that evidence of?

obesity?

diet issues?

moldy cheese?

just wondering...
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (10) Aug 13, 2016
Proto you realize of course that Silent Spring was based on faulty if not purpously doctored reaserch.

http://www.thenew...t-spring
Your link to a sensational article in "The New American, That Freedom Shall Not Perish" questioning just one of the hundreds of sources cited in the "List of Principal Sources" in Silent Spring doesn't even scratch the surface of a snowflake on top of the tip of an iceberg of scientific evidence to the contrary.

Compare your article, which makes it sound like DDT is a miracle treatment, to an actual scientific article in PubMed Central: Long-Term Effects of Environmental Endocrine Disruptors on Reproductive Physiology and Behavior (DDT was the first known endocrine disruptor.)

cont'd >
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (10) Aug 13, 2016
> cont'd

And that's just DDT, one type of chlorinated hydrocarbon – what about others pointed out by Carson that were used liberally and shown to be highly toxic, like Chlordane and Heptachlor? What about chlorinated naphthalaenes like dieldrin, aldrin, and endrin? Nasty, toxic stuff. And what about the other major group of insecticides covered by Carson, the alkyl or organic phosphates? These types of chemicals were so deadly that they were classified secret and some were used as nerve gasses by the military.

What about it, MR166? Nothing "faulty" or "purposely doctored" about it.
MR166
1.3 / 5 (13) Aug 13, 2016
Yes Ghost I really don't doubt that research. As men became second class citizens and reduced to nothing more than eunuchs by the politically correct movement I really believe that their sperm counts went down.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (4) Aug 13, 2016
where is your evidence that the vapor tail left by a jet or aircraft contains secret chemicals that will geoengineer the planet?
Whos looking for this evidence? Who has the facilities to gather and analyse 1000s of samples? And who can say that chemtrails were only meant to increase levels of contaminants which were already present?

"Exposure to a type of chemical found in everyday items such as clothing, carpets, and food packaging may be adversely affecting women's fertility, delaying the time it takes them to become pregnant..."

-Even Dan Brown took a shot...

"The plague that Zobrist created is revealed to be a vector virus that randomly activates to employ DNA modification to cause sterility in one third of humans, therefore reducing population growth to a more stable level."

-Inferno, a 2013 mystery thriller novel by American author Dan Brown
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (7) Aug 13, 2016
@Otto
what, exactly, is that evidence of?

obesity?

diet issues?

moldy cheese?
-Unfortunate side effects.

When one suspects a crime has been committed, one assumes that effort has been made to cover it up. Fortunately there is ample precident.

"Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—like a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. By contrast, direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion directly—i.e., without need for any additional evidence or inference."

-And so we seek to determine beyond a reasonable doubt.

Motive - tropical viral human reproduction

Means - B52s and Monsanto

Opportunity - All the late 20th century distractions that come to mind.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (6) Aug 13, 2016
And then theres THIS

"Hollywood actor Tom Cruise is reportedly in talks to portray hefty renegade drug pilot Adler 'Barry' Seal, a central figure in a true story that involves one of America's darkest secrets since the Kennedy assassination: CIA-sanctioned cocaine import/weapons export smuggling between Central America and Arkansas during the 1980s Iran-Contra affair. The project, tentatively titled Mena, will be distributed by Universal Pictures and directed by Doug Liman of Bourne Identity fame."

This provides us with a potential connection between the clinton dynasty with scientology.

Cruise knows more than we are led to believe...
http://www.imdb.c...0120663/

-And of course he played the nazi Feikling conspirator von Stauffenburg so there you go.
https://en.wikipe...e_(film)
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.6 / 5 (5) Aug 13, 2016
Obviously the world is a lot more simpler and we are a lot more stupider than we are led to believe.

One last additional ominious observation if I may...

"The Caribbean island of about 3.5 million people has recorded 10,690 laboratory-confirmed cases of Zika, including 1,035 pregnant women, but the actual number of infections with the mosquito-borne virus is likely higher, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said in a statement..."

