Friday Funny: Chemtrails theory gets shot down by science

Surveyed scientists debunk chemtrails conspiracy theory

UCI, Carnegie paper explains persistent aircraft trails, substances in soil and water

A commercial airliner produces a condensation trail in the skies over California. Mick West

A commercial airliner produces a condensation trail in the skies over California. Credit: Mick West

Irvine, Calif., Aug. 12, 2016 – The world’s leading atmospheric scientists overwhelmingly deny the existence of a secret, elite-driven plot to release harmful chemicals into the air from high-flying aircraft, according to the first peer-reviewed journal paper to address the “chemtrails” conspiracy theory.

Researchers from the University of California, Irvine, the Carnegie Institution for Science and the nonprofit Near Zero organization asked 77 atmospheric chemists and geochemists if they had come across evidence of such a large-scale spraying program, and 76 responded that they had not. The survey results were published Wednesday in Environmental Research Letters.

Heat from aircraft engines produces condensation trails that can be clearly seen from the ground. A small but vocal segment of the population firmly believes that these are composed not merely of condensed water vapor but of chemicals and elements such as strontium, barium and aluminum that powerful, high-level entities have been intentionally and covertly releasing into the atmosphere for decades.

They find the increased number and lingering presence of these aerial streaks suspicious and claim to have identified toxic substances in soil and water samples.

“The chemtrails conspiracy theory maps pretty closely to the origin and growth of the internet, where you can still find a number of websites that promote this particular brand of pseudoscience,” said study co-author Steven Davis, UCI associate professor of Earth system science. “Our survey found little agreement in the scientific community with claims that the government, the military, airlines and others are colluding in a widespread, nefarious program to poison the planet from the skies.”

The belief in chemtrails parallels increasing public distrust of elites and social institutions, according to earlier social science research. To those convinced, the chemicals are sprayed to regulate the food supply, control human population and/or manipulate weather patterns. In recent years, the theory has expanded to include government-sponsored geoengineering to mitigate climate change.

Some of the surveyed specialists suggested that global warming may in itself be a cause of longer-lasting condensation trails from aircraft engines. Another contributor, outlined in the study, is the steady growth of air travel in recent decades, which leads airplanes to fly higher, where contrails are more likely to form and remain in the sky.

“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,” said Carnegie investigator and co-author Ken Caldeira. “Contrails are becoming more abundant as air travel expands. Also, it is possible that climate change is causing contrails to persist for longer than they used to.”

The survey’s respondents many of them currently active in research on atmospheric dust and pollution stressed that methods of collecting samples of water, snow and soil recommended by chemtrails-focused groups may be to blame for faulty results. Obtaining and transporting samples via Mason jars with metal lids, for example, was cited as a poor practice that could lead to erroneous outcomes.

One of the experts questioned wrote:

“The jar will contaminate the sample, as will the metal lid, particularly if you shake it. I cannot imagine a worse protocol for collecting a sample; the data would be totally worthless.” Another said, “To analyze metals in environmental samples, glass needs to go through an acid wash to remove any residual metals. Otherwise, plastic should be used.”

UCI’s Davis said:

“We don’t imagine that we’re going to sway the beliefs of hardcore adherents to the chemtrails conspiracy theory with this study. But we thought it was important to go on the record with fundamental scientific facts to refute claims that the government is deliberately spreading harmful chemicals from aircraft.”


Amen to that, as I’ve viewed “chemtrails” as some of the worst crap science out there. It goes hand-in-hand with wild atmospheric effect claims about HAARP, which persist today even though the HAARP facility was closed a few years ago.

Ken Caldiera, a climate scientist whom I’m often in disagreement with is a co-author of this study said that “…showing that what some people think are chemtrails are just ordinary contrails.”.

That’s exactly right. But conspiracy whackadoodles seem to think there’s an organized effort (imagine trying to keep thousands of airline pilots, ground personnel, and suppliers quiet for years), even going so far to fake-up video footage of a airliner cockpit “chemtrail switch” being thrown.

It is a laughably transparent fake, notice the switch label is an overlay to hide the real lettering under the switch. The overlay isn’t even attached, and it slides when thrown.

As the overlay label slides down, you can see the word LOGO. The actual switch function is the LOGO LIGHT, used to illuminate the company logo on the tail:


Here is what the switch panel looks like in a 747:


And here is the actual panel used in the faked-up switch video as seen in a Boeing 737-600. Annotations are mine:

aviation-logo-light-chemtrail-switch-Being-737 debunked yet another version of a fake chemtrail switch.

Proponents use video like this one to say that there really is an on-off switch:

But what is actually happening is that the airliner is going from one type of air to another, such as crossing a frontal boundary, or by changing altitude where the dew point and temperature are no longer conducive to exhaust condensation. Of course, such simple Occam’s razor type explanations don’t satisfy the chemtrail kooks.

Here is a video produced to go with the paper:

Now if we can just put HAARP, Anti-Vaxxers, and the particularly wrong and angry Slaying the Sky Dragon no greenhouse effect kooks in their rightful place of understanding science properly, we might actually have a more pleasant Internet.

The paper:

Quantifying expert consensus against the existence of a ‘chemtrails’ conspiracy

Environmental Research Letters | August 10, 2016

Nearly 17% of people in an international survey said they believed the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric program (SLAP) to be true or partly true. SLAP is commonly referred to as “chemtrails” or “covert geoengineering,” and has led to a number of websites (e.g., Global SkyWatch) purported to show evidence of widespread chemical spraying linked to negative impacts on human health and the environment.

To address these claims, we surveyed two groups of experts—atmospheric chemists with expertise in condensation trails and geochemists working on atmospheric deposition of dust and pollution—to scientifically evaluate for the first time the claims of SLAP theorists.

Results show that 76 of the 77 scientists (98.7%) that took part in this study said they had not encountered evidence of a SLAP, and that the data cited as evidence could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols.

Our goal is not to sway those already convinced that there is a secret, large-scale spraying program—who often reject counter-evidence as further proof of their theories—but rather to establish a source of objective science that can inform public discourse.

Read the entire paper – open access at:

UPDATE: It occurred to me that some of the “harmful chemicals” being claimed as being “deposited” were actually quite common. From the paper:

Atmospheric deposition

SLAP proponents argue that seemingly abnormal concentrations of elements such as strontium, barium, and aluminum in water, soil, and snow samples are the result of sprayed chemicals. Our survey asked experts to evaluate photocopies of three different laboratory analyses of elemental concentrations in samples of pond sediment, filter media, and snow that were posted on the SLAP website, Geoengineering Watch. Additionally, experts were asked to evaluate the appropriateness of the sampling methods recommended by SLAP websites, and whether they have observed any secular changes in the environmental concentrations of strontium, barium, and aluminum over their careers, and the factors underlying any change.


Now compare that list to chemical analysis of seawater:


source: Karl K Turekian: Oceans. 1968. Prentice-Hall

Gosh just think of the terrible things that could happen if airplanes sprayed seawater in the air like the salt spray we get naturally from the oceans. /sarc

NOTE: Since Chemtrails is normally a banned topic at WUWT, comments will be heavily moderated. Rants, accusations, claims of being paid to publish this, etc. that don’t conform to WUWT policy will be deleted.

368 thoughts on “Friday Funny: Chemtrails theory gets shot down by science

  1. You don’t believe in the government secretly spraying altering chemicals into the atmosphere? That’s how you know they’re working!!!! Lol.

    • The world’s leading atmospheric scientists overwhelmingly deny the existence of a

      Is that supposed to mean that they are psychologically “in denial” or that they to be assimilated with holocaust denial. Please clarify.

      Researchers from the University of California, Irvine, the Carnegie Institution for Science and the nonprofit Near Zero organization asked 77 atmospheric chemists and geochemists if they had come across evidence of such a large-scale spraying program, and 76 responded that they had not.

      So this paper is yet another attempt at proof by consensus. This is the most blatant non scientific bunk. This is just Cook at al , all over again. Did they do the usual filtering like : are you still doing active research in this field, have you published more than 5 papers in the last two years in this field?
      What was the selection method which produced the 77 from the thousands of “atmospheric chemists and geochemists ” they could have chosen? Before asking whether they were “aware of” they need to ask if they have ever looked, otherwise a negative response is meaningless.
      Now I should point out that I have never seen anything even remotely convincing about chemtrails and everyone I have ever met who is into this does not understand the first thing about could formation or what determines whether contrails will be persistent or not. They have no idea about the physics and just regurgitate the usual rubbish we’ve all seen on the internet in a totally unquestioning manner.
      However, this is the most crappy attempt to “scientifically” disprove something which I have seen in a long time. A pseudo consensus from a straw poll of a straw poll selection of “experts”.
      Rather than 77 ‘opinions’ about ‘awarenesses’ could not they find ONE competent scientist who could demonstrate something with a proper scientific article? Was this article written by socialogists or ‘media studies’ graduates or what.
      Sorry this is not science.
      Also what is it suppsed to prove? It does not provide any solid scientific data or facts to those who do not believe in chemtrail projects and it certainly does not speak to anyone who is concerned or convinced there is a problem. In fact, it is so badly done that I would say it looks more like a hopeless white wash and cover-up which will more likely be seen as confirmation by anyone who concerned about the existence of chemtrail projects.
      Scientifically it is a failure and as communication it is a failure. Further proof that we are coming to the end of the age of enlightenment.
      The most incompetent drivel I have seen since Cook’s cooked up 97%.

      • don’t have to worry too much about the Anti Vaxxers though, when the diseases spring up again, they have ensured that their kids won’t survive to breed. In fact, the anti vaxxers will have the only children that get sick

      • This is good site which directly addresses a number of erroneous ideas as well as respectfully showing where some who have attempted to collect samples for analysis have gone wrong explaining the ludicrously high reading they were claiming in their results.
        Well worth spending some time clicking through for contrete facts, arguments and rebuttals to common misconceptions.

      • Greg…my sentiments exactly a “survey of scientists” is Cook et al. Stupid government experiments? That’s for historians armed heavily with FOIA disclosures. I mean the MK Ultra Project was definitely out of bounds and got away from them. How much of civilian modern drug abuse has been fueled by “controlled” use of amphetamines in the military? The problem with “conspiracy loonies” is sometimes they brush up against some real stupid secret government program and bring discredit to anybody asking questions.

      • Greg “Scientifically it is a failure and as communication it is a failure.”
        It might also be that they are too busy in their real jobs and don’t have time to run scientific tests and I really really doubt there would be any budget for such activity. Unfortunately the fact that AGW theory (idea) uses consensus has poisoned the possibility of the usefulness of consensus. Anyway, what else should they do as in this case they are just using whatever information to hand to debunk this crap?
        I really doubt this will have any affect on those deluded and fixated on this, in fact it will be considered more evidence that this stupid idea is real. Whenever I have argued on this or other ludicrous conspiracy ideas the replies usually begin with insults and then the usual mental contortions to protect their particular insanity.
        Without doing any tests it should be enough just to look at the world and think this one through. Unfortunately this is also what a lot of conspiracists say which is ‘open your eyes’. However, we do live in a time when people will follow their sat nav and drive out into the ocean. I think a lot of people today are losing the ability to look at the world directly and without filters.

      • Bryan A – Except that most of the children that get sick have been vaccinated.
        Regardless of effectiveness (and different vaccines have varying effectiveness) the harm that has been caused to many should be much more widely acknowledged. People should have all the information – not just that which the establishment or a majority want them to believe, so that they can make the right choice, taking into account pre-existing health issues and genes.

      • Interesting that this site only publishes on this topic when the news supports its view. Greg, you are right, this is drivel just as Cook was. Anyone who has actually LOOKED at these things and is old enough to remember how contrails used to behave, must suspect something has changed. I have taken photos from my yard in central Texas that support what I am asserting, but don’t know how to post them here: what they show is a “contrail” which, instead of sublimating, slowly spreads across the sky, leaving a faint haze that persists all day. The haze, whatever it is, ain’t some new form of water vapor. And, as this site has demonstrated over the years, Establishment Science has been thoroughly corrupted, so who you gonna believe? This lame BS, or your own lying eyes?

      • Indeed, when you see some thing like:
        …. The world’s leading atmospheric scientists overwhelmingly deny the existence of a secret, elite-driven plot…
        you need to wonder just how they would know about a “secret” conspiracy. Chemtrails are a boneheaded chunk of paranoia, but really… Just because “methods” like this are regarded as acceptable in climate science doesn’t them acceptable in real science.

      • The problem with this Contrail rubbish is that it assumes many things that simply aren’t true.
        Not that they can be proven, then can’t, because the basic physics and fundamentals don’t exist.
        As a guide in general avionics, start with the NASA primer, found here:
        However, for this rubbish to exist, what your saying is that the following things must be true.
        First, that some global elite conspiracy exists at a level that manages to muzzle all World Governments and all employees of all airline entities and organisations, worldwide, with no exceptions.
        This forgoes just one ‘Getup’, ‘Conspiracy Socialist minded loon’, ‘inbred moron’ or other equally doubting individual stumbling over the logistics and apparatus used.
        This then is the first problem, outside of somebody photo-shopping idiotic images of secret aircraft functions, show me, just one, just one, piece of apparatus used to transport, store or inject your “secret” chemicals into any aircraft?
        You can’t.
        Not because it has the greatest camouflage known to mankind, but because it simply doesn’t exist.
        The second problem to your grand theory is where do you store this muck?
        A. Suspended in the aircraft fuel mix, really?
        B. In it’s own ‘sooper secret ‘ hidden on-board container?
        Then in either case comes the problem of either contaminated Jet Fuel or the ability to mix what is essentially non-combustible material into the Jet Fuel mix at some point.
        The issue here, in all it’s stupidity, is where in any standard aircraft could you hide these storages tanks?
        Should you opt for (B) and the related plumbing and controls, explain it to us all.
        Diagrams are a must. AS is the technology and it’s weight.
        However, for (A), explain how often would you need to clean out the sediment from the Fuel Tanks and related plumbing for option (A) without being noticed, much less, dispose of the related contaminant?
        This is basic logistics and physics, but wait, if gets worse.
        Given either of your methods, what exactly is being mixed into the Jet Fuel mix that no one has noticed?
        Is it a Gas based product, a Liquid based product, a Powder based product, or some other solid or no solid substance as yet unknown to science?
        As a courtesy, we won’t go into the excess maintenance issues with contaminating Jet Fuel or the serious consequences while doing so in flight.
        However, aside from that, then explain to me how the aircraft weight and load factor is managed?
        In simple terms, let us fuel an average large jet, for example, a Boeing 747-400, with 150, 000 litres of fuel, or roughly 39,625 US gallons of fuel, which weighs 120 metric ton. Just the fuel load, nothing else.
        Then let’s shove a few people aboard and a little baggage.
        However, we need to keep it under 295 tons, otherwise the aircraft will never get off the ground.
        This problem in the aviation industry is known as (MTOW) or “Maximum take-off weight”, that magic mark where you will forever remain on Terra Firma, because your too heavy to get into the air.
        With all of this in mind, tell me how much your aircraft weighs, per payload group.
        1. Your aircraft type and model and the engines used.
        2. The dry weight of the aircraft.
        3. Your chosen fuel weight.
        4. Your chosen freight weight.
        5. Your chosen passenger and crew weight, as separate items.
        6. Your chosen weight of support logistics, as separate items. (Food, oxygen, clothing, water, etc.)
        7. The weight of your “Secret Chemicals” or your separate payload.
        8. Your proposed flight heights.
        9. Your proposed flight speeds.
        We will allow for average variance in speed, height and such for aeronautics related issues.
        Then pick an imaginary flight path and destination, based on the average of the aircraft capability and your flight weight.
        From this, the various aviation types can then calculate your (MLW) or Maximum landing weight, which is what you should weigh when you land, less the fuel you used.
        From this we can deduct your (MTOW) or “Maximum take-off weight” and compare the difference between the two.
        However, for the sake of argument, you may quote actual real figures of real aircraft from real flights.
        Should there be any discrepancy, it will soon be noticed.
        Given that these aviation performance and load figures are very well known and are also well published, this is why all avionics types are taught the THE BREGUET RANGE EQUATION and the related logistics that apply.
        This is one of the most important things to understand in avionics and is why your theories are dismissed out of hand.
        In fact, the most scrutinised figures on the planet are avionics performance figures.
        Any discrepancy, such as the dumping of your “Secret Chemicals”, in any quantity or volume, will then be noticed.
        In fact, any substantial discrepancy will soon be noticed.
        I would refer you to this site first, for the next few months.
        This is how, via basic maths, physics and logistics, anybody with the slightest clue about avionics knows your off with the pixies.
        Such a project could never be hidden.
        Such a project could never land in any Socialist or Communist country or for that matter, Islamic country, with being discovered. Much less, could anyone manage the reaction that would follow.
        You think for a moment, that any Foreign Government hostile to the USA could hide this?
        You seriously think China would?
        You think you could land such a aircraft in any Arabic or Muslim nation without notice?
        This is why your being laughed at.
        Not because “the man” is against you, not because you can’t find the “worlds greatest conspiracy”, but because you can’t apply basic common-sense and look at the actual logistics and facts.

