I received the scientific explanations of contrails from another fellow named Geg McKee, who I've been sharing info and questions about contrails and 'alleged' chemtrails with. He gave me his very educated and well researched response....and I am grateful for that.
Yes, it is true that aerial biological/chemical spraying had gone on until 1975 in Britain, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience However, I recommend taking the time to go through the other side of this issue before surrendering to the belief that all contrails are 'chemtrails'.
This is not to suggest that some aerial spraying does not go on. Even in Duncan, BC, about 15 years ago, we were told our skies were
being sprayed for eradication of specific tree-eating
moths. No doubt the occasional military project does aerial spraying
as well. However, after thoroughly reviewing the following material, I now have extreme doubts as to contrails being 'chemtrails'.
Hi Bill:
I'm from Sydney Australia. I've spent years studying whaling history. I've spent years studying robotics and science. I've spent years studying aviation and learning to design planes, build jet engines, and fly gliders and hang-gliders
Some people obsess for decades about sports scores , tattoos, train spotting, or dog and horse breeding.
I'm interested in science topics like marine science, contrails and aviation.
If you believe the claims that the long white lines in the sky that often criss cross in grid patterns are a new phenomenon, you might like to ponder the lyrics of classic folk singer Jonie Mitchel's 1976 song "Amelia" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAb6Jgb41mo
"I was driving across the burning desert When I spotted six jet planes Leaving six white vapor trails across the bleak terrain It was the hexagram of the heavens it was the strings of my guitar Amelia it was just a false alarm"
The fact is that Chemtrail believers tend not to bother to
understand nor check the details of specific claims, as if the sheer
number of claims is a mass so overwhelming it cannot be wrong.
Effectively, it is a misleading call to the sheep.
There are so many sheep running towards this cliff they cannot be wrong.
Nonsensical Arguments
On the contrary, by not understanding details, it becomes VERY easy to be swayed by nonsensical arguments. Remember hundreds of error-filled claims presented together do not make a greater truth.
They are simply a greater collection of error.
The tendency in humans to believe in meaning, or pattern, in things when in reality there really is none.
It is an irresistible urge in many people and is the reason many
people believe in conspiracies when there are none, hidden meaning in
people's comments when there are none, and connectedness in events when
in reality there are none. (This is not to suggest that real corruption and sinister activities are not to be found).
It is why people sacrificed their own children on mountains in the
hope of appeasing Gods that did not exist. Why they threw people into
volcanos and burned "witches". Why they gave money to religious
institutions to pay for the "sins" of dead relatives.
That is why simple superstitious people waged war on their
neighbors in the hope that it would please the cloud spirits and make
rain for their crops.
That is why they thought floods, fires, storms, meteors or
earthquakes were the result of unappeased Gods or ancestor spirits, when
in reality none existed. At the time, the people did not understand that such occurrences are just natural phenomenon.
They see a willful conscious reason for something when there really isn't one.
Contrails form long trails in the sky, not because someone
willfully wants them to, but because that's the way the laws of physics
work.
A speedboat leaves a long white trail, not because someone wants it to but because that is just fluid dynamics at work.
When you drive a motorcycle on dirt, your bike leaves tracks
behind, not because you are deliberately trying to make tracks but
because it is IMPOSSIBLE for you not to.
Sometimes they are deep tracks, sometimes they are shallow tracks.
It's not because some bike tracks are Chem tracks and some are
normal, but because it is the specific conditions of the ground , being
sandy, wet or rocky etc that determine the track formed. Sometimes you
will ride over a patch of hard ground and you won't leave any tracks.
You are not deliberately switching the track on or off, it's just
that the ground conditions are not suitable for a track to form.
It's the same with contrails. The next video shows fighter jets giving off some small contrails, yet at the same time shows a jet airliner giving off large, persistent contrails. (go into the 2minute:05seconds of the video clip): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5iLya1n7zE&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Make sure you are aware of this natural tendency in all humans, and
that you are not falling for that instinctive urge to find a deliberate
willful intent to a phenomenon when in reality it may not exist.
Pay extremely close attention to the details, and the REAL big picture will emerge. However, sometimes the necessary 'details' are not provided.
Water Ballast Tanks are used to simulate weight of passenger and cargo during air-flight testing Have a look at the water ballast tanks that are used for ALL prototype airliners.