-Yeah we'll just toss that one on the pile. Just how many small-headed children is the world going to be willing to tolerate??
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (6) Aug 13, 2016
Unfortunate side effects
@Otto
side effects of what?
When one suspects a crime has been committed, one assumes that effort has been made to cover it up
not really
first off, you must always follow the evidence
if there isn't any indication of something being covered up then why make an assumption that isn't supported by the evidence... making a gut call like that will almost always get the investigator in a world of sh*t unless there is at least something said investigator can point to as evidence to justify the belief

the reason for that is because of limited time (statistics show the longer a case is open, the less likely it is to be solved), limited manpower & case-load, and the need to work towards solving a case rather than running around like a headless chicken

so i'm still not sure what you're talking about re: evidence, cover up etc

are you saying the side effects are proof of chemtrail conspiracy?
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.5 / 5 (8) Aug 13, 2016
@Otto
side effects of what?
Well that is the question isnt it?
first off, you must always follow the evidence
Correct.
if there isn't any indication of something being covered up
What makes you think there isnt any isuch indication?
then why make an assumption that isn't supported by the evidence...
What evidence are you talking about?
making a gut call like that will almost always get the investigator in a world of sh*t
-Except that thats what detectives usually do. Its how our legal system works. They assume deception.

This isnt science. Ask the amazing randi. Ask your buddy george kamburoff. Psychopaths run the world. Deception is the norm not the exception.

Politicians only pretend to believe in causes. Actors only pretend to express emotions. Sincerity is the rare thing and we are ill-prepared to recognize it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (6) Aug 13, 2016
are you saying the side effects are proof of chemtrail conspiracy?
I am saying you ought to practice lightening up a bit. Try yoga. Do a little research.
http://www.imdb.c...0364845/

Hey did you know that 2nd amendment people will now try to assassinate hillary because trump told them to? Or that putin needed trumps encouragement to hack US computers?

Im being only a little sarcastic. Or maybe not.
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Aug 13, 2016
Well that is the question isnt it?
@otto
which is why i asked
What makes you think there isnt any isuch indication?
no compelling evidence that explains it... for a good indication of what compelling evidence describing a conspiracy should look like, read this: http://www.drexel...nge.ashx

What evidence are you talking about?
compelling evidence of conspiracy or cover up
Except that thats what detectives usually do
making gut calls?
not really. not saying it doesn't happen, mind you, but a good detective follows the evidence
IMHO - you're thinking movie detective... or being sarcastic and playing around...
I am saying you ought to practice lightening up a bit. Try yoga. Do a little research
ok, you're goofing off

gotcha

and i thought georgie was your bud?
LMFAO
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.7 / 5 (9) Aug 13, 2016
no compelling evidence that explains it
Well my assumption, as you are probably aware, is this

""No question, the human population is the core of every single environmental issue... The only way to save the world is to stop making more (and more, and more, and more) humans."

-and further that this has been the case ever since we became able to hunt the animals which had been keeping our numbers in check. With each succeeding triumph over nature our population problem increased.

But we're still here. This is evidence enough for me that the problem became obvious to Leaders a long time ago and that they took intelligent Steps to mitigate it.

And since technology has gotten to the point where 1) we can save and prolong more lives than ever before and 2) we are able to affect the birthrate directly by a myriad of means, I am also assuming that the few things that I mentioned above, some serious and some not so much, are part of the Effort.

It is a very big Pile.
antigoracle
1.2 / 5 (17) Aug 13, 2016
The only way to save the planet is to mitigate the reproductive potential of the tropical human animal, by any and all means possible.

Uh huh. The solution to all problems is to cull the TROPICAL HUMAN ANIMAL. You know (or in your case don't know nor care) that this is the population that consumes a small fraction of the natural resources, compared to you.
Garrote
4.8 / 5 (18) Aug 13, 2016

cantdrive85 1 /5 (13) Aug 12, 2016
Operation Cloverleaf....
has been thoroughly debunked. http://www.csicop...g_planes
By skeptics. I thought you were a skeptic? Oh, that only applies to AGW. Meanwhile you'll swallow whole every load of spunk from EU to chemtrails.

This is where the idea comes from that their beliefs come from ego identity groups. Those no rational pattern to what they reject and what they accept. Except their buddies all agree.

onesdave 5 /5 (12) 7 hours ago
Let me guess; this lunacy started in America, yes?


Yeah, you can see the signature. Those cranks always say something like, "Look at that picture. Does that look normal to you?" Uh...look at your life. Does it look normal to you? It's the American idea that the most insightful is the least educated and that an ignorant person's immediate impression is probably right. Also known as Bone Deep Anti-intellectualism.
cantdrive85
1.3 / 5 (14) Aug 13, 2016
cantdrive85 1 /5 (13) Aug 12, 2016
Operation Cloverleaf....

has been thoroughly debunked. http://www.csicop...g_planes

What in that article shows anything as being debunked? Just an ill-informed author blathering along about some grand army he insists must exist.
KBK
1.5 / 5 (16) Aug 13, 2016
I don't see many people talking about the testing of so-called chemtrail residue.