    • Exactly. Evidence which undermines a conspiracy theory is just evidence of an even bigger conspiracy!

      • Conspiracy theorist. Racist. Islamophobe. Denier. All words to stifle any reasonable conversation. Cloud seeding has existed for 100 years. There are currently over 30 companies in the US alone dedicated to this. Many more worldwide. What do they do? Has science and technology not made great strides into this activity? If you are a true AGW fanatic or government pushing this lie, would it not make sense to research possible actions to counter its effects? To get some information i did some research into Universities. Unfortunately I have not saved the searches. And, yes they are working on Climate Change. Not an easy search. Most is blocked from public view. Why?

    • You are aware that the gov’t sprayed low–level-pathognenicity bacteria over San Francisco in the 1950’s are you not to test how aerial spraying was disseminated. Of course, they’ve cleaned up their act since then. 😉
      I have no idea why Anthony denies chemical spraying. I am not saying this is happening. But here are some FACTS:
      If glass jar sampling of purported air/falling metals is due to glass-jar and ild contamination, just triple wash jars and lids, with distilled-water final rinses, and then submit distilled-water samples as controls, then subtract the latter samples’ values from the collected samples.
      If the supposed chemtrail flyers thought things out, they would spray only at night and overcast days, this would have created massive press. The astronomers would have noticed clear daytime skies, but fog when they tried to observe.
      If Anthony doesn’t notice summertime “high smog”, high-altitude stratus and strata-cirrus, I have. In the early ’60s, I saw clear-blue skies in the Sactramento Valley. It was beautiful. I saw B-52s from Travis, March and Victorville laying down contrails that dissipated within 2-3 miles behind the planes.
      Today, the Sactramento Valley summer skies are ugly. Gray, sun-diffusing high-stratus/cirrostratus. Did Anthony never get to observe the beautiful past clear blue summer skies over the Sacramento Valley? When on a high northern Sierra Nevada peak, you could see the Coastal Range nearly every day from June 1 to Spetember 1 all summer long?

      • lftpm,
        “If Anthony doesn’t notice summertime “high smog”, high-altitude stratus and strata-cirrus, I have. In the early ’60s, I saw clear-blue skies in the Sactramento Valley. It was beautiful. I saw B-52s from Travis, March and Victorville laying down contrails that dissipated within 2-3 miles behind the planes.”
        I still see such skies here on occasion, and the very few high flying planes one would expect in a place (Northern Central Valley) with only a few North/South scheduled flights supposed to be up there. Many days they’re up there in droves, apparently going to and from virtual airports all over the North Pacific and all over the Western Continental US . . which of course can’t really be there . .

    • I just note in passing that the metals “chemicals” listed (barium, strontium,…) are widely used as colorants in fireworks… the tons used of which have risen dramatically with wealth of the nation…
      Oh, and those red roadside flares….
      Hope they didn’t measure during late summer or near any traffic problems or…

    • The ones at lower altitude happen because the turbulence of the engine blades condenses the water and the particles in the exhaust form nice nucleation particles for the resulting clouds to persist.
      Dew point is a temperature and pressure phenomenon but we normally don’t see the pressure relationship in day to day life because the normal variation of surface pressure makes little difference, but the changes in pressure and temperature in a jet engine (though it works with old propeller planes like a DC-3 as well due to blade pressure gradients) make a significant shift of the state chart for water. People who have never worked with engines and engine instrumentation have no feel for this concept.
      But about this report: Surveys mean nothing! Just because I happen to be part of this consensus does not mean that I follow this report. I agree that the arguments for this conspiracy are spurious, but I do so from experience in aviation and analysis of actual data associated with air operations, not because some 99.999% of a group of people agree. One reproducible experiment whose results show that condensation is not a credible solution is enough to make me search for another solution.

      • Thanks Owen. We have had enough of this ‘consensus’ crap in climatology. I now seems to be the new normal. Since most of these guys are probably involved in climate one way or another, it must seem a perfectly normal way to “prove” something to them.

      • Yea , I realized that I should have mentioned that the ambient air needs to be nearly saturated for the additional water to condense . But these comments are archival once committed . I just wanted to point out the perhaps inadvertent omission of the additional water of combustion without which there would be far fewer and shorter contrails .
        The idea that thousands of commercial planes are secretly carrying around any extra weight of any thing for any reason is one of the most bizarre conspiracy theories ever — even more so than 20010911 conspiracies which particularly bug me because that was my neighborhood and lost a great friend in it .

      • I believe the most interesting “trails” I have seen were actually negative trails. I watched a liner heading in toward SMF pass along a very thin layer of cirrus clouds. It was leaving a regular condensation trail behind in blue sky, but as it crossed into each thin cloud layer, it created a “negative” contrail of clear air that otherwise had all the characteristics of a regular contrail. This was not a shadow effect, which was momentarily my first hypothesis.

    • Well, yeah.
      The output exhaust of completely burned hydrocarbons is CO2 and H2O. Since the exhaust is more humid (H2O) the dew point of the exhaust is higher than the ambient air. If the dew point is higher than the ambient temperature there is a vapor trail.

      • Don’t like the survey says science or the game shows that use the same meme but it would be easy to pick someone who believes this conspirosy by the usage of tin foil hats .

    • Greg,
      Great post, have nothing to add. My (rhetorical) question is, 76 out of 77? For the odd one out, what was his (her/it’s/shiz/sherz) answer?

  2. Wait for it. All of Anthony’s blog spawn and other such critics will trash this and say it is all part of the overall lies generated by WUWT. Paid and orchestrated by ‘Big Oil’ and ‘Big Airlines’, no doubt.

      • None of the CS theories even come close to Lizard people, flat earth, amazed also how many people believe the ISS is in a swimming pool. If you can “believe” the sun and moon are “lights” moving around a flat plane, you shouldn’t own a credit card

      • There has to be a song in there somewhere !! Maybe…” Can’t get away from a Slandering Sou ” ??..(Obviously my song writing days are over)

      • As a professional pilot of some odd 40 years of all types of aircraft, thank you for this article. Been accused of the Chemtrail thing by having a tank under a firefighting aircraft.
        Actual conversation.” What’s dat tank unner yer airyplane.?” Reply “It holds fire retardant.” Drooler;”Dats Cemicals?” “Well it’s bascially Driller’s mud phosphate fertilizer.and seweed based gum thickening.” Drooler: “Dem’s chemicals. so you are part of da problems.” “Chemtrails. you flys and makes chemtrails.! ” Oh boy! I call Jeff
        Rense and Art Bell on dis one! I found Chemtrails.’ he went away happy. never heard from him again..
        BTW this occurred in Chico, Ca. back in 1992.

      • Credit card? That’s nothing; one of them may be driving somewhere at this very moment. That would be an effective seat belt commercial.

  3. “They” are not intentionally spraying hazardous chemicals
    They are intentionally spraying chemicals that they hope with reflect light and thus cool the planet. It is just a coincidence that these chemicals are also hazardous.

      • If there is a change in contrail persistence, you’ve got the atmosphere being the cause or the emissions from the jet engines or both. Any idea, I would think more sulfur in fuel? Not to poison anyone lol, but maybe for more pressure?
        Would that put more aerosols into the air to draw moisture?

    • Well, just because 97% of scientists believe something, doesn’t necessarily mean they’re wrong, just that they might be.

  4. Well, actually there is NO GREENHOUSE EFFECT! From 4.12 of “Introduction to Atmospheric Physics” by Fleagle and Businger, “This effect is sometimes refered to as the greenhouse effect ….However it is NOT commonly recognized that whereas the absorbing effect of the atmosphere results in temperature above what they would be without an atmosphere, the elevated temperatures within a greenhouse are not to be attributed to absorption of the long-wave radiation (to outer space) by the glass, but rather to the greenhouse being a convective boundary. In 1909 R.W. Wood carried out an experiment with two model greenhouses. One of which was covered with a ROCK SALT sheet and the other normal sodium glass….” The text goes on to explain that the equilibrium temperatures for both model greenhouses, parallel to each other on the same day, were the same. (With a discussion of the nature of a “convection boundary” and the ability to trap in the incoming visible and near IR energy, and convert to an elevated temperature of the gas within the boundary. The text goes on to say, “The trapping of energy from incoming radiation by the atmosphere is…therefore may be called, the ‘Atmospheric Effect’.” I realize that in “general and non-precise” English speaker’s minds this may be a trivial distinction. However, I feel that there is an OBLIGATION to be precise in this realm with regard terminology” and use of the language.

    • The precision of terminology is crucial in sound science. Indeed, it’s the presence an atmosphere that is capable of being heated directly by moist convection that accounts for the bulk of the widely-misunderstood “greenhouse” effect. Nor is the debunking of “chemtrails” well served by the claim that

      Heat from aircraft engines produces condensation trails

      which contradicts the well-known physics of condensation of vapor upon cooling, not heating.

      • Say what? The heated air (exhaust) from the engine hits the ambient air and condenses. The ambient air is much cooler (at altitude) than the exhaust. Ergo: condensation.

      • Oh come on Bill!
        Air does not ‘condense’. Combustion of kerosene (jet fuel) created H2O out of the H in the kerosene (typically C9H20 to C20H42). Burning jet fuel literally creates water vapour.
        When the water vapour cools in the air behind the airplane, it condenses and freezes, and because the concentration is high enough, it appears as a white cloud of ice particles.
        If ‘chemtrails’ were true, there would be no need for a switch to throw. They could just as ‘secretly’ add something to the fuel and keep quiet about it. For example, adding anti-freeze to kerosene could be interpreted as ‘adding a chemical’ because anti-freeze is a chemical. If the anti-freeze was ethanol or methanol, that would increase the amount of water vapour (because it contains hydrogen) but it would need less kerosene because anti-freeze is combustible.
        Contrails consist entirely of water vapour mixed with a lot of invisible CO2 and a tiny amount of CO and black carbon.

      • Thank you Crispin, and the rest, above and below, who can explain combustion clearly.
        This article and the resultant comments is very useful: It serves as a guide to who is an actual thinking and rational person who understands science, and…um…other sorts. (To be kind to the other sorts I will not describe them as they really are.)
        And thank you to the airline pilot for your story of Drooler.
        The idea that planes are carrying chemicals in huge vats and spraying them as they fly is seriously batshit crazy.
        As is the idea that decades ago memories of contrail appearance and persistence not matching up with how the sky looks in 2016 is proof of a massive conspiracy, is equally retarded.
        It may be worthwhile to make a list of names from this comment section of people who can be safely ignored in further conversations on any topic at all, on the basis of truly impaired judgement.

  5. Good luck with this. It seems the more you disprove one of these conspiracy theories, the more convinced adherents become that the conspiracy is vaster than they thought. Saw the same thing with seeding hurricanes. Anytime there was a wiggle in a storm track, it was because of seeding. Once the Government ended STORMFURY the conspiracy theories dried up.
    Things won’t improve once it becomes apparent that the global warming hypothesis is wrong and that science has gone down a vast dead-end corridor. There will be those who say that CAGW is just being covered up by some mysterious cabal. >sigh<

    • Yeah, especially when you go about it by asking a group of govt payed scientists if they are “aware” of anything about the govt. operating a secret operation and try consensus instead of science and facts.
      If I was concerned about the existence of chemtrails, I’d definitely see this as confirmation not a rebuttal.
      Lamer than this and you don’t get out of bed in the morning.

    • @ Mumbles, re Storm fury: There are still cloud seeding operations (China for one , pre Olympic games and others including the US and Canada). I also remember seeing photos of airspace pre 911 and the days after when air traffic was halted for 2-3 days not a haze to be seen for that period prior and post that period a haze re-appeared. I just wonder what the cumulative result of exhaust trails have especially during prolonged periods of stable weather such as summer high over North Am.? Anyone?

  6. “Results show that 76 of the 77 scientists (98.7%) that took part in this study said they had not encountered evidence of a SLAP, …”
    I wonder about that last scientist…. 🙂

    • I was wondering that myself, but frankly, I’d waste my time worrying more about something other than chemtrails … like maybe Bigfoot.

  7. Studies to debunk chemtrails nutty theories? Most are so out there. Though the image above, the contrails, don’t they form near the tail and not right from at the engines because there is still heated and ice crystals wont form there?
    Theories are all well and good, some pure sci fi, but persistent contrails are pretty significant and refract a lot of sunlight over large areas. They are something discussed by the IPCC, not some cooky conspiracy theory, yet it is worth noting this is not more prominent, as well as what appears to be completely uncoordinated cloud seeding efforts around the globe, this should also be up there, botching something might cause floods in one area for example, it all seems unregulated, just like that dude dropped a lot of ion into the ocean recently in some deal with the islanders.

