Cloud Seeding Has Nothing To Do With Chemtrails (oops I mean contrails)

First of all, chemtrails do not exist

Secondly, those that claim cloud seeding and chemtrails (grrr I hate that word) are the same thing are wrong. Cloud seeding is employed in mid level clouds (and at the tops of cumulus form clouds) where the the water is super cooled, thousands and thousands of feet below where planes cruise and clouds including contrails consist completely of ice (and small dust particles)

The stuff used is either silver iodide or dry ice. Silver iodide is used to stimulate freezing (for snow) or heating (to produce rain) of the supersaturated water particles in the mid level clouds. Dry Ice can be used without supersaturated clouds as the dry ice itself has a high vapour supersaturation point (which means it produces its own vapour as it melts, supersaturating the air)

Contrails are formed much the sams way as silver iodide cloud seeds, except it is water vapour and dust introduced into the environment and the extremely cold temperatures at that height freeze increasing ice particles in the atmosphere. Sometimes stimulating the environment enough encourages the cloud to spread over the sky forming a layer. Another difference is that clouds at this height do not produce rain as it is too cold and any vapour that does fall into warmer layers is evaporated or dispersed, its just to high

And before people start complaining about silver iodide beign harmful, I attched a saftey material data sheet at the end of the references. Notice how only serious skin contamination (like pouring it all over yourself) and swallowing it is dangerous. There is no hazard in inhaling it (that is not even possible)


rams.atmos.colostate.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...

www.sciencelab.com...

I can do cloud seeding from the ground burning natural materials of about 30 lbs or less.I learned this technique on a farm because when I was burning some very wet rotted wood to clear some land ,I had to construct a makeshift blast furnace out of sheet metal.I was pretty isolated on this farm and discarded rusted sheet metal and strong wire were my tools. I made a sort of oven with walls 3 to 4 ft high,and aimed an opening hole into the prevailing wind.It superheated in about a half hour when burning wood,so that I could even burn wet wood rotting in a swamp. If there were low clouds they would dump out some rain overhead my hot smoky fire.I thought the smoke had a lot more to do with it then.But since using a backyard grill to do the same "trick" I find that it's the invisible heat/steam that disrupts the low clouds and punches a hole in them,disturbing their balance so that rain falls in my surrounding area. It's very dependent on ideal conditions and location.If I could chase storm clouds that would be more effective.The Chinese have 30,000 people working doing this ground based cloud seeding with chemistry in fireworks.I use no fireworks,but wood,dried of wet yard waste.I use natural materials. [email protected]

reply to post by vze2xjjk


Well actually the particles from the smoke would be the things that encourage the growth of water particles. Smoke from bushfires or industrial fires actually produces cloud called pyrocumulus which has the potential to produce phenomenen such as thunderstorms. Maybe your smoke caused a similar occurence

Yeah,the smoke certainly helped on the farm when it could reach the clouds.Most instances the clouds are too high.But,when limited to backyard grill,30 lbs of material burning I would sometimes anticipate the storm cloud edge and withing 5 mins start burning very smoky stuff like green vegetation,hay,PINE NEEDLES,leaves etc to get a nice big hit of smoke up there when the dark ,low full clouds went over in the leading edge. However some windy days the smoke did NOTHING and just got blown sideways or dissipated.Then I discovered that when I had a lid on a very hot fire and uncovered it during that same leading edge time,the invisible ball of fire expanded but went pretty much straight up,less effected by wind and less dissipated,because I'd watch the sparks travel almost straight up while the wind-blown smoke went more sideways and hardly reached 100 ft altitude and dissipated rendered ineffective. The ball of steam is what seems to work more,at least on a windy day.The added build-up and destroying the cloud balance shooting a hole thru it with a balloon-like disturbance,with suddenness seems more than the cloud can absorb and recover from before DUMPING OUT. Here's a Mars man(I designed the rovers 1987).Imagine the fire represented by the Mars man's chin and BALLOONING upward like the shape of his head.In reality it's more like a long column,but the expansion would also dissipate the heat and flatten more like a pancake as it rose(my theory). Upside down think of it like dropping a pebble in a pond in slow motion,the pond being the clouds.