The residues found (how what when where-it is all collected-deposited-etc... is part of the issue) are generally found to be of a fairly nasty nature. All the kinds of particles that can be sprayed in the air (ie, easily made, and can be carried in the air) and are detrimental to human health.

What can such a particle mix can be used for? well, to block or enhance certain radar systems (aural & ground penetrating)

We have INDIA THE COUNTRY, ie the governing body of a country of 1.1 billion people, officially claiming that HAARP is a weapon of war and is being used by the USA.

The point being that the so-called chemtrail spray mixture is for enhancing and/or blocking penetrating systems such as HAARP type devices....now existing in, at last count...47 different locations.

Russia and the Alaskan HAARP arrays being the largest.

There are REAL international treaties on this subject.
KBK
1.8 / 5 (16) Aug 13, 2016
That's how we end up with 'nothing to see here, go back to sleep' articles on physorg.

Physorg is western-intellectual-centric, so that's the perfect spot to put a debunking article on 'chemtrails', for a US-European scientifically minded linear thinking crew.

Specifically one (article) with the completely wrongheaded logic tack, so it can officially wander down the wrong road, and no one sees the deeper connections to all the circumstantial aspects.

War is being waged in intellectual circles, and the engineering minded who tend to live in dogma at their logic limits, the very linear aspects of such negative proofing... they and this sort of mindset...is being used as the zipper-head foot-soldier hammers to keep potential for independent thought from blooming into being.

Everybody knows it, everyone who is truly intelligent knows it... from the academic (and corporate) department heads on down.

Nobody knows what to do about it.

Too many c grade dogmatic asshats.
cgsperling
5 / 5 (9) Aug 13, 2016
You know, guys, if there IS a government program to spray us with drugs, they will probably be monitoring this website to hunt down and silence those people who threaten to expose them.
fulely
1 / 5 (15) Aug 13, 2016
CIA admits to chemtrails.....
https://youtu.be/WBG81dXgM0Q
antigoracle
1 / 5 (12) Aug 13, 2016
Does that look normal to you?" Uh...look at your life. Does it look normal to you?

LOL.
You must forgive AGreatWanker who gets a pill for everyone of his dozen suck puppets. It's especially sad when he starts talking to himself. It must be quiet lonely in that institution. So, don't bother asking him to look at his "normal" life.
antonima
5 / 5 (9) Aug 13, 2016
Burning 'oil fields' and 'offshore oil spills' is a much better cover for releasing gases and aerosols into the atmosphere. Sheesh, get your conspiracy theories straight people.
Maggnus
5 / 5 (9) Aug 14, 2016
What, what?! Who is the one that said s/he encountered "evidence" of a secret spraying program and what was that person's reasoning or experience? Even though I personally think that the chemtrail conspiracy theory is about on the level of the flat Earth conspiracy, leprechauns and unicorns, I would nevertheless like to hear the whole story. Journalism should be fair, even to the people that are generally believed to be crazy.

Seriously, this is the best comment on here! I'm with koitsu, who IS this person, and what the hell were they thinking?

2nd best: He used to work with Dr. Timothy Leary.

There are a couple of hold- overs from the experiments he performed lol!! Look at zephir or cantthink!
antigoracle
1 / 5 (12) Aug 14, 2016
Burning 'oil fields' and 'offshore oil spills' is a much better cover for releasing gases and aerosols into the atmosphere. Sheesh, get your conspiracy theories straight people.

Try the burning of of biofuels. Get the science straight.
http://www.scienc...15302053
Maggnus
5 / 5 (6) Aug 14, 2016
Evidence you say?

"Between 1989 and 2005, average sperm counts fell by a third in the study of 26,000 men, increasing their risk of infertility. The amount of healthy sperm was also reduced, by a similar proportion.

"The findings confirm research over the past 20 years that has shown sperm counts declining in many countries across the world. Reasons ranging from tight underwear to toxins in the environment have been advanced to explain the fall, but still no definitive cause has been found.

"The decline occurred progressively throughout the 17-year period, suggesting that it could be continuing."

http://nottingham...nts.aspx
Thielex
5 / 5 (9) Aug 14, 2016
Thank you, conspiracy theorists! You NEVER fail to amuse and entertain! Without you life would dull and gray... :)
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (5) Aug 14, 2016
Uh huh. The solution to all problems is to cull the TROPICAL HUMAN ANIMAL. You know (or in your case don't know nor care) that this is the population that consumes a small fraction of the natural resources, compared to you
Yes well I understand you're a frothing misanthrope. And don't preach to me about conservation. I live in a teepee in the desert.