    • The biggest conspiracy theorists I’ll have you know are detectives, Fed or police, it’s what they do. So does good researchers, not the utube loonies, (researchers generally, not concerning chumtrails)

  8. As one that has probably watched the sky for 50 years, I’ve seen a lot of contrails, and in the past 20 or so I have seen a lot of “strange trails.” When I read about “debunking” peer reviewed reports, especially here on WUWT, I am amused at the fact that such reports are acceptably correct, when reports on climate change are totally bogus. Bottom line is when you look up in the sky and watch two jets flying the same direction at what appears to be the same height – judging by their apparent size, and both are leaving “contrails” behind – you know, the type that come out of the engines or off the wing tips forming ice crystals that sublimate quickly, as the trail behind them might be 20 times the length of the airplane and stays quite narrow. Suddenly, however, the trailing plane’s “contrail” ceases to sublimate and expands and expands and expands while never dissipating. I know what a contrail looks like and I know they really don’t “persist” for long periods of time. I do know clouds reflect heat back into space and it appears reasonable to assume that these highly persistent, never sublimating “contrails” are doing the same thing. I’ve watched real clouds form and dissipate in the same areas as the “strange trails,” but the trails don’t. You think what you want, I know what I see, what I know is possible, and what I know isn’t possible. Those are NOT contrails.

    • Your opinion is noted, but unfortunately wrong.
      You are assuming he atmosphere and the flight plan/altitude are constant, they aren’t and this is what causes such variations in condensation. Winds, temperature, dew point, clear air turbulence, engine output/throttle setting, altitude, can all play a role in determining if condensation and dispersion occurs. You just can’t see any of those things from the ground.
      And so, the mind strives to fill in the blanks.

      • Your opinion is noted, but doesn’t necessarily mean any more than mine does. To each his own. I recognize what you are saying. Contrails, however, still do not spread many miles wide without fading away. Everything dilutes as it spreads – except, apparently, some magic contrails. Ice crystal either melt or sublimate, well, most of the time except when conditions are just right, so as to confuse the mind.

      • There are companies that specialize in “cloud-seeding”. A simple internet search can find many advertising their services. They are mostly dumping aluminum-oxide into the atmosphere and thus into the eco-system. This paste and copy Lewandosky/Cook-like study does not deal with this reality. Anthony, this study is a mirror image of the garbage which you have been fighting against for decades, and to trumpet it as “peer-reviewed” when you’re fully aware of how much pure garbage is pushed out under that rubric makes me wonder if you’re receding into a fox-hole of eccentricity. There are hundreds of tons of heavy metals pumped into our atmosphere and lands every day. I could hire a plane tomorrow to do exactly that, if I so wished.

      • You are no different (in this realm) than those who mock climate alarm skeptics, to me, Anthony. It is perfectly possible in the scientific sense that substances are/have been sprayed into the atmosphere, and all the mocking in the world won’t make it impossible.

      • GC and JK, normally I stick to nerdish/legal climate or energy facts. But your comments here are off base. So I will rebut using common sense.
        Chemtrails theoretically possible, yes. We have the sarcastic image upthread of a cropduster. In reality? No. Every ‘proof’ evaporates in the light of simple scrutiny like sea water spray, collection jar methods, and examination of commercial and military aircraft. Comtrails are H2O in the condensed/ ice state. Nothing more. Chem trails is complete nutter territory. Now, itnwill always be there on the internet, since nutters have equal access. Salby youtube lectures being a recent example over at Climate Etc.
        The one big geoengineering attempt (iron fertilization of the Pacific off Vancouver) was found and shut down pronto. And iron fertilization isn’t toxic, it just increases ocean bioproductivity.

      • Contrails, however, still do not spread many miles wide without fading away.
        They form cirrus clouds…..

      • Tom, remember that these are very big engines burning fuel and leaving exhaust. You know this and I believe you have seen “strange” contrails, but it was probably an engine burning through more oil than usual.

      • “Chemtrails theoretically possible, yes.”
        Good thinking, I hope you can maintain that approach.
        ” In reality? No. Every ‘proof’ evaporates in the light of simple scrutiny like sea water spray, collection jar methods, and examination of commercial and military aircraft.”
        Every proof? Says who? You? Official “debunkers”? . . “They” debunked us climate alarm skeptic’s “proofs” long ago . . but you don’t speak so highly of their debunking in that realm. Why do you in this one? Without allowing the presenting of the “opposition’s” own arguments/evidences, by them, it’s all just so much authority worship to me . .

      • JK, you deserve anothet reply. As said, because every ‘chemtrails’ “proof” has evaporated upon minimalist scientific scrutiny. Natural abundance, contaminated amateurish collection, whatever. As said above, none of that will matter to dedicated chemtrailists, apparently like yourself. Just like none of the equivalents matter to dedicated CAGW warmunist believers. Paise, no SLR, greening, thriving polar bears, all no matter. So the optimum engagement strategy is to present referenced irrefutable facts, then cease further engagement with nattering nutters. Like here, now, you.

      • “So the optimum engagement strategy is to present referenced irrefutable facts, then cease further engagement with nattering nutters. Like here, now, you.”
        I agree, and that’s why I condemn folks here speaking as though it is an irrefutable fact that no “chem-trails” have ever been generated. Skepticism is one thing, but close-minded mocking of people for not believing what you do, is quite another (especially a negative) . .

      • Robert W Turner August 12, 2016 at 5:34 pm
        This video is poor. There are a handful of old Russian planes from the 60s that are smokers, one of maybe a 737 with engine problems, which gets repeated and I really really doubt the 737 at the end is chucking out all that smoke.

      • You ain’t seen a “smoker plane” until you’ve seen a BUFF. (Made them easy to avoid when taking joy ride flights along Rye, Hampton and Salisbury beaches back in the early to mid 80’s when Pease was still active.)

      • Original Mike, that video is pretty interesting. I lived in or near Sacramento most of my life. Mather AFB used to be the SAC base and every so often they would scramble the “buffs”. That and Aerojet General testing rocket engines made for some very interesting days.

      • Earlier this year on a flight to Almaty, I saw quite close below, but on a heading about 45 degrees north of my westerly heading, a large civilian plane that was blowing a great deal of black smoke from both engines. Expecting that something was really wrong I took a video of it for several minutes – more than 5 as I recall. I followed it until it was no longer visible which was for many miles. The colour of the exhaust never changed. There was something obviously wrong with the fuel mix because the exhaust was just like a badly tuned kerosene burner. Never seen before or since. As I deal with combustion professionally it was very obvious to me that this was unusual, abnormal. It was not ‘spraying something’.
        Like the story above about two jets running parallel and one having a sudden change in the contrail persistence, it could have been entirely caused by the one jet changing the air-fuel mix to see what happened. The ‘changed’ trail was probably condensed, unburned kerosene, the direct result of combustion inefficiency produced by operating some sort of test. The fact that there was a companion aircraft tends to support the ‘test pilot’ angle. It was probably filming the experiment.

      • Crispin in Waterloo August 14, 2016 at 11:48 am
        This is an optical illusion. I was in Scotland a while back and going up in wave lift. The clouds above me were white but as I went up passed them they became a dirty grey. Not what I was expecting. Also., there is no option whatsoever to change the fuel content in a plane. You can increase or decrease the fuel flow but not its content. You can change the mixture in small planes with carborators but that is just increasing or decreasing the amount of air. So pilots get what they get.

      • This is a good juncture to second Anthony’s point. I can’t afford the time to read this thread to conclusion, but so far no one has discussed a relevant fact about contrails. There are two phenomena: (1) The condensation of water vapor from engine exhaust, formed from hydrocarbon combustion. Most everyone has mentioned this. (2) The production of otherwise invisible air vortices trailing from the wingtips (an inevitable consequence of the aerodynamic lift process)–into which the condensation trails can be drawn.
        This can be appreciated when one looks at the passage of an airliner, and the contrails seem to greatly expand in diameter, the farther they are from the airplane. That diameter approximates the size of the trailing wing vortex. This may be one explanation for why contrails may end abruptly, if a vortex trail is sheared by an updraft.
        While I’m at it, I might as well refer to a topic that has popped up on WUWT in the past, regarding seeming rocket trails in places where they ought not to be. These are simply contrails of a jet that is approaching from beyond the horizon and flying toward the viewer. How else could it look? If you don’t know what you are looking at, it will appear like a rocket blasting upward into space. (Because if you know what a rocket launch looks like, you will know that this is not it.) I have seen this effect many times in connection with traffic coming into Sea-Tac International.
        Finally, I am not talking out of utter ignorance. I was for several years engaged in a research effort at my employer (name un-named) to detect and measure the presence of trailing vortexes, in all weather conditions. An interesting problem. I had fun characterizing it in cocktail conversation as “We are trying to see something invisible…through something opaque.”

    • ,

      two jets flying the same direction at what appears to be the same height – judging by their apparent size,

      “I know what I see ….”
      Well from your comment you do not seem to know what you see. What do you think is the accuracy of your claim that the two planes are flying at the same height and therefore in the same air conditions?
      Go on, just jot it down on paper what you estimate the height to be and the uncertainty in percent or thousands of feet and what certainty you can put on the size of planes being the same if they look about the same to your eye.
      Once you have made an honest attempt to address the uncertainty in your observations read the following article and see whether you were correct and how that uncertainty affects what you think you “know” about what you have seen.

      • Greg, A simple program called flight radar is available to any one, it accurately positions planes in the airspace above you anywhere, you can put it on a screen and sit on your deck and watch the planes fly over with most of the flight data available. From that you can make your own conclusions. Also we have watched the changing patterns of contrails over the last 45 years. Maybe it is a change in fuels, a change in exhaust patterns due to different engine types but to me there has definitely been changes, I also do not believe for one second all that happens in the condensation and exhaust process involves pure water etc ( I think AW threw this out here as a “Friday Funny” but I think it is a valid subject!

    • “…when you look up in the sky and watch two jets flying the same direction at what appears to be the same height – judging by their apparent size…”
      Well you’d have to identify the type of plane to make an appropriate size comparison. And let’s say that one is 90% of the other…well, when you’re talking about flying at altitudes of 30,000-40,000 feet, a 10% difference in elevation is huge when it comes to the conditions one plane experiences vs another.

      • Do not planes flying in the vicinity of each other have a minimum separation distance in altitude, always in intervals of 1000′?
        So if they are near each other, they are not at the same altitude, by ATC flight rules.

    • I once found a plot of yearly production of aviation fuel over the last 50 years….a YUUGE increase, so we would expect a large increase in contrail activity over the same period of time. That being said, as a meteorologist who worked in a National Weather Service Office 40 years ago and trained to identify clouds, I have never seen a contrail that would make me think it’s anything different from a vapor-induced cloud formation. (BTW, microphysical-probe based studies have shown that contrails in humid environments “suck” vapor out of the environment, and produce much more cloud mass than can be produced by the vapor from jet engine combustion alone.)

      • Roy
        Spot on. You describe the action of the carbon in the exhaust and the water vapour-cum-ice particles acting as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN). This happens in parcels of air stripped of all CCN with the water vapour remaining in gas phase, waiting for something to condense on. It is in fact both super-cooled and super-saturated. The available water vapour would condense on the particles and the relative humidity would drop, and the ice mass would increase.

    • Contrails persisting and/or expanding into larger clouds isn’t new. Antoine St-Exupery described just that phenomenon in “Flight to Arras”, published in 1943. Like it or not, they really are contrails. Most interesting contrail I’ve seen was a dotted line. Quite often the atmosphere at altitude has waves in it, and so flying at a constant altitude put the airplane first in one airmass, then another.

      • “Like it or not, they really are contrails.”
        Why exactly can’t some of them at least, be more than just contrails?
        How does this logic you are proposing work, exactly? . . If it’s possible that nothing unusual is going on, there must not be? . . I realize Anthony is condoning and encouraging that form of reasoning here, but I say he’s doing logic itself a great disservice thereby.

      • No, Menicholas, that’s not my logic, and I defy you to demonstrate by anything I ever wrote that it is, sir. The implicit assertion of this article (and most of those commenting in agreement) is that there are no chem-trails . . A negative, and I merely claim to have witnessed a positive.

      • Less ambiguously put;
        No trails are chem-trails
        Some trail are chem-trails
        If Anthony declared some trails are not chem-trails, I would not have said a word . . But he didn’t, he claimed (by inference and insult ; ) to know that none are, and I don’t believe he can possibly know that. And frankly, it’s somewhat disturbing to me that so many I see as very intelligent and well educated people here, don’t understand that none of these “explanations” prevents anyone from spraying things up there.

    • Tom O
      Contrails might form or they might not depending on the air they are flying through. They might also persist or not and if they persist they might do so in a variety of ways including expanding way beyond the original trail. So what? The atmosphere is not organised into neat cubes or any regular shape or pattern and there is a wide range of outcomes when a condensation trail appears.
      When all the flights over Europe were grounded by Eyjafjallajökull volcano it was said that the clear sky was going to be a rare and special occasion. It wasn’t as clear skies without contrails have happened since as they did before. Some people see what they want to see.

      • There is one thing I have learned by this particular article. A closed mind is a closed mind when it comes to reviewing something that differs from what they choose to believe. It doesn’t matter which side of the “argument” you are on, either. We read what we want to, and we reject out of hand, that we choose to. There are “reasonable” explanations for what you see when you look up, and if you wish to believe that there is something in the fuel that causes ice crystals to persist far longer than would be normally expected, then so be it. If you wish to believe that ice crystals formed coming out of the end of a fanjet are pure and can persist for 30 to 40 minutes or more as they slowly drift across the sky, then you will. There are those that believe colder is warmer and that drier is warmer and that wetter is warmer. Have a nice day.

    • Tom O August 12, 2016 at 1:50 pm
      “…when you look up in the sky and watch two jets flying the same direction at what appears to be the same height…”
      Planes are separated by the semicircular rule so two jets in the same direction will be 2000ft apart. Contrails appearing and then ceasing is no more unusual than clouds appearing and disappearing. Clouds appear to be scattered randomly but there’s no conspiracy there?
      Please see this video of Lenticular Cloud over Mount Hood. The cloud appears stationary even though the air is moving fast over the top of the mountain. Cloud forms and dissipates just because the air is made to go up and then down.

      And this: At 00:45 clouds appear out of nowhere. It gets more interesting around 1:04 as cloud forms and dissipates:

      • Interestingly, we can see two planes fly by at around 26 seconds on the left side.
        “They appear to be the same altitude, flying in the same direction”, and yet one makes an intermittent contrail, one part of which lingers briefly, and the other makes a very short contrail which dissipates immediately.
        The watch that same part of the sky, as clouds form and dissipate.
        This is all you really need to see to know that contrails can do all sorts of things, and a plane’s altitude cannot be reliably judged from the ground with any accuracy.