Here's a video of the first 747 in 1969 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrDv4jX_MUs These are the same ballast tanks that appear in "chemtrail" videos. We are misled to believe they contain chemicals. In fact they go way back prior to the 1960s. They were also used in the 1950s for testing the Boeing 707.
They are used to test the effect of weight shift distribution on
airliners by moving water around to simulate the mass of passengers and
cargo.
No insurance company is going to allow 300 passengers aboard an
uncertifed airliner being tested. Because the companies need to work out how the plane
will perform with differing weights representing passenger numbers, water ballast tanks are used.
No one is going to risk their backs lifting sand bags around so they just pump water.
I deal with Ed Griffin's "What in the world are they spraying?" film further down.
My take is that it is a deliberate HOAX to make money.
If you want to know exactly what jet planes are flying above you
anytime anywhere in the world you can use this tracking software http://planefinder.net/
No more guessing about unmarked military planes, but exact squawk and flight numbers.
I'm going to mention a few films you may have watched such as
"What in the world are they spraying?" and other such internet postings,
and I'll also mention welsbach materials . All of the points raised in
such films are covered in my comments and links. If you try to come
back with "but what about....." then it's probably because you haven't
read all of the links and understood the physics I'm explaining in this
post.
How much water do jet airliners release in their exhaust? 6 to 8 tons per hour!
The same weight in water as a cement truck.
A small swimming pool full... EVERY HOUR.
What happens when even a few cup fulls of water encounter the -50
freezing cold of cruising altitude? This is what happens. Watch
carefully http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsPHr8uR6ig
Now think how big that cloud of ice crystals would be with 8 TONS of water, mixed with jet exhaust matter and particulates, and the millions of tons of invisible water vapor already in the atmosphere. Big enough to stretch horizon to horizon. And just like clouds, these contrails can appear red or gold at sunrise or sunset....depending how the light reflects on the cloud-like Contrails.
For every ton
of jet fuel burnt in an engine, more than a ton of water comes out the
exhaust. It's just basic combustion chemistry. Ice crystals are a natural result of that invisible water vapor meeting the -50 degree temperature. That formation of ice crystals behind an aircraft is called a Contrail. Every single day there are
close to 80,000 jetliner flights per day.
Say there are only 75,000 flights, which is a commonly used average figure
75,000 flights per day worldwide , 4 hours average.
2million, 4HundredThousand TONS of water added to the sky by passenger jets.
Most of that 2,400,000tons of water is released into -50C temperature.
It freezes. It forms huge contrails
Now remember every single day 2,400,000 tons of water are added to
the sky . If that water doesn't freeze, it evaporates. What happens
when something evaporates? It makes the surrounding air MORE HUMID.
More jet aircraft flying = More Humid atmosphere
More Humid atmosphere = Contrails Persist LONGER.
So as the day goes on, the sky gets more humid and trails last longer, often causing complete overcast.
It's not a conspiracy, it's basic science.
Invisible Water Vapor in the Clear Blue Sky
Now think carefully.
No human has ever seen water vapor.
The scientific definition of water vapor is "a colorless invisible gas."
INVISIBLE get it?
I'm not talking about "common usage terms" your grandma used for "vapor"
The fog around a boiling kettle is not steam or vapor.
It is liquid water droplets in a mist that have condensed from the invisible vapor.
If people don't understand phase changes of water from invisible
vapor to visible droplets or ice then no wonder they don't understand
clouds.
The sky above you is filled with MILLIONS of tons of invisible
water. Even a completely clear, blue, cloudless sky can
contain MORE water than an overcast cloudy sky.
If you don't believe that then it's because you don't understand the physics and WHY clouds form.
You might think it is no big deal that you probably had no idea
that water vapor is invisible but it is at the core of why people so
easily fall for the chemtrail hoax.
If you didn't know or perhaps refuse to believe water vapor is
invisible, it means you don't, or didn't, know one of the most BASIC
aspects of atmospheric science upon which all others have their
foundation.
If you don't understand such a fundamental fact then you have insufficient
fundamental knowledge to discern reality from BS
You have probably read comments that long
contrails never occurred in the past and only appeared around 1996.
Why do they say that?
It is not true.
Ed Griffin says it.