No need for final solutions, in 100 years most everybody alive will be dead, all neatly burned and buried.

Why make a mess?

The important thing is to keep them from replacing themselves.

I see maggnus concurs that all artificial animals should be neutered and allowed to roam the streets until they too are extinct. It is the only humane thing to do.
mrlewish
5 / 5 (5) Aug 14, 2016
The contrails are only supplemental mind control substances. The vast majority is distributed through gas stations. You fill your car with it and is spread out via everyone's tail pipes. That is why the Oil industrial complex is fighting electric vehicles tooth and nail. The illuminati and Knights Templar are at war with each other.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 14, 2016
@otto
I live in a teepee in the desert
LOL

that sucks... i bet it's hotter than all h*ll in that teepee!
are ya using animal hide, canvas or tarps? what?

you would be far cooler using adobe, Cobb or thick dirt walls.... you can still use the Teepee design if you do it right, but i would suggest going with either half-buried or full buried housing for the most comfort
(don't forget to add drainage to your area for any occasional rainfall, too)
DeliriousNeuron
2.7 / 5 (7) Aug 14, 2016
Out of all these posts and not one of you mentioned the obvious. I'm referring to the pics of contrails before 1997. What's the one thing we all have the ability to do now? That's right. Pull out our smartphone and take a picture or video of these contrails. This is the information age and we convey information with the press of a button. YouTube is filled with the stupid "chemtrail" videos. Its full of lens flare videos by the idiots claiming them to be Nibiru! Same thing goes for the weather. All those meteorological catastrophies aren't stories told by a farmer at a feed store and passed down to grandchildren. We have the means to document all these "crazy events" and share with the world in an instant. That's all that's going on. The next time you see a contrail that lasts in the sky, make note of the stratus clouds that are nothing more than upper level moisture. When a high pressure is dominant, the contrails evaporate quickly because the air is dry.
DeliriousNeuron
1.6 / 5 (7) Aug 14, 2016
Hello there Stumpy. Good to see you still trolling the forums.
Yep...I'm still an EU supporter and I don't believe in chemtrails or Nibiru. And please don't confuse cloud seeding with contrails. Two totally separate issues.
tinitus
Aug 14, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
meerling
5 / 5 (9) Aug 14, 2016
Mwahahaha!!!!
Contrails have been around since before jets, but jets make it easier due to the huge amount of water vapor their engines create.
Contrails happen at any altitude the conditions are right, we made them in a tank in Junior High science class in the 70s. Though it's true conditions are often better at higher altitudes, and more visible.
Those were absolutely NOT tracers in that pic. (By the way, I'm also Ammo, so I know a bit about tracers and what gets put on planes. IYAAYAS)
Contrails exist in old pictures and movies, even when they filmed in the desert. The old films didn't have the ability to easily and cheaply remove them. Just go watch some of the old films and look for them in the sky, you'll find them.
If you've ever examined a plane, you'd know there's no chemical tanks for that garbage, and you can't mix it in the fuel or you trash the engines performance, if not the engine.

Of course, the tinfoil hat crowd won't accept reality and evidence.
fulely
1 / 5 (15) Aug 14, 2016
20 hours ago
CIA admits to chemtrails.....
https://youtu.be/WBG81dXgM0Q

Mwahahaha!!!!
Contrails have been around since before jets, but jets make it easier due to the huge amount of water vapor their engines create.
Contrails happen at any altitude the conditions are right, we made them in a tank in Junior High science class in the 70s. Though it's true conditions are often better at higher altitudes, and more visible.
fulely
1 / 5 (16) Aug 14, 2016
DeliriousNeuron
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 14, 2016
@fuley.
What the hell kind of video is that? Its not even him talking!! ROFLMAO!!
Gidge
1.7 / 5 (11) Aug 14, 2016
I recently moved from the east coast of Florida and one Sunday leaving a restaurant after breakfast, looking to the west, there were two planes flying, one leaving a massive trail that was persistent and another just ahead of it that was not. You could clearly tell they were the same size and therefore flying the same course. Chemtrails are persistent and they do not begin in the typical location that a contrail does after a plane. I get that many do not believe, but I would like to see someone look at the current evidence that exists instead of grouping together and everyone agreeing something does not exist without exploring the multiple facets. Please note this articles was a survey of their knowledge of the "existence of" a secret atmospheric spraying programs. Not the existence of the chemtrails themselves.
DeliriousNeuron
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 14, 2016
@Gridge
Being an observer from the ground, its extremely difficult to judge altitude differences. One was at a higher altitude than the other. 5,000 to 10,000 foot difference may not seem like much, but temperature variation is with height. Its all about the dewpoints.
Caliban
5 / 5 (10) Aug 15, 2016
Iv'e been around since the beginning of passenger jets and they ALWAYS left a contrail. If you want to worry about government sponsored pollution and mind control worry about our educational system.