  9. The whole controversy was absurd on the face of it. Outfitting aircraft to spew toxic compounds is a highly dubious proposition. Especially commercial airliners, which have their own requirements for range, safety, capacity, and speed. Really, you do not just load on a bunch of equipment and cargo with nobody knowing.
    As I said, aircraft deliberately spraying chemicals is ridiculous.

    • Aw, man – you beat me to it! Of *course* there are chemtrails! Anyone who lives around farm communities sees them quite often during the growing season…just not up around 40,000ft 😉

      • And that stuff is obviously not coming out of the engine, as contrails always do.
        Do chemtrail people own telescopes, or even binoculars?

    • TonyL / GromitDog – That bit about not at 40,000ft. How about this bit of flying under wires:

      You would lose your job as a crop sprayer if you tried it 40,000ft. It’s infuriating that in needs explaining why.

  10. The water vapor in the exhaust comes from burning the fuel. It is basic stoichiometry. Burn carbon fuel get CO2 and H20.

    • You also get fine particulates of unburned carbon and sulfur oxides, not to mention the water vapor that might be in the air the engine is traveling through. Now you have pretty much everything you need to seed a cloud: water and aerosol particulates. When you add the turbulence induced by the movement of the aircraft and the blades to beat the water out of the atmosphere, you have a perfect storm for cloud formation. Add to this the ever greater bypass ratios of newer jet engines and yes there is going to be a change in contrail formation.
      I haven’t seen the data, but if atmospheric water vapor content has increased in the last couple of decades, that would also have made the air ripe for persistent contrail formation. Since ice crystals are such a good source of nuclei for cloud formation, that would tend to make contrails a good core for larger clouds to form when the vapor content would support them.

      • Hey, it just occurred to me that there is also the breathe of all the hundreds of passengers in the plane as the cabin air is vented and replaced over a cycle of every few minutes.
        I wonder how much water vapor is in the exhaled breathe of a few hundred peoples?
        One person has enough to fog up a car in a few minutes.

  11. There are several consideration for this “chemtrail” business. First, where do the airlines hide the tank for the chemtrail chemical on the airplane? How much does this weigh? How can a plane be full of passengers and baggage carry the chemtrail stuff also?
    In ten years of working on heavy inspections of airliners, I’ve never come across any extra tank installed for this sort of thing.

    • And who says it is commercial airliners? I see many airplanes in the sky trailing “normal contrails.” Not saying you are wrong, just pointing out a truth.

      • OK, everyone has to use the /sarc tag so we can know who to put on our mental list of people who should be ignored.

  12. Amazed that any scientist thought such a paper necessary. Won’t convince the chemtrail kooks, and useless for the rest of us. Any more than documenting in detail Dr Andrews MMR/ autism fraud will convince antivaxxers. Jenny McCarthy simply does not get that correlation is not causation. Autism first manifests with sufficient child development (12-18) months, which just happens to be the onset of most child vaccinations including MMR.

    • The stats for autism on low vac populations is similar to the rate of vaccinated populations, so the theory doesn’t really hold

      • M-H, ty. Nice additional observation. Had not thought about it, so did not include as part of my MMR example in The Arts of Truth ebook. If there is a second edition, will add this with actual data and give you footnote credit for the insight. Just on the edge of enough interest to justify a rewrite to update and add an ever growing collection of examples to all chapters. More Obamacare, more no child left behind, more GMO nonsense, more climate stuff, more Washington DC law naming silliness… The book’s theme remains a target rich environment. And, as the intro explains with a Harvard example, even the title is a sarcastic illustration of the books true theme–the arts of untruth.

      • That is exactly what I thought as well. Even paying heed to this topic only provides fuel for this conspiracy. I blame the publish or perish university system for this. Chalk it up to just another paper you coauthored, helps get you tenured.

      • As if you can find unvaccinated populations anywhere. You can’t find a low pregnant women either. It is unfortunate that antivaxxers are portrayed as some sort of a cult. Most of them are merely sceptical, and wishing to be able to chose their options. There are valid points to question vaccines, as there is a valid point to be sceptic in every walk of life. Being here is also a sign of healthy scepticism.
        Reality check: find one vaccine that actually works against TB.

      • Hlaford. The problem is that antivaxxers will surely kill people due to lack of herd immunity, and most likely not their own. That amounts to criminal civil disobedience, in my book. Read up on the vaccination issues.

      • @ristvan, the case against herd immunity is a very simple one. It works only with live vaccines, and in a way of spreading the live vaccine strain infection in the population. For that particular reason it is not advisable to let children recently vaccinated with live rubella vaccine roam around pregnant women. It may do real harm.
        The vast majority of vaccines today are not live. And there goes the herd immunity big thing. It is very much like CO2 of vaccination alarmist lot.
        A few years ago there was a big alarm about polio in Israel, and lack of herd immunity due to dead vaccines was called to blame. Just scratch the surface and you’ll find more examples.
        The story behind vaccines is much larger than the net benefits of the population. The community is mostly divided to sceptics and alarmists, just like climate is. It is almost impossible to maintain an impartial position, but in case you are not personally involved it may happen. The vast majority of bad publicity against vaccine sceptics is concocted by the alarmist lot. Many of the sceptics know very well what they talk about.

      • I do not think herd immunity is caused by the vaccine being spread to unvaccinated individuals.
        It is caused by having enough people vaccinated that the few who are not are unlikely to encounter one another, and thus spread the disease if someone gets it.
        It is the same as why driving is usually safe even if a few maniacs drive like jackasses…as long as two of them do not cross paths simultaneously, accidents will be few and far between.

      • @Menicholas, what you say is reasonable, however, it doesn’t work like that. High vaccination rates you see in media are those that are applied to the children, and it is only a mild deception people conflate children vaccination rates with total population rates. So in practice, the rest of the population falls off the herd, unless you have live vaccines.
        If you really insist on herd immunity by total inclusion, and dead vaccines, you’ll have to vaccinate everyone on regular basis.If you miss a booster, you lose immunity. A small glitch in such reasoning is that such action would yield intolerable frequency of adverse effects, and public outrage.
        So far vaccination programs are tailored in a way that:
        1. children are vaccinated as much as possible
        2. live vaccines are re-introduced if a real threat is on a horizon

      • I am not exactly sure what you just said, but thank you for allowing that what I said makes sense.
        I am simply referring to the commonly understood definition of what the term means, and why it is an effect.
        “Herd immunity (also called herd effect, community immunity, population immunity, or social immunity) is a form of indirect protection from infectious disease that occurs when a large percentage of a population has become immune to an infection, thereby providing a measure of protection for individuals who are not immune”
        Vaccines do not work by spreading immunity to unvaccinated people.

  13. Well, it is a well-known fact sonny-gem that there is a secret society of the 5 wealthiest people in the world known as ‘the Pentaverate’ who perform all chemtrail experiments, including buying off the pilots, and meet tri-annually at a secret country mansion in Colorado known as ‘the Meadows’.
    “So whose in this ‘Pentaverate’?”
    The Queen, the Vatican, the Getties, the Rothschilds, and Colonel Sanders before he went tits-up. Oh, I hated the Colonel with his wee beady eyes and that smug look on his face. ‘Oh, you gonna buy my chicken?’

      • I got this far and and the elephant in the room is not there!
        The original writer did not understand it with the comment about “heat’ from the engines. –No.
        Others with H2O from combustion–helps but is not the trigger.
        It is particulates from combustion that provide the nucleus for existing super-chilled water vapour to crystallize on. That is why sometimes there are contrails and sometime not.
        It is the existing water content of the air that makes it work–or not.

      • @Anthony Watts – Just to throw a curve, NASA learned a long time ago that the most effective way to cover a large area of the sky with a chemical is using sounding rockets. They launched their experiments out of White Sands at least during the early nineties through 2010, when I retired They were easily visible as I was driving to work just before dawn in Yuma County, AZ, clear over by the Colorado River. They covered multiple New Mexico counties and showed the beautiful colors in your photograph. The intensity against the dark blue sky was amazing. News articles were sent to surrounding states explaining what they were doing to keep alarmists at bay.

      • I think a number of people here sailed right past the “Friday Funny” part. Glad to see your sense of humor is still working.

      • Subtle, it is both…a little extra water added to air near the saturation point, and the particulates, and the turbulence, and, as I just thought of, perhaps a wee bit from hundreds of people breathing in the plane.
        I want one of the geniuses of calculation to tell us how many people are in various planes, and how much WV they exhale, and if this is significant in relation to the burned fuel WV.
        Pretty please.
        Otherwise I will have to do it myself, which I can already see will involve lots of looking stuff up.

    • The Horror!
      Oh, The Humanity.
      Ladies and Gentlemen, as unlikely as it sounds, Marcus has stumbled upon an effective new technique to fight Wind Farms.
      Nothing logical or rational has worked to date. This might just do the trick.

    • It’s the horns wind farm 10 miles west of Denmark.
      It shows the propagation of turbulence & the drop in pressure as the air flows through turbines

      • I enjoyed the Nordic Noir ‘Follow The Money’ with its eco-baddies, perhaps the worm is turning as well as the titanic satanic mills (shown on BBC Four too, quite a surprise).

      • If the wind mills are subtracting energy from the air, could they be actually cooling the air too?

    • Good contrail footage. The trails, though initially thick, dissipated quickly.
      There is not a good explanation for persistent contrails that from a single airplane do not vaporize to invisibility, but stretch for over a hundred miles, and generate strato-cirrus (cirrostratus clouds.

  14. A few years ago a vocal local eco-weenie kept sending me emails about chemtrails. She was being a royal PITA.
    I was out in the marsh one day and photographed a commercial jet high above because it had a long contrail. I was using a 400-mm lens (600-mm equivalent on a APSC sensor) and when downloaded I could clearly see this was an Atlantic Virgin jet owned by none other than the famous enviro, Sir Richard Branson.
    I sent the photo to the radical enviro lady and she never sent another loony email about chemtrails.
    Good fun. ☺

    • Clive in now-socialist Alberta (bah) August 12, 2016 at 2:34 pm
      “She was being a royal PITA.”
      Or how about TW – Time Waister

  15. Excessive cloud seeding on the other hand puts silver iodide into the first two feet of forest soil which retards decomposition. It’s not conducive to a healthy soil situation

  16. I consider anyone who thinks any of this prevents people from rigging planes to spray stuff, just plain gullible.

  17. Somehow, this reminds me of General Ripper… “God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our natural… fluids.”

    • Correct – it is more the heat/water vapor from the combustion of hydrocarbon fuel. You get vapor out the tail pipe of your car on cool humid days (and ice fogs up in the artic north during winter deep freezes…same thing)

      • You get vapor out of your mouth on cool days.
        And on warm nights when the humidity is near 100%, although few have ever noticed. I walk around at night with a very bright flashlight, and on most nights here in Florida, even in summer, you can see your breathe.
        It does not take much if the air is near saturation.

      • Here you go.
        Hey, these planes have the chemtrail switch too!
        Sometimes you see ’em, sometimes you do not!
        Notice when you see them, is when there are other clouds around, and when you do not, it is usually dry very clear air.

    • That is because of the turbulence playing the devil with the pressure/temperature at the boundaries. You would get those same contrails if you somehow could generate the same shaft horsepower with an electric motor. The combustion products are really unnecessary to the process, just available water vapor and the turbulent motion of the air induced by the blades.

      • ” The combustion products are really unnecessary to the process”
        No. At altitude the contrail is simply the condensation of exhausted water vapor. No exhaust = no contrail.

      • with respect that is mostly rubbish yes you can get condenstaion at sudden drops in pressure. think ‘cloud chamber’ but that’s not contrails.
        there you need the added H2O from burnt hydrocarbon fuel.

    • James Francisco August 12, 2016 at 2:50 pm
      Great picture showing trails coming of the prop tips, although the vapour from the exhaust must be the lions share of the trails. How about this modern version (and there are loads more). This is not common but evidence that just disturbing the air can generate a trail.

      • An observant traveler, and I am one, can see the condensation forming in bursts at the wingtips and flight surfaces just by looking out an airliner window.

  18. I love this topic as a conspiracy theory. It is just 100% completely illogical, and demonstrates a level of ignorance on a biblical proportion. If you are going to spray a population, you don’t release the chemical in the jet stream. Crop dusters fly close to the surface for a reason. Spraying over NYC at that height would likely end up falling on London or the Atlantic.

    • co2islife,
      “Spraying over NYC at that height would likely end up falling on London or the Atlantic.”
      And that is some sort of secret? Obviously not, so if you wanted to spray people in New York, you would not spray high over New York . . Logic is permitted ; )

    • Amen co2islife,
      Google the chart that shows terminal velocity of a falling object by size. Something the size of a virus or “nanoparticle” if knocked off your tabletop would take around 7000 hours to fall to the floor. Those “persistant contrails” are persistant because THEY AREN”T FALLING. Anything heavy enough to have a chance of coming down anywhere near where it was released would be big enough to see and would hurt if it hit you.

  19. There are lots of amateur astronomers with backyard telescopes. Some of them are fitted with spectrometers.
    Could you point a spectrometer at a contrail to see what it’s made of?

      • Conducting actual science instead of science by consensus?
        Srsly, this study is pathetic. Not only is it a pure argument from authority aimed at people wo distrust authority, but it seems to mess up the actual scientific explanation for contrails. It truly demonstrates what passes for science these days.
        As for me, I don’t believe in the Chemtrails Theory for the simple reason that I don’t think it would be that hard to clandestinely spray chemicals into the stratosphere without leaving a trail for everyone to see. If they can turn it on and off with a switch then they can spray them only during moonless nights or during heavy cloud cover.
        Then again, Hilary can’t even wipe a harddrive without the whole world hearing about it, so maybe I’m giving them to much credit. ^_^

      • Not only is it a pure argument from authority aimed at people wo distrust authority…
        Very nicely put. I made the same point but you sum it up perfectly.
        The also attempt a scientific rebuttal and totally fail to be scientific. Total lamers.

    • Technically no.. the sunlight and composition of the air between are both factors as well as calculating the refraction. We can get close but you’re talking about equipment in the $4k range just to be able to collect data and the spectrometers specifically are designed to accept point source information… so we’d have to take a thousand samples with 2 or 3 second exposures then do all sorts of color tricks with extracting background… the end result would be about as scientific as the witch scene from Holy Grail.

  20. The title of the paper is “Quantifying expert consensus against the existence of a ‘chemtrails’ conspiracy,” which unfortunately, as someone said earlier, is falsified as science by the use of the phrase “expert consensus.” It’s an opinion poll, not science.
    Still, though, the idea of chemtrails sounds made-up. Now Bigfoot, on the other hand . . .

    • The title itself is highly confused. Are they reporting on the evidence of chemical trails or the existence of a secret conspiracy? Assuming they mean the former then the mention of conspiracy is redundant and has no place.
      It really just reveals their mindset and their lack of objective investigation. As soon as you label something a ‘conspiracy theory’ you are dismissing and ridiculing it. This was never a scientific venture.
      This is further underlined by their adoptions of Cook’s flawed 97% consensus methods.