It is NOT true
To quote from 1969 "It is certain that many occasions, say 30 to 40
days a year, the cause of cirrus cloud cover is contrails. This
cloud cover can take in a substantial part of a continent half the US"
If you search through peoples' old photo albums on 'Flicker' prior to
1996 you will see innumerable large contrail photos. Go watch Mad Mad World;
Back to The Future; DeathRace 2000; and innumerable old films all of
which accidentally capture large persistent contrails in the back
ground.
Since the evidence proves beyond ANY doubt that long and spreading
trails existed long before the time chemtrail theorists say they first
appeared, why would people like Alex Jones and Ed Griffin etc say such
things?
Because they are deliberately lying.
They WANT to deceive you to make money.
"The spreading of jet contrails into extensive cirrus sheets is a
familiar sight. Often, when persistent contrails exist from 25,000 to
40,000 ft, several long contrails increase in number and gradually merge
into an almost solid interlaced sheet."
Please make an attempt to understand the contents.
It is just the tip of the iceberg of 70+ years of rigorous
atmospheric science that proves beyond any doubt that the things people
write on the internet about "chemtrails" are utter rubbish.
Direct tests of trails in the sky have been done hundreds of times.
Not guesses from finding junk on the ground but real tests where
planes have flown up into the sky DIRECTLY into a trail and sampled it .
The tests are conclusive .
The trails are water Ice crystals http://www.patarnott.com/pdf/contrailMicrophysics99.pdf
They were documented throughout the 1920s and 30s , particularly the Spanish civil war during dogfights.
They were filmed over Paris in 1936 go to minute 1:29 of this clip:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wUiVLTxw2g
Extract from ''Flight To Arras'' Pub 1943
''The German on the ground knows us by the pearly white scarf
which every plane flying at high altitude trails behind like a bridal
veil. The disturbance created by our meteoric flight crystallizes the
watery vapor in the atmosphere. We unwind behind us a cirrus of
icicles. If the atmospheric conditions are favorable to the formation of
clouds, our wake will thicken bit by bit and become an evening cloud
over the countryside''.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/3/4/045022/pdf/erl8_4_045022.pdf
More Science and Research behind Contrails
"Measurements of the Growth of the Ice Budget in a Persisting Contrail"
R.G. Knollenberg
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 29, Issue 7 (October 1972) pp. 13671374
"Multiple Contrail Streamers Observed by Radar"
Journal of Applied Meteorology;Volume 13, Issue 5 (August 1974)
Abstract: An unusual case of multiple streamers or filaments with
the characteristic mare's tail pattern in vertical section has been
observed by radar where the generating elements were condensation trails
laid by high-altitude aircraft. The contrails were laid perpendicular
to the wind and as they drifted a multitude of streamers formed along
each trail.
"The Effects of Aircraft Wake Dynamics on Contrail Development"
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 58, Issue 4 (February 2001)
"Influence of propulsion efficiency on contrail formation"
Ulrich Schumann
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Wessling, Germany
Abstract: Higher η causes contrails at higher ambient temperatures and over a larger range of flight altitudes.
"On the radiative properties of contrail cirrus"
Geophys. Res. Lett., 25(8), 11611164.
"Optical properties of contrail-induced
cirrus: discussion of unusual halo phenomena"
Ralf Sussmann- Journal of Applied Optics- June 1997
Measurements of the growth of the ice budget in a persisting
contrail (Contrail ice budget measurements with optical array particle
size spectrometer onboard Sabreliner, noting water abundance reduction
at subtropopause jet traffic levels)
KNOLLENBERG, R G
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. Vol. 29, pp. 1367-1374. Oct. 1972
"Cirrus, contrails, and ice supersaturated regions in high pressure systems at northern mid latitudes"
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1689-1699, 2008
"On the Transition of Contrails into Cirrus Clouds"
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 57, Issue 4 (2000)
"Cirrus Clouds and their Supersaturated Environment -Overview, Examples, and Problems"
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre
"Global Modeling of the Contrail and Contrail Cirrus Climate Impact"
Jet Contrails and Cirrus Cloud: A Feasibility Study Employing High-Resolution Satellite Imagery
Andrew M. Carleton and Peter J. Lamb
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (March 1986)
ON THE POSSIBILITY OF WEATHER MODIFICATION BY AIRCRAFT CONTRAILS
WALLACE B. MURCRAY
Monthly Weather Review
Volume 98, Issue 10 (October 1970)
"Measurements of the Growth of the Ice Budget in a Persisting Contrail"
R.G. Knollenberg
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 29, Issue 7 (October 1972) pp. 13671374
"Multiple Contrail Streamers Observed by Radar"
Journal of Applied Meteorology;Volume 13, Issue 5 (August 1974)
Abstract: An unusual case of multiple streamers or filaments with
the characteristic mare's tail pattern in vertical section has been
observed by radar where the generating elements were condensation trails
laid by high-altitude aircraft. The contrails were laid perpendicular
to the wind and as they drifted a multitude of streamers formed along
each trail.