The other thing to consider is that modern jets are a lot heavier than the jets of the 50s and 60s. Thus they burn more fuel and produce more water vapor.


http://www.busine...o-2015-7 staged by the United States government between 1950 and 1969. It was neither the most heinous, nor the deadliest.


Sheesh. No wonder tinfoil is so expensive.


The Final Nail in the coffin of this chemtrails nonsense:

The definitive and direct evidence provided by the fact that I find myself in complete agreement with MR166 and geokstr.

This is the very last gasp of chemtrail conspiracy wanker ideation.


krundoloss
5 / 5 (11) Aug 15, 2016
So, they are keeping Thousands of Airplane Mechanics Quiet? Worldwide? You know that to produce a supposed 'chemtrail' you would have to have tanks, nozzles, parts, and functions added to the aircraft. They do so many things to keep aircraft as light at possible, and this is just not happening. Sometimes, when people think there is a conspiracy, they forget that large numbers of people do NOT keep secrets. Small numbers of people can, but when you are talking thousand of people in many countries, that's just not happening.
Dug
1.6 / 5 (14) Aug 15, 2016
Did I miss the part of the study where they sampled and analyzed a 1,000 contrails across the US and only found them containing moisture and burnt JP-4? Otherwise this isn't a scientific study, it's just a consensus of the like minded. Which will actually do more harm than good in explaining away any conspiracies. While I see no rational basis to believe that there are any good technical reasons that contrails could or can contain purposefully induced chemicals - or that if they did that at such low dilution levels - that they could accomplish anything that background industrial pollution at much higher levels - haven't. P.S. Surveys aren't real "research." I would remind the authors that, expert surveys prior to the 1400s "proved" the world was flat.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (6) Aug 15, 2016
Did I miss the part of the study where they sampled and analyzed a 1,000 contrails across the US and only found them containing moisture and burnt JP-4?
Did you miss it or did you just make it up because you assumed it had to be the case?
fulely
1 / 5 (15) Aug 15, 2016
CHEMTRAILS ARE REAL>>>>>
https://youtu.be/FeTaejpg18g
Maggnus
5 / 5 (11) Aug 15, 2016
CHEMTRAILS ARE REAL>>>>>
https://youtu.be/FeTaejpg18g

NO THEY'RE NOT
http://www.chemtr...e-a-hoax
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (4) Aug 15, 2016
Has anybody considered that they are our first direct evidence of dark matter?
https://youtu.be/1vSTsADQXG8

And if not why not?
You know that to produce a supposed 'chemtrail' you would have to have tanks, nozzles, parts, and functions added to the aircraft
The US military and bill Clinton both have access to many such tanks, nozzles, parts, and functions.

You're not thinking very hard are you?
MandoZink
5 / 5 (8) Aug 15, 2016
I retired recently, having worked in the engineering department of a major airport for several decades. I can only guess that this 'chemtrail' thing is an hair-brained vestige of some group-think conspiratorial ignorance. You would be laughed right off of the airfield if you suggested 'chemtrails' to those actually who work around aircraft.

Having a fairly straightforward understanding of aircraft, jet exhaust and the atmosphere pretty much keeps ideas like this out of rational conversation. You would likely not nave been hired in the first place. Lunacy is frowned upon by the air travel industry.

You know that to produce a supposed 'chemtrail' you would have to have tanks, nozzles, parts, and functions added to the aircraft.


I've had to laugh at evidence photos of supposed "chemtrail equipment' that are nothing more than airspeed indicators or other normal aircraft apparatus.

Good grief people! Learn something about aircraft and atmospherics - and quit being stupid!
antigoracle
1 / 5 (12) Aug 15, 2016
Good grief people! Learn something about aircraft and atmospherics - and quit being stupid!

Are you familiar with cloud seeding?
If so, how far removed is it from chemtrail deployment?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1 / 5 (6) Aug 16, 2016
Having a fairly straightforward understanding of aircraft, jet exhaust and the atmosphere pretty much keeps ideas like this out of rational conversation. You would likely not nave been hired in the first place. Lunacy is frowned upon by the air travel industry
"This is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The atomic bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives." — Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy during World War II

-Sorry try again. You sound like the great psychopath george kamburoff.