  21. I’ve personally worked with two otherwise educated techical types who were highly suspicious of contrails. And they were both daft as badgers, one suffering from OCD, the other having had too many recreational mind-altering substances.
    So how do the wackadoodles explain the contrails blotting out the skies in photos from WW II showing B-17 armadas over Europe, with the ME-109 and FW-190 fighters dancing around them, all leaving beautiful contrails in their wakes? I’m sure those aircraft had plenty of extra payload capacity to bring along chemicals for dispersal while their pilots struggled to stay alive.
    I believe the genesis of this “theory” has roots in the Agent Orange program of the Viet Nam War.

  22. Jet fuel (Jet A/A1) contains on average about 800 ppm Sulfur and trace amounts of other elements besides carbon and hydrogen. It is the most regulated product from a conventional refinery and must meet either ASTM D1655 or the British MOD specification DefStan 91-91, both of which specify energy content, density, aromatics, thermal stability and many other properties of the fuel. Aircraft are certified to use only this fuel and cannot use other fuel unless they are re-designated Experimental Aircraft. This was done when testing a number of alternative jet fuels produced from biomass resources. The biomass derived jet fuels, many known as Synthetic Paraffinic Kerosene (SPK), have even more restrictions on their composition.
    Jet fuel is my specialty, so ask any questions you may have about these fuels.

    • Thanks doc. How has sulphur content changed over, say the last 20y ? Can you point to a source of the volume of fuel consumed each year over a similar period.
      From the figures you give it should be possible to estimate the amount of sulphate aerosols being dumped, mainly into the lower stratosphere and compare this to the effects of major stratospheric eruptions like Mt.Pinatubo.
      I’d be surprised if the amount of sulphate and particulate matter being dumped into the lower stratosphere is not having a measurable effect.
      I also expect that the natural processes which removed volcanic aerosols in the years immediately following Mt P. will have flushed out a considerable amount of this human injected pollution from the stratosphere.
      The stratosphere cooled by about 0.5K once the initial perturbation settled out.
      This less opaque stratosphere will have let more solar penetrate into the lower climate system, meaning that major volcanoes have a long term warming effect on climate. The late 20th. c. warming that started this whole panic was probably largely due to the two eruptions.

      • I mentioned above that I once found a plot of yearly jet fuel production over the last 50 years or so….amazing increase. I haven’t been able to find it since.

    • ‘DefStan’ / Dark satanic mills – the connection could hardly be clearer, I’m with the 77th guy.

  23. If the Anti Vaxxers had to sign an agreement that their medical insurance would not cover the children if they became infected with what the vaccine was for that they refused they would stop this behavior.
    In any high desert airport, when it gets warm they have to ask people to leave to lighten the plan, been there done that, to many times to count, left the airport with 10 seats empty. Took off in a Cessna 152 with two 200 pound adults and full tank of fuel at 14:00, 98 degrees. We cleared a major power distribution center by 15 feet (normally 400 feet), turned around and landed, there was a noticeable ‘contrail’ as we landed.

    • Yeah, sounds like a case of contrail from a moisture source other than the engine combustion :). And I can vouch: on a hot day in Prescott you need very sensitive instruments to detect any power output from a 152.


    Expert participants were selected by using the ISI Web of Science to identify the authors of the most-cited peer-reviewed publications covering these topics that have been published in the past 20 years (1994–2014). In the first case, we searched for papers with the topic ‘contrail’.

    OMG, they have basically adopted the highly flawed methods of Cook et al bullshit 97% paper almost line by line.

  25. Let’s play logic, folks . .
    People convinced that the Earth is on the verge of catastrophic overheating, experiment with potential ways to intercept incoming energy from the sun high in the atmosphere.
    Where’s the logical flaw?

    • The Commander in Chief has declared said catastrophic overheating of the Earth to be the number one National Security threat to the US, and authorizes said testing.
      Where’s the logical flaw?

    • As the CO2 increases it starts intercepting the energy higher in the atmosphere? Water vapor does the same thing at about 20x the effectiveness?

  26. I’m actually more stunned that such a cabal of conspiracy theorists exist and there are efforts to prove them wrong. What’s next, “grass isn’t really green, pediatrics practitioners drug us all”?? What foolishness.

  27. nope..not on the chemtrail/HAARP/hollow earth bandwagon. In all endeavors related to science and technology, I advocate reasonable skepticism that science has all the answers (since science is practiced by man, who is flawed)
    Any scientist who claims “fact” “settled” etc will get challenged by someone who knows more.
    On matters of politics, propaganda, mass psychology..neh.

  28. The anti-vax people are correct ….
    If it wasn’t for vaccinations I wouldn’t have made it out of childhood.
    Over the last 60yrs I’ve managed to upset a lot of people…….all due to vaccinations.

    • I have no words to adequately express my dismay at people who have the intelligence to grasp, but don’t, that some vaccines being safe and effective does not make anything labelled ‘vaccine’ safe and effective to inject into everyone, by default. It’s magical thinking to me . . with the term ‘vaccine’ acting as an incantation, essentially.
      If someone started calling people “anti-drug” because they did not accept that some drugs being safe and effective, rendered anything labeled a drug safe and effective, by default, more might see how unscientific it is to approve concoctions that have not yet even been concocted, as fine and dandy for injecting into people en mass . . and to approve of mocking those not so inclined to place blind faith in pharmaceutical companies . .

      • JK, I will engage again on antivax as someone who has delt professionally with the FDA for now 16 years concerning antimicrobials. You really have no idea of the extensive safety and efficacy trials medications including vaccines go through. Are they perfectly efficacious? No. Are they perfectly safe? No. But on balance, is their approved cost/benefit very positive? Yes. By FDCS law passed 1906. In the specific case of MMR, the rate of reported medical complications is about 1/1,000,000. The lives saved totals over 36 million. The positive cost benefit is undeniably overwhelming. That developed world lifespans are into the late 70’s is due mainly to foir things: things: fossil fuels enabling industrialization circa 1800, vaccinations starting with Jenner cowpox for smallpox circa 1790, antibiotics starting with penicillin circa 1936, and modern evidence based medicine generally circa 1900—in that order. See opening chapter of Gaia’s Limits for many interesting details.

      • “You really have no idea of the extensive safety and efficacy trials medications including vaccines go through.”
        Evidence, sir, I don’t do blind faith. And I know that vaccines are not treated the same as pharmaceuticals in general, so you’re basically just losing credibility with me.

      • ristvan,
        “Your assertions are without merit. Try googling FDA vaccine approvals. Just for grins. You know, facts rather than beliefs.”
        Been there, done that, and it caused me to go from true believer to skeptic of the notion that we can’t be over-vaccinated (for big money). I suggest o0thers take your advice. (but do not just take the word of a Government agency as proof of anything . . which seems almost silly for me to even have to advise around here . . frankly)

      • PS ~ Flu vaccines will be distributed as usual soon, which could not possibly have been thoroughly tested. I am convinced ristvan is full of . . vaccines ; )

      • JK, may you not be vaccinated by the next imperfect version. And possibly expire in consequence. Your stuff is stupidly dangerous, not just to you, but to the general public via negating the herd immunity response. Please go elsewhere to some third world country minus vaccinations. Nigeria has polio at present. India has MMR. Just a couple of enjoyble suggestions. You might also consider contracting adult shingles from childhood chicken.pox; my significant other painfully did until adult vaccinated. Cause you are a clear and present disease threat to my children’s (vaccinated) children in my first world country.

      • I agree. I have never had a flu shot, and never will. I don’t get sick either. My opinion of them is that they don’t do much good, at best, and may cause harm.

      • JohnKnight
        Rud is a Harvard-educated lawyer, not a Harvard-educated physician or microbiologist.
        The immune system is the most complicated organ-system, we’re not even close to understanding it–if we were, infectious diseases would be eliminated. Cancer would be a disease of the past.
        My spouse dutifully vaccinated our kids. One had a nasty reaction to MMR. She dismissed it. Three decades later she sustained a horrible reaction to the influenza injected vaccine of that year. Subsequently she did the nasal version, but contracted the flu. (Nasal was thereafter determined to be ineffective).
        Finally, she realized, vaccines are far from safe and effective.
        She actually did lab research, growing flu virus, and analyzing its RNA. Our research supervisor left academia and headed a successful commercial effort to develop and sell flu and Hep-C vaccines, for a time becoming a first-gen biotech billionaire ca. 1980.
        I’m anti-vaccine because I’m a scientist. I deeply studied immunology and microbiology about the time Rud was deeply studying law.
        I am also a freeloader. I know that for any infectious disease that can be prevented by vaccination, only 70-95% of the susceptible population has to be vaccinated, and the entire population is protected. This is called herd immunity. The unvaccinated don’t get the disease, and they escape vaccination risks. A great solution, for them.
        Leftists assert, “That’s not fair, You Borg-resistor parents are avoiding vaccine risks, while not getting the diseases, thanks to the rest of us suffering from the vaccine harms.”
        But, there is a credible answer to that. For the vast majority of infectious diseases, modern healthcare can prevent post-infection death. Intenaive care physicians recognized 30 years ago that “new and improved” chemotherapeutic agents’ ability to extend life by 6-18 months, was an illusion, i.e. intensive care medicine was the only thing that extended chemotherapy patients’ lives, while the chemo-pharmaceutical manufacturers. and oncologists falsely took credit.
        A couple years ago, Mesoamerican refugees reintroduced measles to the US at Disneyland. None of the non-MMR-vaccinated infected victims died. Modern medical care. Nevertheless anti-science Governor Brown spearheaded a mandatory MMR vaccination law for children. As Rud might argue, if he put his head on straight, Gov. Brown and the Cal Democratic super-majority legislature, needs to be criminally prosecuted,
        for allowing illegal alien invasion, and forcing vaccine toxicities on law-abiding people who needed no vaccination if illegal-alien invasion was not occurring.
        Rud says he has been working with FDA for 12 years. Johnny-come-lately. I tried working with FDA 24 years ago, and discovered FDA was incompetent and law-breaking, to boot. It had to do with biologicals, drugs that require human-tissue harvesting (biological drugs are devised from human-taken cells/tissues, often illegally harvested through fraudulent “informed consent”.) The FDA sided with the battery-committing felons.

      • “Your stuff is stupidly dangerous, not just to you, but to the general public via negating the herd immunity response.”
        Evidence, lightweight, you need evidence to convince me.

      • PS~ Readers please note the similarity of ristvans accusatory scare/guilt tactics, and something like the RICO AG shakedown attempts.

      • Dr. Istvan, do you not need to add modern sanitation and the availability of fresh healthy food supplies all year around to your list of four things?

      • LFTPM, did you say your research supervisor went left and became a billionaire in 1980 by successfully making and selling hep-c vaccine?
        Hep C was known only as non-a non-b hepatitis until the late 1980s, when the virus was isolated. And no vaccine for hep c exists, then or now, successful or unsuccessful.
        So, unless you misspoke, I am calling bullshit on your story.

      • Menicolas, you’re right. It was Hep-B vaccine. My error. Thank you for correcting me.
        An interesting thing, my son was required by his college to receive hep-B immunization in order to re-enroll for junior year. He wasn’t a homosexual. He was not an IV drug user. He wasn’t even heterosexually promiscuous. His risk of contacting Hep B from sex or drugs was zero. But he was forced to accept vaccine risks, with no possible benefit.

  29. Of course they would deny it — that is only more proof that it is true!
    I, with my own eyes, can see what is going on 20,000 feet above my head. Should I believe their lies or my own eyes?
    Something must be going on! It must!
    “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you and then you win!” — Mahatma Gandhi. Hold fast! We are in the laughing stage!
    Eugene WR Gallun

  30. As my son (an astronomy professor) always says when asked about “chemtrails”, ” If this is a secret government program, why don’t they only fly at night and no one will see the evil chemtrails?” Why are so many people so determined to believe that this nonsense is true?

      • “If this is a secret government program, why don’t they only fly at night and no one will see the evil chemtrails?”
        Trails exist, and you have no way of knowing none are “chem-trails”, yet you assume none are, as do many others here. So why “hide” them? The question is nonsensical coming from those who are in the process of dismissing the possibility, with the trails that could be “chem-trails” hanging the air, it seems to me. You folks are DEMONSTRATING why there is no need to hide them . .

      • JK, have you checked the dust bunnies under your bed lately? They might be rabid and tularemic. /sarc. Positive about that possibility–and more potent than chemtrails. Both rabies virus and tularemia bacteria exist, and they are both amongst the top ten weaponized illegal biological weapons of mass destruction. That you can google. Infalation anthrax is #1.
        As for water vapor contrails, yup. They exist just like dust bunnies. It is the rabies/tularemia dust bunny equivalent part that is in dispute. Me, I just vacuum them up and don’t worry so much about the global dust bunny conspiracy angle.

      • ristvan,
        Seriously, if some chem-trails were generated tomorrow (really and truly ; ) would there be any particular reason for the people generating them to be worried about people noticing them, such that not hiding them could rationally be considered evidence that no such things ever happened? If anyone (rightly) tried to point them out, wouldn’t they be met with the exact same dismissive responses from you ( and Allencic, etc, etc). making it pointless to “hide” them?
        “Terrific comeback” you say, but I say; Only if reports might be taken seriously. This is basic logic, to me, and you can’t escape it by demonstrating you will mock people who claim to have witnessed chem-trails habitually/casually . . that just demonstrates it’s not a terrific comeback.

      • And why would anyone do that, and what are the chemicals, and what exactly do they do, and why spray them so high, and…and…
        Holy crap dude!

      • Menicholas,
        Let us reason together . .
        Universal negatives are not to be treated as simple statements of possibility or probability, they are declarations of absolute truth, and so bear a huge (often impossible to meet) burden of proof, right?
        You would have no objection if I denounced Anthony for declaring no Sasquatch exist just on general logical principles, would you? And taking a survey of seventy biologists or whatever, would not render such a universal negative declaration unobjectionable to you, right? And you wouldn’t be asking me to describe or quantify Sasquatches, if I objected to the universal negative, would you?

      • And further, discovering a faked or mistaken Sasquatch encounter, or faked Sasquatch photo or video, or a whole army of imbeciles totally convinced they were Sasquatches, etc, etc, would not change the fundamental logical problem with making such a universal negative declaration, would it?

      • Here are a few of them:

        I’d mention others (including one Anthony mentioned in his OP), but the mods would probably (and rightly) delete them for fear of derailing the comment thread even more. 🙂

  31. To spray these ”chemtrails” would require a big tank somewhere in the aircraft, a filling point, pumps and a system of feed lines to each engine and some kind of diffusor in the exhaust section of the engine. Plus a control circuit and at a minimum an on/off switch in the cockpit.
    Now I worked with aircraft maintenance for 40 years, and I knew the aircraft I worked with pretty damn well. How come neither I nor anyone else have ever noticed all this unnecessary hardware? For example every time you remove an engine, you would have to unhook a pipe that doesn’t have any known function.
    Would this hardware be in the IPC (Illustrated Parts Catalog) I wonder? And if not, how long would it take before someone complained that the IPC isn’t properly updated?