"The Effects of Aircraft Wake Dynamics on Contrail Development"
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 58, Issue 4 (February 2001)
"Influence of propulsion efficiency on contrail formation"
Ulrich Schumann
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre, Wessling, Germany
Abstract: Higher η causes contrails at higher ambient temperatures and over a larger range of flight altitudes.
"On the radiative properties of contrail cirrus"
Geophys. Res. Lett., 25(8), 11611164.
"Optical properties of contrail-induced
cirrus: discussion of unusual halo phenomena"
Ralf Sussmann- Journal of Applied Optics- June 1997
Measurements of the growth of the ice budget in a persisting
contrail (Contrail ice budget measurements with optical array particle
size spectrometer onboard Sabreliner, noting water abundance reduction
at subtropopause jet traffic levels)
KNOLLENBERG, R G
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences. Vol. 29, pp. 1367-1374. Oct. 1972
"Cirrus, contrails, and ice supersaturated regions in high pressure systems at northern mid latitudes"
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1689-1699, 2008
"On the Transition of Contrails into Cirrus Clouds"
Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
Volume 57, Issue 4 (2000)
Jensen, E. J., A. S. Ackerman, D. E. Stevens, O. B. Toon, and P.
Minnis, 1998: Spreading and growth of contrails in a sheared
environment. J. Geophys. Res., 103, 31,557-31,567.
Mannstein, H., R. Meyer, and P. Wendling, 1999: Operational
detection of contrails from NOAA- AVHRR data. Intl. J. Remote Sens., 20,
1641-1660.
Meyer, R., H. Mannstein, R. Meerkotter, U. Schumann and P.
Wendling, 2002: Regional radiative forcing by line-shaped contrails
derived from satellite data.
J.Geophys.Res.,107(D10),10.1029/2001JD000426.
Miloshevich, L. M., H. Vömel, A. Paukkunen, A. J. Heymsfield, and
S. J. Oltmans, 2001: Characterization and correction of relative
humidity measurements from Vaisala RS80-A radiosondes at cold
temperatures, J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 18, 135-156.
Minnis, P., J. K. Ayers, R. Palikonda, and D. Phan, 2004:
Contrails, cirrus trends, and climate. J. Climate, 17, 1671-1683.
Palikonda, R., P. Minnis, D. R. Doelling, P. W. Heck, D. P. Duda,
H. Mannstein, and U. Schumann, 1999: Potential radiative impact of
contrail coverage over continental USA estimated from AVHRR data. Proc.
AMS 10th Conf. Atmos. Rad., Madison, WI, June 28 -- Jul 2, 181-184.
Palikonda, R., P. Minnis, D. P. Duda, and H. Mannstein, 2004:
Contrail coverage over the United States of America during 2001 derived
from AVHRR data. Meteorol. Z. (submitted). http://books.google.com/books?id=GSoDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA74&dq=popular+science+contrail&hl=en&ei=vK9kTZWHOIOSuAPisvWrBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&sqi=2&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false
"Cirrus Clouds and their Supersaturated Environment -Overview, Examples, and Problems"
Institut für Physik der Atmosphäre
Consider the mass of water to create a 100 kilometer contrail: Its four times the weight of a cargo plane.
Here's a small selection of footage of commercial airliners and their
massive trails. The same trails some claim are impossible to
be contrails and can only be "chemtrails". One must understand that the amount of water vapor to produce a 100 kilometer contrail would be 10,000 metric tons, which is
about seven times heavier than a maximum payload of a jumbo jet. If that contrail were filled with aluminum oxide, as is the 'chemtrail theory', then that mass would be four times greater... ie: 40,000 metric tons.. See the data at bottom of this paper. In other words, these planes simply could not contain the chemical material to create such a trail in the sky.....All those trails are contrails, not chemtrails.