Originally posted by vze2xjjk
Yeah,the smoke certainly helped on the farm when it could reach the clouds.Most instances the clouds are too high.

Well it depends on what clouds you are talking about and how much smoke is being produced, plus what time of the day it is that its occuring.

If you are burning off when there are low clouds like thick stratus or even better low based cumulus you would have a better chance of increasing water droplet size. If you're looking to increase it through mid level clouds then you may have a problem due to the wind changes through each of the levels you encounter as the smoke rises.

Plus you have to take into account low level inversions to, where the smoke will just hit and flatten out and most likely disperse (much like the anvil on a thunderstorm as it hits the tropopause)

I have always assumed my smoke on the best of conditions days reached no higher than 3000 ft before dissipating,but usually 1,000-2,000 ft for best results during low cloud events.It would only work for me maybe 6 days a month tops ,and more likely better than half my tries since I'd wait for ripe conditions. I have had to do it less this year than most since no dry spells here yet.I judge by the level of a local stream/creek to check the area general water levels(twice weekly). That way I'm certain not to overdo it when we don't need more rain.That's a nice handy check on where we stand locally.The creek is miles long and 30- 100 feet wide in sections,and runs under a bridge so I can eye the depth accurately. The rain I liberate generally spreads out in and expanding circle ,but if the fast movers come in it can take the effect 5 miles away and bring rain to areas downwind.I have heard radio reports where it started raining about 5-10 mins later 5 miles away,since the radio person was on the interstate road and reporting the start of the rain.So,I can miss the rain in my area when the clouds blow the effect downwind/late seeding. This ,being a windy example,was a wild card and usually I avoid doing burning in windy conditions,because of fire hazard. I prefer those days when the rain is just hanging up there with 0-5 mph winds and just needs me to instigate ,break the clouds open and get rid of the oppressive humidity/heat trapped. JOKE: the Yeti is a huge fan !! "AHHHHH Rain !!"

reply to post by OzWeatherman


Im actually curious as to why the people that keep repeatedly calling cloud seeding, chemtrails have not replied to this thread

Also vze2xjjk, how much smoke are you actually producing when you burn off?

Depending on your definition of Chemtrail it is essentially the use of a plane to deposit chemicals or other substances into the atmosphere. The formation of the trails (Chem or Con) depends on the altitude of the plane and atmospheric conditions.

Technically speaking then, cloud seeding is in fact a form or variation of Chemtrails. Right?


[edit on 18/6/2008 by VIKINGANT]

reply to post by VIKINGANT


Wrong, cloud seeding is a form of weather modification

The chemtrails that are so frequently talked about on here relate to trails being formed behind planes at high altitude. The planes that are used for seeding do not fly at that height (crusing altitude) and the stuff that is used is deposited using canisters (will double check this), i dont think its sprayed

So chemicals, yes.....trails, no

Do you know those popular WEBER charcoal grills? It's about the size of a beach ball,about 2 ft diameter sphere basically.About the max you can burn is 30 lbs of wood at a time.When I want a lot of smoke ,have the fire hot already,add pine needles or leaves,hay ,dried grass. If you want thicker smoke try green yard waste,being careful not to extinguish your fire.That means high maintenance/attention,instead of doing a nice long slow thick wood burn(overnighter). What I've done is adapt an old lid of a WEBER grill to avoid lifting the lid so much by cutting a dinner plate sized hole in the top center. This allows for a very concentrated TALL FLAME of over 10 ft tall if done correctly.After using this lid I was pretty convinced that the heat was having more effect than smoke.That's GROUND-BASED though,and overcoming the space/height/altitude to the clouds with as perfect a straight ascent is most desirable. Jerry Here's another Mars Man 2004.I designed the Mars rovers 1987.