  32. Do the chemtrail kooks have an explanation as to how the chemtrail big cheeses avoid contaminating themselves, their loved ones, friends, and all their associates and workers involved in the supposed chemtrail malarkey?

      • JK, you should definitely install ultrahepa filtration (like in a clean room) with subsequent UV sanitation of filtrates, to protect from chemtrails.Then never venture outside again except in a bunny suit. Enjoy the self confinement provided by your absurd paranoia.
        Just always report your position when you comment here again. So we know you have not broken containment so could flee if necessary. Else you would be dangerous to us per your own theories; No trained immunity system, plus mentally unbalanced.

      • Anti-chemtrail vaccinations have been mandatory among the elite for some years now.
        Bill Gates injects them all personally at Bilderberg meetings and at the Bohemian Grove. As a member of the elite, Dr. Spencer, you should know this.

      • Rivistan, you too should definitely install ultrahepa filtration (like in a clean room) with subsequent UV sanitation of filtrates, to protect you, your children and your children’s children from germs. Then never venture outside again except in a bunny suit. After all, in the outside world, you can never be sure when an unvaccinated person will sneeze or cough in your general direction. Howard Hughes had the right idea, but with today’s technology you can enjoy full-spectrum antiseptic living free from the hassle of having to breathe the same air and touch the same door knobs as the unclean ones.

      • Roy: “people all take anti-chemtrail pills”
        Heh heh, good one! So instead of only needing millions of people sworn to secrecy about their involvement to perpetrate the nefarious program “X” upon the general population, there are millions more people sworn to secrecy about their pharmacological involvement (a network for secret development, production and distribution) to protect the lives of the perpetrators plus the perpetrator’s families, friends, associates and, of course themselves plus their own families, friends etc.
        The expanded paradigm might reduce the degree of separation all the way down to one, someone I know is secretly protecting me from chemtrails! So it’s plausible that most everyone who isn’t involved in the conspiracy is nonetheless being secretly inoculated by someone they know thus explaining why no one is affected by it!
        “I have an existential map. It has ‘You are here’ written all over it.” – Steven Wright

      • Anti-CAGWers are silly dopes . . who are like the people who wear tin foil hats, join suicidal cults, and behave like Howard Hughes. Ha Ha ha
        There, I proved the CAGW!! ; )

  33. That ‘blue ice’ incident in Chino, California was obviously an attempt to silence our host spoiled only by incorrect data entry.

  34. Thanks for the warning in Red, these sorts of subjects will naturally bring out the emotion in us to support what we most strongly believe.
    I only ask that you leave out the Anti-vaxers in your equivalence statements.
    Vaccines do indeed cause side effects, some side effects are quite bad or even debilitating. They are definitely not 100% safe products. That someone doesn’t want to take said risk should be their choice, not a mandatory “you will take it”.
    Anyway; thanks for the opportunity with the article, and your site in general.

  35. Well, considering my senator confirmed by email that they are spraying “nano particulate” into the air as “weather modification,” I guess this article went up in smoke.

  36. I am an old fart, and have heard of of a large number of conspiracy theories, from Pearl Harbor, the Kennedy assassination, to 9/11 truthers. The major conspiracy theory no one has touched on yet is the GMO/Monsanto theme, which does affect policy on food.

    • You mean Monsanto, the company that pollenated everybody’s crops with the genes from their own so they could sue everybody into being forced to use their seed?
      What truly scares me about this is that nobody has sued Monsanto for intentionally spreading their crop’s genes on the wind so that it infests every plant in North America.

      • PRJ, No. I own a major Wisconsin dairy farm. We use only GMO corn and soy cause of the economics. Your assertions are just illiterately wrong. Been there,done that for ~30 years. Please provide actual counter evidence. First check your under bed dust bunnies. Or maybe you think farmers become mutant ninja dust bunnies via GMO pesticide exposure?

      • monmongrels get in first
        anyones grain found to be contaminated cops a bill FOR the supposed “theft” of their genetics.
        and now ALL NON GMO growers cop a fee for testing to ensure their grain isnt ruined by gmo
        and have to pay more for safe storgae to keep it safe.
        they get you coming and going.
        re vax..well Merks OWN page on the HPV admits that anyone with the strains in the vax is at something like 50% INCREASED risk of the cancer its supposed to prevent(and that prevention story is long and full of holes)
        so before getting the vax tests should be done to assess if the recipient has those strains present.
        tell me why a NON injecting drug user/non Hep B mumfamily etc
        needs a newborn jabbed with hepB vax?
        and evidence of harm to liver from vax is growing
        or the kids getting shingles FROM the varicella vax?
        query WHY? ONLY the vaccine pharmas have immunity from legal redress?
        special court for the claims and theyve paid out many mil after putting parents through hell first
        didnt believe
        then clear hot sunny summerday in rural area where planes are rare
        see one trail
        see 3 trails by journeys end all moment
        coming home 6 trails, ditto and all are spreading to dim the light
        none “evaporated as normal” contrails should.
        suspect more warmist than other reason ..but?
        Ive also read USgovt papers on intent to cause harm by cloud seed weather mods dated 80s and admitting use from 60s onwards in vietnam and ongoing albeit limited implied.
        would I…trust USGOV?
        no fn way!
        hell i dont trust my own mob and theyre shiny clean in comparison

      • They are parallel because planes fly on certain designated flight paths, not randomly. As the wind blows, each successive plane on that path makes a contrail offset from the plane in front of it.

      • OZ, in different geographic areas, the chance of contrails can be higher or lower. In north Florida, i saw them all the time, but down here in SW Florida, almost never…and the few times they do appear there are almost always cirrus clouds in the area, indicating that the humidity is very high at the flight levels.
        look at the following picture…you can see that they cut off in certain areas, are heavy in other areas…the patterns, the persistence.
        Now, this is one moment on one day…how many tons of whatever do they need to spay every day of the year?
        The real answer is simple…there are tens of thousands of flights in the US alone every single day, and in some places contrails persist, and in others they do not, and this varies as the weather changes.

  37. I’ve always been amused by the whole chemtrail thing.
    First we have to assume that some secret society is secretly spraying some secret concoction of chemicals from airplanes. The way the keep it a secret of course is to do it in broad daylight, up in the sky, where millions upon millions of people can see them.
    Then we are to believe that, given the number of planes involved, literally millions of tons of chemicals, equipment, and tens of thousands of of people must be involved to operate the whole thing without a single whistle blower. I mean, the 100 MPG GM carburetor at least belonged to my friend’s friend’s cousin’s uncle whom no one could ever find. These loons don’t have even that.

  38. I’ve lived all over the country and for a few years there in the NE, the frequency of contrails did seem to be higher than usual. And over a period of time that would make it unlikely that it was just a change in wind direction and thus the in and out bound flight paths.
    Anecdotal evidence for sure and I’m not claiming to know the reason if there was one.
    Just as there are black helicopters that fly around especially in areas that have low populations.
    I’ve seen them. Once again I’m not claiming to know who they belong to and what they were doing but I saw them. And since FAA rules state that all aircraft must have identifying letters/ numbers (and even military aircraft do have them) they must receive special permission to fly without any visible. This raises questions of who they are and what they doing.
    Just sayin’

    • Yes, there was an awful lot of contrails over Europe 1939-45, but i guess the Chemtrailers then moved to the US.

    • Hasn’t it struck you that these black helicopter people must be rather dim? I mean if I was flying a lot of helicopters around secretly, I would use paint jobs like ordinary civilian and/or military helicopters so as to make them as inconspicuous as possible, but apparently they have never thought that far.
      And no – black is not a good night camouflage color, grey is much better as the navy found out more than a hundred years ago.

  39. Well, I got tired of being on the losing side of all this New World Order stuff, so I decided if I can’t beat ’em I’ll join ’em. Went right down to my local NWO rep and he signed me right up! Here is their latest newsletter. Now, I can offer all of you the opportunity of a lifetime – Become part of the NWO and don’t be a little guy any more!
    New World Order News
    “Controlling the world for the benefit of ourselves”
    It should not come as a surprise that these are busy times here at NWO. Our business lines are expanding at such a rate that we just can’t keep up. So today, we want to see if you are right for NWO and introduce you to some of the opportunities that we offer.
    Am I Right for NWO?
    Only two requirements make you a candidate for joining NWO: 1) You much have a passion for taking over the world and screwing little guys, and 2) You have to love keeping secrets – from you spouse, friends, relatives, even your hairdresser, dope dealer and your dog.
    Our Chemtrail™ business is going gangbusters and we need help! Here are some of the excellent personal business opportunities for you:
    – Chemtrail™ dispenser unit manufacturing. As you no doubt are aware, chemtrails need to be turned on and off depending on where they are targeted. And one for every airplane engine means we need millions of them and more new ones every year. You can make good money right at home assembling Chemtrail™ dispenser units in your house. Just set up a room that you can keep secret to everyone else in the world and carve out a few hours a day when you won’t be missed.
    – Chemtrail™ supplement manager. You will be delivered 50 gallon drums of concentrated Chemtrail™ atmospheric supplement, which you will mix with pure non-GMO papaya juice and dispense into patented Chemtrail™ biodegradable plastic delivery canisters. With millions of planes and a million flights every day, we need lots of supplement suppliers to keep up with demand. And you have the satisfaction that you are playing your small part in ridding the world of human cockroaches.
    – Chemtrail™ airport facilitator – the most exciting and challenging job for a Chemtrail™ employee. Without being detected by airport or airline personnel, for every flight you need to access, inspect, recharge and replace if necessary, the Chemtrail™ dispensers attached to every jet engine. You will be working up close and personal with everything from giant Rolls Royce Trent engines to personal jets belonging to other NWO members. After your work, raise a toast with the rulers of the world!
    – Chemtrail™ air controller – A wonderful job for shut-ins. You will be assigned an air control quadrant and will track in real time, all the aircraft flying though it. According to a spraying schedule provided daily, you will push the button to start and stop spraying for each and every aircraft. It’s fun and addictive! The more you spray, the more we pay! Die cockroaches, die!
    Sign up today for the free secret NWO newsletter. With background information on all NWO conspiracies and secret business lines, you will amaze your friends with your knowledge of NWO activities in every conversation or Facebook posting.
    And if you think you might be right for NWO membership, just reply to the secret email address included in this newsletter and you can get started on your fun and exciting career of getting everything for yourself and your fellow NWO members and the hell with the little guys!
    And don’t forget our Refer a Friend program!
    /sarc just in case…

    • @markopanama:
      I’m in! Let’s have that e-mail address, okay?
      Oh… what’s the “Refer a Friend” bonus; a secret decoder ring?

  40. Even worse than the chemtrails, are those pesky black helicopters that follow me around all day.
    I blame it on Anthony 🙂

  41. For any of you who happen to get this far down the thread and notice this: My alternate path to debunking ‘chemtrails’.
    “You think the Airforce would put something so cheap and laughable as a mind control chemical in their jet fuel?
    That material they add to the jet before flight is a concoction of oils, toxins, volatiles, polymers and assorted other materials all designed to make the jet faster, stronger, more nimble and more able to keep a flame under all conditions in combat and flight while reducing maintenance. Its there to ensure our fighters are able to hold the limits of the flight envelope to the wall, make it their bitch and leave it wanting the plane to call them. It contains some truly nasty compounds that activate the self-sealing fuel bladders too. The truth is that if ground up living babies and kittens pumped into the fuel tanks before takeoff produced the same results there’d be no kittens or children available for adoption in North America. The Airforce doesn’t give a shit about you and your health. Their job is to 100% protect the US Military-Industrial Complex and carrying twenty gallons of mind control chemicals just isn’t even on their minds. Now go drink your mineral added water that gives you high blood pressure, eat the organic food with unregulated amounts of toxic natural pesticides on it and go home to your chilled environment of recirculating acetone, sulfur monoxide and carbon dioxide.”
    That usually shuts em the hell up.

    • My sense is that most of the heavy duty “chemtrailing” is done with drones . . which is to say most military personnel would not be aware or involved, and fighting capabilities as such are virtually irrelevant.

    • That would depend on what the danger (if any) is, one figures . . If some are limited experiments in weather modification (which is what I believe I have observed), involving relatively harmless substances, no protection may be needed. Harmful things might be done in places where none of “the people controlling them” live or work . .
      The real question is, to my mind at this point; What makes people think that those who would “do” the CAGW so persistently, and all that the virtual crippling our economies thereby entails, would not do other destructive and/or dangerous things? Here’s some quotes from the WUWT article immediately preceding this one. for instance;
      * Jeremy Rifkin: “It’s the worst thing that could happen to our planet.” Inexhaustible power only gives man an infinite ability to exhaust the planet’s resources, to destroy its fragile balance.
      Paul Ehrlich: Developing fusion for human beings would be “like giving a machine gun to an idiot child.”
      Amory Lovins: “It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it. *
      Why would the next article be . . making fun of those who believe less than tender caring souls have been doing things most people would consider unethical/dangerous? It’s not like history is lacking examples of such disturbing behavior among humans after all . .
      I hate to be a party pooper, but I really suspect we are under attack, by people who want us closely controlled, dumbed down, pacified, hurt . . or worse. About two hundred and fifty million were murdered in cold blood by despotic/control freak rulers just since the twentieth century began, from what I’ve read. Any firm belief that no one in positions of power would do unethical/dangerous things, seems rather naive to me.

      • ..John, if that was their intent, wouldn’t it be much more effective to just put something in the drinking water supply ??

      • Marcus,
        “..John, if that was their intent, wouldn’t it be much more effective to just put something in the drinking water supply ??”
        (I assume you don’t mean for weather/climate modification ; )
        It is possible to my mind that things are put into water, like fluoride for instance, which according to a 2013 Harvard U study/meta analysis I read about, significantly reduces children’s IQ in areas with fluoridated water supplies . .
        I believe it’s what the military folks call a “full spectrum dominance” approach . . with a heavy emphasis on things that help undermine our economy, like the CAGW.

  42. I don’t have the links at my fingertips, but there are a number of prominent policy papers – some from academia, some government sponsored – speaking about geoengineering, stratospheric aerosol injection, etc. in the context of mitigating climate change.
    For instance, a few years ago CIGI (Balsillie) used Canadian tax dollars to fund a Yale study on avenues of climate change mitigation, and SRI was prominently figured in the results.
    Heck, Brennan talked for a (whole) minute about SRI at the CFR recently.
    What amazes me is that, in this age, anyone should think the citizenry would be informed of such a program, should it exist, by their governments. That this conversation is characterized as fodder for jest (here in particular) is profoundly disappointing.

  43. Actually I am now rethinking my stance on chemtrails.
    It would be a more plausible explanation for the insanity of the current American election than anything else I’ve heard so far….