Jet Exhaust produces more water than the original amount of fuel
The combustion of all hydrocarbons produces H20. kerosene has approx 15 carbon atoms per molecule.
C15H32 + 23O2 --> 15CO2 + 16H2O" 1 mol kerosene combusts to 16 mol water & 15 mol CO2.
1 mol kerosene weighs 12*15 + 32*1 = 212 gram.
1 mole O2 weighs 16*2 = 32 gram.
1 mol CO2 weighs 12 16 16 = 44 gram.
1 mol H2O weighs 2*1 + 1*16 = 18 gram .
212 gram kerosene + 736 gram oxygen -> 660 gram CO2 + 288 gram water. Thus jet exhaust produces MORE water than the original fuel
Another major component of jetfuel is decane.
C10H22
So Combust with oxygen :
2 C10H22 + 31 O2 ->20 CO2 + 22 H20
2mol of Decane weigh 284 grams.
22 mol of Water weigh 396 grams.
So 396 grams of water result from every 284 grams of decane fuel
Piston and jet engines produce a greater amount of water in their
exhaust than the original mass of fuel they had to start with.
Debunking the "What in the world are they spraying?" film
You have probably believed the nonsense reports such as "What in
the world are they spraying?" where contrary to what the video claims, in
fact, pond sediment, sludge, canyon runoff and puddle residue were
collected and sent as samples of "rainwater".
Here's the actual report www.mckeewildthings.com/Chemtards/chemtrails_basic_lab_report.pdf
How much aluminum does soil NATURALLY contain?
7.1% on average
Yes the normal worldwide average of aluminum in soils is 7.1% or 71,000ppm (parts per million) or 710,000,000ug/L
So a tiny spec of soil in a water sample vastly changes the aluminum content.
Where does this natural level of aluminum come from?
Aluminum is the 3rd most common element on earth's land surface.
It is the most common metal and it is found EVERYWHERE on earth
naturally, and always has been since before the time of the dinosaurs.
So since aluminum is so common everywhere, it is very easy to
contaminate anything like water, so your test for aluminum in water, with
tiny specs of dirt in it, would be unreliable due to the soil contaminating the water. http://www.eoearth.org/article/Health_effects_of_aluminum
So when the idiots in "What in the world are they spraying" have
wind blown dirt accumulate in open air ponds, all that natural aluminum
will comprise about 7.1% of the pond sediment and sludge and puddle
residue they collected and failed to mention in their video test results.
Poor sampling methodology conducted by morons is only proof of
idiocy, and has zero relevance to the contents of contrails at 10km
altitude.
Here's an email sent to the film makers:
Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:57 AM
To: gedward.griffin@verizon.net
Subject: A few brief point on "What in the world"
Dear Sir,
I watched your documentary, "What in the world are they spraying"
with interest, but I have a few of issues I'd like to raise.
1) The film seems to suggest that water from the pond was tested
at 375,000 ug/L aluminum. However the lab report says it was sediment.
Since sludge is basically soil, then 375,000 ug/L is a perfectly normal
level. Ordinary soil has an aluminum content averaging 7.1%, or
71,000,000 ug/L
2) The hair test on the little girl were used to suggest that
aluminum must have been sprayed. Yet the levels on the report were only
33% higher than that listed for a healthy adult, and children are known
to naturally excrete aluminum at a higher rate than adults. Hence the
use of that test result seems rather misleading.
3) Aluminum toxicity in soil has been a known problem for a
hundred years. Breeding crops to be aluminum resistant has always been a
goal, and hence a normal application of genetic modification. How then
can this be evidence of aerial spraying?
4) The tests used for aluminum were EPA 6010B, Plasma-atomic
emission spectrometry. This does not distinguish the form in which the
aluminum is in. Hence any contamination with aluminum oxide, which is
present in very large amounts in soil and dust, would throw off your
tests. Basically, if the water had just a tiny bit of dirt in it, from
dust or otherwise, then the results would be immediately off. This was
not addressed in the movie.
I hope that you can post a clarification on these issues.
I have no specific education in these subjects, and prefer to
remain anonymous, so that the facts may speak for themselves. I refer
you to the references below for confirmation.