Argument from 'authority' is always suspect here
SLOOHCox
5 / 5 (8) Aug 16, 2016
antigoracle 1 /5 (2) 13 hours ago

Good grief people! Learn something about aircraft and atmospherics - and quit being stupid!


Are you familiar with cloud seeding?


Are you familiar with "scale"? No, most trolls/shills/conspiracy theorists aren't.

antigoracle 1.3 /5 (13) Aug 13, 2016

Uh huh. The solution to all problems is to cull the TROPICAL HUMAN ANIMAL


No; just you.
BongThePuffin
Aug 16, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BongThePuffin
Aug 16, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BongThePuffin
Aug 16, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BongThePuffin
Aug 16, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (14) Aug 16, 2016
Maggnus5 / 5 (6) 19 hours ago
CHEMTRAILS ARE REAL>>>>>
https://youtu.be/FeTaejpg18g


NO THEY'RE NOT
http://www.chemtr...e-a-hoax


Oh the naivete...
Ask the suspected perpetrators if they are responsible, and believe them when they tell you no...
Trust me occifer, I didn't do it...

Funny thing, the government can force it's employees to sign disclosure statements which prevents them (by threat of prosecution) from speaking of said programs. And not unlike the Manhattan Project, many, many thousands of people can be working on various clandestine projects and not know what they are actually working on. It's called "compartmentalization" and only a handful of people need be informed of the end goals. There are many examples of this M.O.
Protoplasmix
4.5 / 5 (8) Aug 16, 2016
Lookie wot I found:

Okay. How about an actual scientific paper? Anyone want to try to debunk actual science?
Evidence of Toxic Coal-Fly-Ash and Chemical Geoengineering in the Troposphere: Consequences for Public Health by J. Marvin Herndon, Ph.D.

Please note that, under the circumstances, pointing out that the paper has been redacted does not suffice, because the scientist has issued a public rebuttal, reported here:
Scientific Proof of Chemical Geoengineering Falsely Discredited by Journal Editor – Dr. Marvin Herndon Issues Public Rebuttal, Compares the Plot to a CIA Psyop

There's a link in the State of the Nation article to a corrected version of the paper, repeated here for convenience: http://stateofthe...sion.pdf
Thanks in advance for sticking to the science.
Phys1
5 / 5 (11) Aug 16, 2016
@cd85
Is there any pile of excrements that you do _not_ believe in?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (12) Aug 16, 2016
@cd85
Is there any pile of excrements that you do _not_ believe in?

I can think of two off the top of my head. OBAMA! and you.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (13) Aug 16, 2016
And lest we not forget AGWism and dark matter fairy tales.
antigoracle
1 / 5 (10) Aug 16, 2016
@cd85
Is there any pile of excrements that you do _not_ believe in?

I can think of two off the top of my head. OBAMA! and you.

That's an insult to excrement.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (3) Aug 16, 2016
Well, a 1-star from barakn and not a word about the science. That sucks.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (2) Aug 16, 2016
redacted > retracted, oops

This morning I was still pretty skeptical about it, and was still thinking it could be pesticides if anything. After seeing all the comments with youtube vids and not much science, I googled "chemtrail scientific evidence" and went to https://geopoliti...umanity/ where the redaction was mentioned in the comments, followed by someone else mentioning the rebuttal with the link to the State of the Nation article. I hadn't seen or heard of the paper before today. I guess I was wrong about suspecting pesticides, but I'm well chuffed to see Silent Spring cited in the intro.

Since it's unrealistic of me to ask for anyone to refute the science (at this point) with additional data, I hope it's not too long before they add a mass spectrometer to the growing list of smartphone gadgets: http://www.mysmah...ors.aspx
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (3) Aug 16, 2016
And all I can think at the moment is what an absolutely marvelous stroke of good economic fortune for the fossil fuel industry that all the toxic byproducts turned out to be so damned deadly useful, and instead of having to pay for detoxifying and disposing all the byproducts, they make bank distributing them far and wide, for purposes known and unknown. And isn't national security wonderful?
leetennant
5 / 5 (7) Aug 16, 2016
Other things that are "not real" include Santa Claus, magic, the tooth fairy and unicorns.

I know, I know. I was shocked too.
Maggnus
5 / 5 (7) Aug 17, 2016
Other things that are "not real" include Santa Claus, magic, the tooth fairy and unicorns.

I know, I know. I was shocked too.

And others: EU, the Expanding Earth bs, "truth is life and life is truth" gobbly-gook, water ducks in the Aether, pretty much anything zephir says, Iron Sun, Electric Sun, and cold fusion.