  44. If the chem-trail chemicals are supposed to allow them to control my mind, they better look into reformulating the concoction. In my case, it’s only making things worse ;o)

  45. Reading the comments I still haven’t figured out what chemical-trails or condensation-trails are supposed to do?
    I understand there are theories, but? surly (pun intended) people come into contact with a wide range of chemicals including the ones mentioned above on a daily biasses. And surly the longevity of contrails don’t cause a statistically significant warming or cooling of Earth’s atmosphere?
    So what’s the issue?

    • For me, the “issue” is having personally watched such trails being generated in real=time for about a decade now.
      Any clown can imagine I didn’t, but I can’t ; )

      • I’ve been watching the skies for 42 years – the first 32 professionally ….. and I see exactly what I I always have. Contrails forming/not forming, according to conditions in the atmosphere.
        If sufficiently cold the persistent ones form where there is enough moisture present to succour them (deposition outweighing sublimation of WV onto ice). Favoured zones being ahead of approaching warm fronts.

      • “Well if you can’t even imagine that it is possible that what you have seen is not chemtrails, then you will be unable to make an objective judgement.”
        That was you imagining stuff, and believing what you imagined to the point of actually acting as though what you imagined about me must be true, Greg, not me unable to imagine anything.
        But readers ought to take note, I feel, how Anthony and others here are treating those who observed things they did not, as though the observers COULDN’T have seen anything Anthony and the others are unaware of/uninformed about. Essentially treating their own imaginations as if magic crystal balls that allow them to see what the observers saw, and rightly denounce them for misinterpreting the observed.
        In short, anti-scientific thinking in the classic sense.

      • Did you read ANY of it? Or don’t you need to?
        Most of it is nonsense. I grew up near Lake Michigan and the air traffic to Traverse City (during the 60s) would leave contrails that lasted for hours. Some contrails would last most of the afternoon and there would be fresh contrails along side of the fading contrails. The contrails used to stop and start suddenly for no obvious reason.
        I don’t see where things have changed much.

      • How very convenient that you remember such things, PA . . and if I had a magic crystal ball imagination like many here seem to, I might denounce you as misunderstanding what you (ostensibly) saw, or now remember. Got any photos? ; )
        Seriously, I grew up near there too, watched planes habitually, and saw nothing remotely like what I’ve been observing (consciously) for a decade here (in N. California). It’s of course possible I forgot some of the contrails I watched, but the overwhelming majority at least, were wispy and dissipated in short order. Massive swaths of the sky being turned milky white by a plane flying by, is utterly absent from my memory . .
        And frankly, if they were really common, one wonders why vast numbers of examples are not available to view in all sorts of old photos, movies and TV shows . . Or why anyone at all is surprised or worried by what we call “chem-trails”.

      • Hot damn…for the second time in the history of the universe, Toneb said something I agree with!
        Crap, maybe I oughta need to start believing…

    • Its ‘simple’.
      Contrails are just Mother Nature doing her thing with the combustion products of hydrocarbons. Chemtrails are a conspiracy to poison the planet with extra stuff sprayed into the natural contrails. You know, like AW posted above, human blood!!!

  46. When spraying from the air it is necessary to use hemicals at a very high concentration. These would have to be handled and loaded by ground staff. To maintain secrecy, the number of staff would have to be limited. If the chemicals were harmful in effect, those ground staff wouldn’t stay silent – or even alive – for long.
    The basic problems with chemical warfare are in manufacturing the stuff, transporting and handling it, limiting its effects to the immediate area of the battlefield, and dealing with the cleanup afterwards. Spraying dangerous chemicals from high-flying aircraft is just hopelessly inefficient; it would be so much simpler to put them into the water supply.

    • If it simple compounds or elements like Al Br or simple salts that would not be the case. Most chemtrail proponents are not suggesting stuff like agent orange.

  47. I was a teenager in Tucson in the early 60’s. There were many, many contrails in the skys from the constant training exercises from B-47, B-52 and fighter escort aircraft. When I see a contrail, its a very familiar atmospheric artifact with a an explanation from my childhood.
    Later, we moved to an agricultural area, and crop dusters were normal and useful aircraft that flew over cotton fields.
    My childhood experiences have influenced my adult thinking. Cropduster chemtrails are low, killing off insects. Aircraft contrails are thin, straight high clouds that sometimes disperse to clouds resembling cirrus/mares tails and sometimes just disappear altogether. My formative years have provided explanations for these phenomena and it will take some really extraordinary evidence to change my mind.
    I have not seen any credible evidence of the so-called high altitude ‘chemtrails’ other than photo’s that seem to be of contrails.

      • You mean other than the pompous insulting/mocking by those on the right side of the discussion, Ric? ; )

      • Because those commenters you refer to, are indeed ‘better behaved’ and don’t even want to enter the silly tit-for-tat and uninformed name-calling. They just sigh and think… “They’re good at debunking CO2 driven global warming, but that’s about as far as they’ll be willing to go. Apart from that they are indeed afraid for their reputations & Lewandowski calling them names.”
        Check this:
        Ah, Never mind America! It’s OK. Don’t worry about it, go back to CNN or Fox, and consuming.

  48. I’ve swallowed all that whilst swimming in the sea when i was a kid. Oh no, do you think it will kill me I’m only 70 years old.

  49. …But we thought it was important to go on the record with fundamental scientific facts to refute claims that the government is deliberately spreading harmful chemicals from aircraft.”…
    This piece produces no fundamental scientific facts which refute anything. It simply provides an appeal to authority and consensus – which is demeaning and totally against scientific principles.
    And, unsurprisingly, it won’t help with the fundamental issue. If you believe that there is a giant conspiracy to poison people from aircraft, run by the scientific establishment, then a paper from the scientific establishment saying that everything is safe is more proof that there must be a conspiracy!
    What this shows is that modern science is so corrupt that it thinks science is about publicity, presentation and image….

  50. I didn’t believe the chemtrail explanation but this paper proves it’s true – if it wasn’t why would these alleged “scientists” (code for operatives of the deep state) be denying it. One doesn’t deny something that is false.

  51. Let’s just say they are spraying. Don’t you think that airline pilots would see they are poisoning themselves, other pilots and their families? The whole thing is absurd.

  52. I think this chemtrail nonsens is rooted in the JP-7 aviation fuel that contains cesium which hides exhaust from radar.

  53. The worst part, for me, when reading an “article” at a chemtrails website was finding something about space aliens…
    Ye Gods.

  54. “we might actually have a more pleasant Internet.” AW
    Cheers to WUWT and continued success in “having a more pleasant internet.”

  55. I remember the first contrail I saw was from a Lockheed Constellation. I was about 3 years old then. My dad explained the phenomenon to me. I was more fascinated by the triple verticals.

  56. I used to work for a USGS analytical lab in Denver (not the one previously mentioned on this site, that got shut down). We were primarily focused on water quality, but we analyzed other matrices too (sediments, ground up fish and other critters, and some air samples). My focus was on organic contaminates. I don’t remember seeing anything weird or hearing about anything weird in air samples. Much of our work used mass-spectrometry — we could identify unknowns with this technique by electronically comparing the spectra with a mass-spectral library. And if the spectra didn’t show up in the library, the spectral information itself contained a lot of structural information. Most air samples were kind of on the “nasty” side. This was not because of the concentration of pollutants in air, but the way we concentrated them. We would suck air through an absorbent for days — maybe weeks, then extract and analyze the adsorbed contaminants. So because of the length of time involved in pumping air through the absorbent, even minutely small amounts of contaminants would be very apparent in the chromatograph.

  57. Well you learn something new every day…… I did not know these people existed. Now we have another fringe group making up conspiracies. We cannot even keep our most important high security stuff secret, how do you control hundreds of thousands of people in the airline industry from spilling this? I truly fear for our society.

  58. It’s a conspiracy so insidious and widespread that literally *everyone* but me is in on it!
    I once, out of boredom and curiosity, listened to a program by one of the “new flat Earthers” (not quite literally but close enough), just to try to figure out what the argument could possibly be… and that was about it. Every photo of the curvature of the earth, every astronaut and NASA engineer, even the cosmonauts – all *in on it*.
    There is a name for that in the DSM, I’m sure.

  59. Long lasting contrails from jets appeared when cleaner jets stopped pouring out oily soot and switched to high detergent jet fuels that nucleates and holds larger water droplets from the exhaust gases for much longer than before the detergent use. So they naturally don’t evaporate as was as the previous fog.

  60. From a complete layman’s standpoint, this reminds me of the group of morons who committed
    mass suicide in San Diego a few decades back. They were convinced to commit suicide so as
    to allow their spirits to hitch a ride on a “Space ship” that was tailing the comet Hale Bop. “Evidence”
    of the existence of an alien spacecraft was a common photographic anomaly that anyone who has
    ever driven at night is familiar with.These were the rays and rings that one often sees around
    street lights. As I recall, one of the idiots was the brother of the actress who played Lt Uhura
    on the original series Star Trek. I guess the dumb ass wanted to go to space just like his sister!
    This whole chemtrail thing amounts to the same thing. White smoke billowing out of jet
    engines must be evidence of some sinister conspiracy, it cannot be something as simple as
    evaporation! I would have had to have failed every science lesson I took from elementary
    school to high school to be that freaking STUPID! I used to listen to Alien Anal Probe Radio
    just to laugh my ass off at parade of morons from the callers to the “Experts.”
    My favorites are the dorks who keep insisting that being chased away from Groom Lake is
    evidence of some vast alien conspiracy, and not the kind of security one would expect
    at a proving ground for top secret spy planes!

    • Leonard,
      “White smoke billowing out of jet engines must be evidence of some sinister conspiracy, it cannot be something as simple as evaporation!”
      I see people here speaking as though such billows cannot be anything other than run of the mill contrails, which is absurd, because they obviously could be. It makes no difference at all that some people have believed strange things, it remains perfectly possible, and indeed I feel expectable, in the sense that feared global catastrophe would logically result in attempts to find ways of reducing the incoming energy, etc . . just as many patents and proposals have anticipated for years . .
      And, Military brass have been talking about “owning the weather” for decades, which would obviously be very desirable to have in one’s bag of war waging tricks, so to speak . . So, simply deciding that none of it is being at least experimented with is highly problematic in terms of scientific style reasoning, and certainly nothing to be beating ones chest about, as I see the world I find myself in. It’s kinda . . weird, in my eyes, frankly.

  61. About anti-vaxxers, I suspect most aren’t being honest about the facts, though we should also acknowledge that there might be some evidence of some issues, even if it’s exaggerated by most of what we would call anti-vaxxers. Consider (more here:

    . BTW, I’m pro-vaccines, have gotten them myself, and encourage others to get vaccines. Though I think we should be a little worried that when an official CDC study of a vaccine -> autism link finds what looks like a link, it then chooses to not follow their own research protocol so they can avoid mentioning and reporting it, and even going so far as to intentionally destroy records. How many other studies have been shy about (and specifically found and avoided) reporting their findings for the same or similar reasons? Does it just so happen that the only time this sort of coverup has ever occurred we just got super-lucky that the details were eventually revealed? Doubtful. I think the CDC coverup story tells us we should be at least a little skeptical of “settled science” even in the area of vaccines. Even if you’re pro-vaccine.

    • The parenting fora I frequented before were not that forgiving on the people saying anything even slightly non-affirmative of vaccines, so feel free to revoke your pro-vaccine status at any time.
      It is safe to assume that vaccines work. But that alone does not make you a pro-vaccine person. The nuances of what exactly they do, how well, and for how long, in reality never become an issue. You are either completely enthusiastic about vaccines, or you are a heretic in dire need of shaming.
      The only reason why this tactic does not work that well in climate is because it is much easier bashing parents than scientists.

  62. This conspiracy makes no sense. Why spray chemicals to brainwash the masses and breath the SAME AIR as the masses. That’s like Hitler drinking poisoned water knowing full well the effects of the water. To substantiate such claims these nut-jobs would also have to prove that the Elites are continuously taking the antidote to pass off the conspiracy. Until the elites starts selling or wearing HAZMAT suits there really is no substance to this conspiracy.

    • “That’s like Hitler drinking poisoned water knowing…”
      Considering that commercial air carriers would comprise the enormous majority of people sworn to secrecy, it would be more like automobile companies having some sort of “reason” to intentionally design their automobiles to kill everyone who buys them.

  63. Do the Chemtrailers have any idea WHY the Elite are trying to poison us?
    (Any more than the Anti-Vaxxers know why they are trying to make all our kids autistic…)

    • Do the Chemtrailers have any idea WHY the Elite are ….”
      Sure, they want to end rule by consent of the governed, and indeed severely discredit that approach, before initiating rule by a few elites. The US in particular presents a problem for them, and they want us crippled and discredited . .
      Another way to approach the matter is to ask something like; Why don’t the authoritarian regimes of the world knock it off, and implement rule by consent of the governed?

  64. Those who believe in chemtrails and those who believe in CAGW have one thing in common – a lack of hard evidence.

    • Don’t you mean a lack of hard evidence you are aware of and accept, Mike?
      You’re not claiming to be all-knowing or infallible, right?
      We have been conditioned/indoctrinated, I believe, to think and act as though things are impossible, if some authority (ourselves included) can merely say they are impossible, and demonstrate that someone/anyone saying they happen is wrong. You notice it when the CAGWers use such reasoning, it seems to me, but don’t when the declaration of impossibility coincides with your belief.

    • JohnKnight: “Don’t you mean a lack of hard evidence you are aware of and accept, Mike?”
      The fact that I am not aware of any hard evidence eliminates the possibility that I am willfully refusing to accept any.
      There are people who have never seen a unicorn alive or dead but nonetheless believe they existed. Their belief closely resembles that of those who believe in chemtrails and CAGW despite no evidence that either are real plus all share the same mythological basis suggesting something to fear or something inherently BAD about humanity, (e.g. unicorns were wonderful creatures that existed until bad humans killed them off or scared them all away).
      If you have hard empirical evidence to prove the existence of unicorns, CAGW or chemtrails please don’t let me stop you from presenting it.

  65. “Friday Funny: Chemtrails theory gets shot down by science”
    I’m afraid it isn’t getting anything of the kind. This article is a report of an opinion survey, not a scientific test of anything.
    What is funny about yet another survey of selected official “expert” opinions falsely claiming to have refuted a popular belief by explaining the phenomenon away as something ordinary and suggesting that the people who take it seriously are scientifically incompetent? Haven’t we seen such official pseudoscientific aggression before, not just in the field of climate research but also in just about every unconventional field of human enquiry, such as UFOs, psychic phenomena, alternative medicine, crop formations and so on ad nauseam? Whatever joke lies hidden in this tendentious academic survey is lost on me.