Regards,
Uncinus
References:
Original test results from the pond, as shown in the film "What in the world are they spraying?" http://ihost.nu/lucifer741/public/chemtrails/chemtrails_basic_lab_report.pdf
"Description: Pond Sediment"
"Matrix: Sludge"
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry -- Summary Report
Hair Analysis Panel Discussion Exploring The State Of The Science http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/hac/hair_analysis/4.2.html
"Aluminum in hair is not a useful biological indicator of exposure"
" Studies suggest, for example, that alkaline earths and zinc are
not excreted as much in early years of life. The opposite is true with
aluminum, of which children excrete higher levels than adults (Paschal
1989). "
Botanical Gazette of the University of Chicago, Volume 71, page 159, from 1921.
"Aluminum as a factor in soil fertility"
How long can Contrails become?
Ed Griffin states that normal contrails are only about 20 plane lengths.
That is obviously total garbage and the Boeing films from 1950
prove his statement is completely false. This is why, from a scientific perspective, he has no credibility whatsoever.
Even this film of a visit to Paris in 1936, and the Berlin 36 Olympics, proves that long, persistent contrails existed way back then. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wUiVLTxw2g
The Kuhn paper includes photographs of normal persistent contrails
that have spread to form complete overcast. A well known phenomena even
in the 1960s and 70s.
I have linked to numerous other sources that prove beyond any
doubt that long, spreading, overcast- causing contrails have been a
regular sight for over 70 years.
Aerosols delivered at 10km altitude would not fall on the ground below them
Additionally, Chemtrail believers imply that after such contrails
are seen aluminum is found directly below, and the film makers claim it
is from geo-engineering sources. However, the very Geo-engineering
proposals they mention suggest that the whole point of the proposals of
delivering welsbach materials in the future at high altitudes is so that
they would last a very long time at high altitude. Weeks or months at
least.
Upper atmosphere winds average about 100km per hr ...or approx 60mph.
It is nonsensical to claim geo-engineering aluminum materials are
being delivered in sufficient volumes to appear as a white trail in the
sky often hundreds of Kms long, particularly when videos of such trails
shown in the very same video show a substantial air gap behind any
possible point of delivery and the trail itself.
Aluminum and its oxides do not have an invisible state the way water has an invisible state.
Any "sprayed" aluminum would be immediately visible and dense
from its point of exit from the aircraft, and never with a clear gap as
seen in most "chemtrail" videos....In simplest terms, these videos are only 'contrails' being mistakenly called chemtrails.
That geo-engineering materials, supposedly crafted to persist in
the atmosphere for months at a time would be detected directly below an
area they were delivered shortly afterward, is delusional in the
extreme.
Mineral sand aerosols from the Sahara desert in Africa make their
way to North and South America, and they begin their journey from ground
level.
The idea that aerosols delivered at 10km altitude would fall on the ground below them is laughable.
Major Air Quality Monitoring Stations see no rising aluminum levels
Every major city on earth has numerous air quality monitoring stations that operate around the clock.
These are often beneath flight routes where long or spreading
contrails are regularly seen. Amazing how thousands of air testing
stations often run by non govt organizations, individuals, and others do not
report exponentially rising levels of aluminum even though being
directly below busy flight paths.
Patent application 20100043443
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SUPPRESSING AEROENGINE CONTRAILS
That is a patent to PREVENT contrails forming so military jets can't be spotted, a huge problem for military aviators.
That's why millions are spent on STEALTH, so military planes are
hard to detect. A big long white trail in the sky is a giant "here I am"
target.
Here's a simple challenge for you people who believe in Chemtrails.
Get out from behind your computer, and go to a busy airport.
Try to find a single airline pilot who is mystified by the massive
white trails that they fly past every day and that their own planes
generate.
Perhaps you could try to convince this guy that the planes he
videos leaving persistent contrails aren't really airliners but are
unmarked white military planes as claimed on conspiracy sites http://www.youtube.com/user/wineandflyguy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbcH5T9NtSk
People can visit this science forum : http://www2b.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/
and try to convince the meteorologists, airline pilots, physicists
and engineers who regularly post there that what they understand of
atmospheric science and aviation is all wrong and contrails are really
"chemtrails" because they read it on the internet
A well researched introductory site to the subject is www.contrailscience.com
Good luck
greg@mckeewildthings.com
Here are some additional details Greg has recently supplied:
Contrail May Cast Shadows on the Haze Below
I haven't even covered cloud
seeding have I? Contrail may cast shadows on haze below them and are visible in many
videos filmed from the air: http://www.youtube.com/user/wineandflyguy
They result in the "black line" effects.
It's the shadow of a contrail on haze below it.
How much weight would need to be
carried for a 100km long trail
There are also calculations on how much weight would need to be
carried if a 100km long trail that is 1km wide as is documented by
sattelite photos was really aluminum as is claimed by chemtrail theorists. This is a calculation I picked up from another dude on a science forum.
"Did anybody from CT community ever ask what is the total mass
of particles (and/or droplets) in one such contrail line, that can be
more than 1 km wide and more than 100 km long? Such lines are documented
in satellite imagery.
Here is simple estimate for you all. To be visible, that is, to
scatter visible light, these particles must be larger than the visible
light wavelength(s). This means that they are at least a few microns
(0.000001 m) in diameter. And for the trail to be seen against the sky,
there have to be dozens, even hundreds of particles in the path of light
beam. Imagine that all these particles are condensed together in the
direction of the light beam so that all the thickness of the trail is
compressed into a thin film made only of the particles. The thickness of
this film will be at least 100 microns (0.0001 m), thickness of hair.
This value is grossly underestimated, but, due to its width and length,
the volume of this film will be at least:
V = 0.0001 m x 1000 m x 100 000 m = 10 000 cubic meters.
This volume of water has the mass of 10 000 metric tones, which is
about seven times heavier than a maximum payload of a jumbo jet. Note
that this is a rather modest estimate, as there are many much longer and
wider trails observed in the satellite images, each has been left by a
single plane. These trails cannot be made solely from the stuff ejected
by the plane, they have to be made mostly from the stuff that already
was in the atmosphere, which, in any case, is mainly a condensed water
vapor."
To add to that point, 'Chemtrail believers' claim the trails are Aluminum oxide
That 10,000 metric ton calculation is just for water density.
Aluminum is 4 times that density. Volume for volume, aluminum is 4
times heavier than ice, so for the same visual appearance of aluminum
powder rather than ice crystals, a 100km long trail would be 40,000
metric tonnes (28 times the weight of a fully loaded jet cargo plane)
Thus, it is IMPOSSIBLE that a trail that long could be made from materials that came only from inside the plane.
Contrails of course rely on most of the water ALREADY being in the
sky to allow their formation and persistence. The detail of which is in
papers below.
There is also the "web-like materials" that cover huge areas of forests, fields, and suburbs.
They literally are that: Webs form "ballooning spiders" and have been a common phenomenon for MILLIONS of years.
In the middle ages it led to the term "gossamer".
Cloud seeding: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Kw5uTuhH60
Highly publicized and only works at low altitude
Regarding the UN Convention Ban on Geo-engineering
So....someone sent me this link of a UN Convention ban on geo-engineering, plus a link to some
of the history of patents that utilize weather modification systems:
This kind of thing is what is being presented as evidence that contrails are chemtrails.
My friend, Greg McKee, who specializes in aerodynamics, responded... to explain the UN Convention ban, and the questionable documented patents of weather modification equipment.
Reply and Comments Regarding "Patents of Aerosol Spray Equipment" What is happening is that some of the people who are sending these links are simply not thinking carefully of the relevance of the links and are not evaluating them logically. They are simply finding links and patents and ONLY thinking "this is something for spraying, or for an airplane, therefor it explains the trails in the sky".
The UN convention does not refer to chemtrails. It refers to
geo-engineering. There are NUMEROUS proposals for geo-engineering
including spreading vast quantities of iron in the sea and spraying
seawater from ships. www.youtube.com/watch?v=fg7J8P-uXqM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOMyf27v7Go The
whole slew of them were rightly banned because the earth has its own
natural compensatory mechanisms, and there is no way to accurately
predict if any world scale attempt to counteract AGW would actually work
and NOT have unforeseen negative complications . Most are just
raised as a way of not actually dealing with the problem of introducing
alternative energy and increasing energy efficiency. None of the
proposals would compensate for the anthropogenic acidification of the
oceans and other well documented consequences of our carbon footprint.
They are proposed as a way of doing nothing to change our society's
inefficient habits....Thus, they were banned.
Regarding patented products: There are a huge number of patents for smoke generators. I use a number of them for my special effects work. ALL spray and smoke generators that produce visible clouds produce a visible cloud right from the point of exit from the apparatus. EVERY SINGLE ONE. The smoke or powder is densest and most visible from point of origin. The trails that are claimed to be "chemtrails" do not do that. The trails always have a clear air gap where NOTHING is visible other than light refraction due to heat...because this is how aerodynamic contrails act.
We both know much of the early patents are for cloud seeding purposes
(to produce rain)
The people who send you this could very easily go through the exercise and THINK "could this apparatus produce an INVISIBLE exhaust that, after 50 feet or more, becomes dense and white?" If the answer is NO, then it should be discarded as irrelevant. However, 'trails' are perhaps relevant to understanding skywriting, fuel dumping, fire fighting retardant, crop spraying of pesticides/herbicides, and oil slick fighting. All that technology would involve 'patents'. Enough said.
If the device can result in something invisible that turns visible after 50 feet or more then it is relevant but NONE of those linked items actually match the observation of the trails that are claimed to be "chemtrails" That is because it is WATER that can pass through a jet engine exhaust as an invisible gas and turn into a visible, tiny, crystallized particle. Aluminum CANNOT do that. Barium CANNOT do that. NONE of the substances claimed to be in "chemtrails" can do that. Only water can do that. Only the already well understood characteristics of water fully explain all observed phenomena
So water is an example of something that does match observation and titanium oxide and aluminum oxide welsbach materials etc don't match observation. Simple rigorous evaluation of what patents refer to and what their physical characteristics must be, compared to actual observation is a valid way of determining whether they have any relevance to what we see. There are many designs of robotic dogs, and papers, patents etc relating to them. Does that provide evidence that the dogs we see in our street s are robots? Nope, because careful evaluation of the characteristics of robotic dogs reveals they do not match the characteristics of the dog like entities we see in the streets. The already well understood characteristics of real dogs far better matches observation that the likely and observed characteristics of robot versions. The best fit explanation of dog street entities are the already well understood phenomenon of living dogs. No matter the evil govt motivation for introducing packs of roaming dog robots, or "do you really trust our govt so much that you think they wouldn't stoop to do this " or "surely it is in the commercial interest of evil robot companies to force dog robots onto the unsuspecting population", the already well documented explanation fits ALL of the observed characteristic perfectly. "Chemtrails" is an attempt to hammer a square block into a round hole. Lots of ill-fitting square and triangular blocks all thrown in quick succession and repeated done so over and over without any of their champions actually accepting how perfectly the round block fits in the round hole. the round block must be "disinfo" . Somehow, if they collect enough large square blocks and they all swap square blocks with each other it will all somehow fit one day. They just need to believe and spread the square blocks to as many people as possible and sign square block petitions But of course it will never fit.
A number of people have sent you links to aerosol sampling, measuring and detection devices of aerosols. Obviously they seem to think that is evidence for "chemtrails" . This fits the unfortunate meme that aerosols are something that is "sprayed" rather than its real meaning of an airborne particulate. Pollen is an aerosol. Sand from the Sahara is an aerosol. Sea salt is THE most common and prevalent aerosol. Volcano smoke is an aerosol. It is like not understanding the meaning of "vacuum" and thinking there is a giant mechanical hoover out in space.
Regarding patent # 5286979
Yeah, just another one of a vast string of proposals, and one that does not match observation. Again another opaque substance that cannot survive passing through the 2000degree temperature of a jet engine, and a substance that cannot be invisible at any time. Many of these sorts of proposals are written by university students and patented by their universities . 20 year olds produce a lot of unworkable proposals. When I was in uni I produced numerous quirky innovations that we design registered. I designed folding laptops in 1983 before the first mac was even invented an a touch screen Ipad like device. My Uni had the designs, written interface descriptions and drawings on display and they probably still have copies somewhere. I have a few originals myself of the sketches. Does that means that there were Ipads in 1983? Nope, but there were proposals. Mine was one of them. Is it documented? YES. Did I actually build one that worked? NO.
patent 3813875 Another funny one in that people don't think about what the patent relates to. It relates to ways of visualizing the earth's magnetic field which is largely outside the orbital height of the space shuttle. The altitudes the patent refers to are beyond the ceiling of ANY jet engine powered aircraft and it has no relevance to any aircraft capable of leaving a trail. In particular it refers to barium ions, which glow BRIGHT GREEN. Anyone observe bright green trails in the sky ? Nope, so the patent is irrelevant.
This patent # 5041834 Related to some of the HAARP experiments and over the horizon radar arrays.