But I am telling you, that bloody leprechaun who drinks my beer when I am sleeping it getting on my last nerve!
Phys1
5 / 5 (5) Aug 17, 2016
@cantthink,antithink
That is a cosmic pile of shit that you believe in.
In summary, you don't believe in things that make sense and are well based on evidence,
while you do believe in anything that smells bullshit. Clear.
Phys1
5 / 5 (5) Aug 17, 2016
and you.

And the reason is that everything I post here is based on published evidence.
I see.
antiantigoracle
Aug 17, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (1) Aug 17, 2016
The research team says … until now there were no peer-reviewed academic studies showing that what some people think are 'chemtrails' are just ordinary contrails, which are becoming more abundant as air travel expands.
What air travel expansion? There have been *zero* new startups in the US in the last *decade* (since 2007 with Virgin America's launch). Take A Look at the Shrinking US Airline Industry (BA, LUV). At least they corroborate an increase in the number of observed contrails. Sort of...
MP3Car
5 / 5 (5) Aug 17, 2016
I work for a major aerospace company... One time I had the opportunity to observe contrails from the aircraft!!! A neat site to behold! The aircraft has cameras on the belly (not for reconnaissance), a few of which aim aft, and they're rear of the engines. We had contrails coming into view from the right and left from outside the camera's field of view, then 'merging' together behind us! It was very neat and I wish I could post a video of it. As an engineer that spent thousands of hours crawling around every square-inch of that aircraft, I assure you there was no "chemtrail" system of any kind. The only thing remotely close is the ability to jettison fuel. Additionally, with my telescope, I have viewed aircraft producing contrails - it's easy to find them when they have a contrail b/c you can move the telescope up/down until you find the trail, then follow the trail forwards until you get to the aircraft. Most recently, I viewed a Southwest airlines flight at altitude.
Protoplasmix
not rated yet Aug 17, 2016
late edit –
The commercial flight data (passenger and cargo-only flights) is available and there doesn't appear to be evidence of "more abundant" flights – some months up by a percent or so, some months down: http://www.rita.d...ata.html

Air cargo data (US, Oct. 2002 – May 2016) is given in units of "Revenue Tons Enplaned" – http://www.transt...ight.asp Again, some months up, some down...

The military flight data, I'm pretty sure, isn't as easy to come by.

So I googled "near zero nonprofit chemtrail study" to see if I could find what they based 'more abundant as air travel expands' on. All that comes up are links to the many press releases. Anyone got a link to the study?
BackBurner
1 / 5 (3) Aug 17, 2016
To get the IP addresses of the AFOSI stooges promoting it


So you end up with the IP address of every Starbucks in the world? Ineffective in my opinion. If you really want those addresses you can probably just call them...

This whole subject belongs in the Google WTF section, along with the loons who think carbon dioxide is warming the planet.
Phys1
5 / 5 (1) Aug 17, 2016
The world bank data do indicate a steep rise:
number of passengers: http://data.world...AIR.PSGR
freight: http://data.world...OD.MT.K1
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (1) Aug 17, 2016
And the reason is that everything I post here is based on published evidence.

What has been published regarding chemtrails (for or against) other than this opinion poll listed above and Proto's link?
Phys1
5 / 5 (1) Aug 17, 2016
Why do you ask? I am talking about my posts not about chemtrails.
I never made no statement on chemtrails.
I have no time for that.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (1) Aug 17, 2016
Thanks for the links, Phys1. You're right about the rise worldwide. Interesting to note that for the US freight (million tons-km) appears to have peaked in 2007 (at 40,600) and shows decline down to 37,200 in 2015.

I found the link to the study: http://iopscience...8/084011 It does not list Herndon's paper in the references. The experts were asked to evaluate basically the data, methods, and interpretations found on the conspiracy theory websites. Interesting...
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (2) Aug 17, 2016
late edit –

A search for information on the nonprofit organization Near Zero shows no such listing (as of 23 Jul 2016) – http://www.meliss...ear+Zero Interesting, it must be new, I guess... It would be neat if there are grants available for environmental researchers and citizen-scientists to gather more actual scientific data on the actual subject instead of asking everyone's opinion. Sheesh.

To answer my original question, it looks like only relevant changes since the 1960s are decreases in funding for the Environmental Protection Agency. Because what industry wants a government agency telling it what to do? It's bad for business. The Koch-Congress is Gutting the EPA While the Media is Silent
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (1) Aug 17, 2016
Ahh, here we go – a molecular scanner that fits in your pocket, uses IR spectroscopy, your smartphone, and cloud-based proprietary algorithms to analyze the data. Nice couple-minute youtube video here: https://www.youtu...3tbuBmWY

The bad news is it's currently the subject of an intellectual property dispute: https://www.kicks...iscovery

smh

There must be a few DIY sites, maybe an open source database too. If there isn't, there needs to be.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (2) Aug 17, 2016
As an engineer that spent thousands of hours crawling around every square-inch of that aircraft, I assure you there was no "chemtrail" system of any kind.
I can confirm no hanky-panky with any of the F-106s and T-33s I helped maintain and completely disassemble/reassemble every 500 hours of flight. But I've never inspected up close any of the aircraft used these days for fire-fighting, not that I'd need to after seeing them in action: https://www.googl...oe=utf-8
How 'bout you? The ones shown deploying flame retardant sound like a possible explanation for the observations of "bombs" reported in Herndon's paper – did you read it?
barakn
5 / 5 (3) Aug 18, 2016
Well, a 1-star from barakn and not a word about the science. That sucks. -Protoplasmix

Any post that starts with "Lookie wot" immediately deserves a 1. Beyond that, the Herndon paper was atrocious and not worthy of comment. For example, on page 9378 he notes that cement also contains calcium and strontium, and even notes the incorporation of fly ash into cement, but gives not one thought to whether the some of what was measured came from cement plants, where they burn coal and other petroleum products to heat finely ground rocks containing most of the elements mentioned in his paper. No mention made of other possible sources of the elements such as fireworks, which use all of the elements measured except boron. No questioning of whether the sulfur could have come from the bunker fuel burned by the ships in the harbor.
barakn
5 / 5 (4) Aug 18, 2016
No attempt to trace the path of the air before it reached California, and no recognition that dirty air from China - where a thousand coal-fired power plants belch out fly ash - regularly crosses the Pacific, No experiments to test whether other starting ratios of elements would lead to similar leachate ratios because of chemical interactions between them. In short, Herndon ignored all contrary evidence and alternative hypotheses to come to a foregone conclusion. This isn't science and you shouldn't have asked me to comment on it.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (1) Aug 18, 2016
Any post that starts with "Lookie wot" immediately deserves a 1.
I see.
For example, on page 9378 he notes that cement also contains calcium and strontium, and even notes the incorporation of fly ash into cement, but gives not one thought to whether the some of what was measured came from cement plants, where they burn coal and other petroleum products to heat finely ground rocks containing most of the elements mentioned in his paper.
The author did too consider industrial sources: "The rain water and dust sample collection, in San Diego, Los Angeles, Montebello, and Phoenix, respectively, TOOK PLACE IN AREAS FAR REMOVED FROM AEROSOL-POLLUTING HEAVY INDUSTRIES under circumstances of intense and persistent aerial spraying of fine grain particulates that left a white haze in the sky." [emphasis mine]

cont'd >
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (1) Aug 18, 2016
> cont'd

No mention made of other possible sources of the elements such as fireworks
No fireworks were reported being observed during the "circumstances of intense and persistent aerial spraying" under and during which the samples were collected.
No attempt to trace the path of the air before it reached California, and no recognition that dirty air from China - where a thousand coal-fired power plants belch out fly ash - regularly crosses the Pacific,
Well, not quite: "The tropospheric lifetime of the particulate was sufficiently short as to necessitate near daily spraying, which is an argument against the samples originating far away, such as from China due to the global movement of weather."

cont'd >
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (1) Aug 18, 2016
> cont'd

Also, "Off the coast of Southern California individuals have observed tanker jets "dumping" massive quantities of particulate matter in relatively short bursts, colloquially called "bombs," which disperse significantly before prevailing winds bring the matter to the coast line." So it appears that the particulate being collected was visible, while the weather otherwise from China presumably had no visible qualities, especially not haze.

However, I do agree with you on that point barakn, – samples should've been collected during days when the "near-daily spraying" was not observed, to provide a control group. Nevertheless, the author still said, "Whereas the "fingerprint" evidence is compelling, strongly suggesting identical processes/materials, additional investigations should be undertaken and, indeed, are being planned."

Thanks for taking the time, barakn, I do appreciate it.
Zzzzzzzz
5 / 5 (2) Aug 18, 2016
Having a fairly straightforward understanding of aircraft, jet exhaust and the atmosphere pretty much keeps ideas like this out of rational conversation. You would likely not nave been hired in the first place. Lunacy is frowned upon by the air travel industry
"This is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The atomic bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives." — Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy during World War II

-Sorry try again. You sound like the great psychopath george kamburoff.

Argument from 'authority' is always suspect here

Sorry, Otto, your delusions are showing.....

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.