  66. Rather than taking a poll of atmospheric scientists, a poll of jet pilots would be better. Having contrailled thousands and thousands of times myself, I can assure you that no chemicals other than JetA1 aviation fuel were used. And there is no way in the world anything else could have been used. Although sometimes you might get a bit of blue leaky toilet fluid mixed in – but not with more modern vacuum type loos.
    This particular conspiracy fantasy is an example of how detached from reality many modern people are – primarily because our education is so poor and our distrust of politicians so high. Some conspiracies might have an element of truth underlying them – like the proposition that some Moon landing photos were faked, which then morphed into a belief that the entire program was faked. But the chemtrail theory is merely social and political paranoia gone mad, with people being sucked into the most nutty of theories.

  67. Instead of polling atmospheric scientists, they should poll jet pilots. Having contrailled myself many thousands of times, I can assure you that no chemicals bar JetA1 were used. The chemtrailers are a bizarre cult of fantasists, with no technical knowlegde nor contact with the real world. They live in a world where politicians and governments are admittedly less than trustworthy, and so they see conspiracy at every junction. But they do not have the education, knowledge nor common sense to divide the crank theory from the possible or probable.
    It is interesting that the majority of chemtriallers also believe that crop circIes are made by aliens – as if, after slogging half way across the galaxy, that is all an alien might do. Chemtrailers are the ones who used to sit at the back of the class doodling, because they did not understand the tutor or lesson. And that have taken that ‘experience’ and ‘understanding’ into their adult life.

    • You are just one person, ralfellis, not everyone. I can honestly say that I have never murdered anyone, but I can’t rightly stretch that into a declaration that no one has.

  68. Nothing funny about this article or the subject. I for one do my own observations from the ground and I use photography to record many observed actions in the atmosphere. I have always understood Anthony’s need to keep this site uncontaminated by the Spector of “Conspiracy Theory Website” label. WUWT has very good reason to keep to the science. Exactly why WUWT has put this post up is bewildering to me because he has been very good about steering clear of the chemtrail controversy. And it is a controversy as many thousands (tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands perhaps) of people from all walks of life all over the world are recording via video, photographic stills and chemical sampling and analysis chemtrails and their fallout. The vitriol heaped upon those people for simply looking up and snapping stills and recording footage of chemtrail planes and devices can only give credence to these people! Had they be so off the mark then no attention would be given. Yet media and government and scientific denial of what amounts to geo-engineering has not stifled the researcher at all. I maintain that my photo’s positively show particulates sprayed from craft that is not originating from engine exhaust but from a variety of nozzles placed in a variety of ways upon a variety of aircraft. Regardless, I must continue to applaud Anthony’s service to humanity here on this Site for bringing the science to the light of day!

    • “Regardless, I must continue to applaud Anthony’s service to humanity here on this Site for bringing the science to the light of day!”
      Yes, I must as well . . Anthony is a boni-fide champion of science to me. My better, as far as I’m concerned.

    • George Edward Conant — give one specific ‘proof’ of so called chem trails from your photography. There is none. Every pattern in condensation trails, that is EVERY pattern, can be explained. What is more difficult is explaining the psychological issues of mistrust that some people must have.

      • Ian,
        “Every pattern in condensation trails, that is EVERY pattern, can be explained.”
        How exactly could you possibly even know that? Are you a God?
        All it means to me is that you will attempt robotically to explain away anything anyone presents, and assume you’ve demonstrated something other than your utter lack of objectivity regarding the potential.
        One day last year I watched as a group of planes swept into the sky above, and sprayed the remnants of a storm system that essentially dissolved as it approached me . . and I watched as individual remnant cloud clusters were targeted by individual planes, one after another, causing them to dissipate, till nothing remained.
        You can believe it didn’t happen, but I’m not going to raise your belief above my own prolonged direct observations, sir. And frankly, you and many here scare the hell out of me with your bizzaro elevation of your own imagination to the level of absolute truth.

      • Consider please;
        A NAVY chemist has proved that carbon black can make or break a cloud. She is Florence W. van Straten, now working with the Navy Weather Service.
        What van Straten’s discovery means in terms of scientific weather control is now being measured by Naval Research Laboratory. But she has already demonstrated that carbon black, absorbing heat from the sun, can change atmospheric conditions enough to create clouds or to break them up quickly.
        For some time, van Straten believed she could modify clouds by influencing temperatures in parts of the atmosphere. In this manner, she says, cloud masses that exist could be dissipated, and, under some conditions, cloud masses could be created. She reasoned further that carbon black would be the ideal material to induce the temperature variations because of its ability to absorb heat.
        Chem. Eng. News, 1958, 36 (40), pp 67–68
        DOI: 10.1021/cen-v036n040.p067
        Publication Date: October 06, 1958
        And, please consider;
        ‘Hurricanes from Above’
        “Joanne Simpson predicted in the 1960s that seeding a cloud would cause it to double in height. She bootlegged aircraft time during Project Stormfury, a weather modification experiment started in 1961 by her future husband, Bob Simpson. She flew above clouds and ejected flares that ignited and created silver iodide smoke. The clouds behaved just as her computer model predicted.”

      • JohnKnight August 15, 2016 at 12:17 am
        Yes there are cloud seeding exercises these have been going on since the 1930’s and were even used in the recent Olympics in China. But the fact that there have small scale cloud seeding exercises does not mean that every non-persistent contrail is spraying mind altering drugs over the population. Aircraft now carry automatic broadcast systems (called automatic dependent surveillance) you can get applications for smart phones (and other computers) that allow you to identify the aircraft that you are suspicious of. But then don’t let me lift the tinfoil hat.
        And yes every pattern from contrails is simple to explain, just because you do not want to understand it does not make it difficult.

      • Hi Ian W, I suggest you get a good camera with a high powered zoom lens and take your own photo’s and give yourself say five years and about 2000 hours of sky observations and photograph contrails and the craft making them. I am talking contrails that are excessive, oddly thick and heavy and persistent. I suggest you watch the interactions of natural clouds with such contrails and photograph that as well. Pay close attention to contrails and where the originate from the craft (from engines directly or off-set from engines) and if you have a steady hand zoom in on such contrail spewing craft and photograph that as best you can. THEN look at your own work and see what you see. Glad to hear your finding’s five years on….. Cheers!

      • Ian,
        “But the fact that there have small scale cloud seeding exercises …”
        That was just one example of what I have observed, and I will not go along with your (to me)m creepy attempts to dictate to me what I could not have observed or understood was going on in the sky above me, at any point in time.
        To me, the very idea that you could somehow know with certainty that there are not/have not been other forms of “chem-trails” being generated is logically nonsensical. A “positive” along these lines, you could logically know with certainty, but not a “negative”, which would require God-like awareness.
        The very fact that you are acting as though it is rational to think you could somehow be (rightly) absolutely certain of what has NOT been done in the realms of geoengineering, disqualifies you as a rational and/or honest person, regarding this entire realm, to me.
        Knowing negatives is not like knowing positives . . and no amount of double-talk or mocking or distracting will cause me to forget that.

      • For the record so to speak, in regard to the vague phrase “cloud seeding”, that storm front disintegration I watched, was done in drought stricken California.

  69. To quote my favorite skeptic in the whole world: The Amazing James Randi:
    “There is a distinct difference between having an open mind and having a hole in your head from which your brain leaks out.”

  70. There is a totally different way to approach this. The turnarounds of aircraft are quick most domestic aircraft will do a turnaround in less than 45 minutes. These are not secret the pax for the next flight watch them. So you see refueling, you see the toilet emptied, then you board. A tanker with a ton or so of liquid would be difficult to conceal. The cost to the airlines who only make around $1000 profit for a domestic flight would be considerable and difficult to hide in their accounts. It is just not true and shows the lack of intelligence in people who cannot understand how contrails are formed and dissipate from no contrails to non-persistent and persistent therefore invent a ‘faeries at the bottom of the garden’ explanation.

  71. Well, I would say to those who believe the chemtrail thing to be real, what attempts have you made to falsify your own ideas? That is true skepticism isn’t it? Not just arguing for what you believe to be true, but also trying to prove yourself wrong. Looking at all the evidence, and not just the bits that would support what you already believe to be true.
    I think a lot of people caught up in this movement don’t understand that not believing something, or believing something to be a conspiracy doesn’t make you a true skeptic. Being skeptical of something isn’t the same thing as analyzing issues skeptically.

    • Are you expecting folks like me to believe most mockers here applied your “true skeptic” principles in this realm, Philip? Seriously? . . Color me skeptical ; )

  72. There is nothing like a chemtrail thread to bring in the stupid. Let me know when you find those invisible trucks leaving those invisible chemical plants with invisible workforces invisibly entering major airports to invisibly fill some sort of mass-less quantum pocket in an otherwise crowded aircraft fuselage.

  73. I’m puzzled by this article and comments…
    apparently there isn’t likely to be a chemtrails conspiracy, because it would have to be on an enormous scale and people would have noticed/come clean about it etc.
    Yet time after time I read on sites and on comments discussing climate change that this or that or the other temp series, ice chart, data is faked.
    We need to apply the same standards and logic filters to all questioning of science/natural phenomena.
    Atmospheric scientists are to be trusted on chemtrails – yet if any of them published on climate change, what kind of reception would they get in comment streams like this one?

    • They’d be rightly torn to shreds, intellectually speaking, Griff, I have no doubt, if something like this survey/paper was offered up for discussion.

  74. In the blue corner is current USA Central Intelligence Agency Director John O. Brennan and in the red corner is lead researcher Dane Wigington.
    Brennan told the US Council on Foreign Relations (June 29, 2016) that an array of technological advances we are seeing today, often referred to collectively as geoengineering, potentially could help reverse the warming effects of global climate change.
    “One that has gained my personal attention is stratospheric aerosol injection, or SAI, a method of seeding the stratosphere with particles that can help reflect the sun’s heat, in much the same way that volcanic eruptions do,” Brennan said.
    Brennan said an officially sanctioned SAI program could limit global temperature increases and provide the world economy with additional time to transition from fossil fuels for a “relatively inexpensive” $10 billion yearly.

  75. ‘The strongest opposition comes from people who self-identify as politically conservative, who are distrustful of government and other elite institutions, and who doubt the very idea that there is a climate problem.’
    Researchers are interested in pursuing the two major categories of geoengineering technologies: those that are designed to remove carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases from the atmosphere
    (CDR) and those that are designed to reduce the Earth’s absorption of the energy from sunlight or solar radiation management (SRM).
    Read more:
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

  76. There is something worse than rogue Aluminum atoms here. It appears there are an awful lot of young people who cannot even look up and enjoy the sky, or the sight of an airplane full of passengers heading off to visit another state or country. The rainbow sprinkler consp–cy lady on youtube is particularly upset because the rainbows appear to be getting “brighter” than they used to be.
    As Americans, we are free to purchase a flight and go anywhere in the world in just a few hours. World travel has always taken days, weeks, and months–and was full of perils. Flight is a wonderful accomplishment, all started by a couple of young men who had a bicycle and printing shop.
    And what a coincidence that the AGW environmentalists are brainwashing people “not to fly or have children.” Also, Spaceweather com is constantly running columns lamenting the exposure to rads at high altitudes during plane travel, drumming up even more fear of flight and of planes. Now I see a pattern here.
    If you are worried about gov’t controlling the pop through substances, the first thing to do is immediately stop using any substances yourself. Some of the side effects of many street drugs are intense paranoia and a fear of mechanical objects. If you do not use drugs, but believe you are experiencing symptoms which are attributed to spraying, try to educate yourself on the symptoms of dietary deficiencies. Take some time and look up the mental impairments suffered by people who do not get enough B12, superior proteins, zinc, or salt. Almost all deficiencies result in personality changes, disorientation, and difficulty remembering things.

  77. Meanwhile, here in Manchester, the sky yesterday was a mess. What began as a (rare) cloudless sunny day soon began to be show numerous persistent contrails. By early afternoon, these covered the entire sky, stretching from horizon to horizon without fading away. One could easily count more than 20 visible at any time, with earlier ones seen to be spreading out into a milky haze. By evening the sky was awash in the persistent contrails from the day making a messy grid which merged into the cloudy haze. This happens every now and then. Not all the time. But reasonably frequently. I have no idea why it happens, but I don’t recall seeing skies like this in the southern hemisphere where I spent most of my earlier life. Anyway, it’s comforting to know there’s nothing to worry about.

  78. Oh, my sainted aunt… Just remember the canons of proof. You cannot prove a negative, so the study was probably a waste of time an effort. And the burden of proof is on the one asserting a fact.
    This was the realization that occured to Major Keyhoe in his investigation of UFOs. He realized that it had to be treated as a scientific enterprise.

  79. i will be forwarding this to some of the geniuses i know who actually believe in this nonsense…
    that it will do any good, except to get them riled up, of course.

  80. Shocking that all of you science heavyweights went on a days long discussion of persistent contrails without a) referencing “persistent contrails” or b) the Appleman Chart.
    That gives me no confidence in anyone’s handle on this controversy. But as some posters have said, someone’s interpretation of another person’s observed phenomenon is a joke. Sure it could have been a persistent contrail. Or not. We don’t and never will know.
    What would be required really, was real time observations paired with real time atmospheric data– air pressure, humidity, temperature and altitude of the observed trail. Then we can measure the observation against the data and see whether it falls within or without the persistent contrail parameters, which seem to be vary narrow and rare circumstances, particularly in some parts of the nation.
    All I know is that for some reason, persistent contrails are now a daily event when two decades ago I never saw them, ever. Maybe one or two I’ve forgotten. But daily? As Dr. Spencer offers, maybe there’s just more planes, But that’s something that needs to be addressed: did the fuel change, did the flight patterns change, did the atmosphere change? Because something changed. Not just me, but hundreds of thousands of folks have noticed this to be true. Maybe some of you need to get your heads out of your journals and look up once in a while.
    Ten years ago, if you casually mentioned chemtrails to someone, they looked at you like you were nuts. Now, just about 8 out of 10 people I mention it to have noticed it themselves and have no trouble believing that something undisclosed is being done. This is an issue that the “nuts” are winning more and more every day.

    • And one more thing: debunking the logic behind extended theories like chemtrails are to “poison” people doesn’t get us anywhere. Weather modification is set forth as the primary explanation, and may be simply a cover story for when the disclosure of spraying necessarily occurs. As a non scientist I’m at a disadvantage in speculating as to the purpose and function of something that I’m not even certain is a thing (oh I sure feel it is a thing, in my heart I believe it’s a thing, but I can’t prove it’s a thing) but that on the other hand allows me to consider the observational and other information more open mindedly. If I had to speculate as to a purpose and function that seems to fit the stated observations, I’d say the military was working to enhance the conductivity of energy through the ionosphere– perhaps converting it to a temporary or ongoing platform for the transfer of energy (weather modification or weaponization of the atmosphere, or perhaps for observation or shielding) across intercontinental distances. The fact that it uses materials already commonly found in the soil and water– aluminum, barium etc, simply makes the program deniable, as does the existence in nature of persistent contrails.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: