Chemtrails Secret Confirmed by a Senior Air Traffic Control Manager for the (FAA)

Oh dear............I'm leaving now.

You just keep on believing ok............I guess it's what makes this site tick anyway.

Sorry, you are wrong. But I guess not having a life around aircraft/airports/pilots/fuel/instruction etc etc you will never know what goes on "on the other side of that fence" But I can assure you, there is no chem-trails from commercial aircraft.

As for military, well, they have been spraying people with sh*t for years, just ask the Vietnamese. That's real evidence of problems.....birth defects, limb problems etc.

reply to post by CaptainBeno

But I can assure you, there is no chem-trails from commercial aircraft.

Okay, "no chem-trails from commercial aircraft." In the next sentence you blatantly admit the military has been "spraying people with sh.t for years." Thank you for that. Now it's all so clear to me........

reply to post by CaptainBeno


Read em and weep. An additive used in Jet fuel as an antistatic agent can cause extended contrails which could be classified as a chemtrail because of the Barium. chemtrails.cc... This particular antistatic agent is used in most jet fuel.

reply to post by elrem48

This is what spraying (military or otherwise) looks like:


Not this:

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by elrem48

 

This is what spraying (military or otherwise) looks like:

Not this:

Either way it's quite nasty looking...wouldn't you agree?

reply to post by rickymouse


Except that then you have just normal jet exhaust causing contrails. But your link specifically states that it's implied that either barium OR calcium salt is in the additive put in jet fuel. It's hypothesized that jet exhaust causes rainbow effects and other atmospheric effects.

reply to post by elrem48


The top one is, the bottom one isn't. In fact there are some amazingly beautiful pictures of contrails floating around.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by elrem48

 

The top one is, the bottom one isn't. In fact there are some amazingly beautiful pictures of contrails floating around.

"Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder." Sigh...such an understatement!

reply to post by Zaphod58


All they need to do is make the contrails last longer to combat global warming. I don't think they are harmful to most people anyway, it may make people with asthma a little worse but the increasing amount of flights itself is probably the main culprit. I can't see any evidence of this being bad. I think it is a coincidence, asthma increases when the body gets locked out of minerals and vitamins. Magnesium deficiency causes increased asthma symptoms. Chemical imbalances cause Asthma symptoms.

In my opinion the formula of the additives has been designed to kill two birds with one stone. It probably doesn't cost any extra money this way to make a thin cloud cover to hinder global warming. Just because we see these contrails doesn't mean they are dangerous. I can't say they are dangerous or are not dangerous from the articles I have read concerning this action. I think it is necessary to do this but it would be better to stop polluting instead. I trust a big corporation could create and hide this technology. I would be really disappointed if their scientists weren't smart enough to do this. I would be disappointed also if they weren't trying to do modification of weather especially since we need to learn how to protect ourselves from the sun during solar max. I don't think they are doing a good job of regulating it's use though, they may be screwing things all up. They need to watch for side effects and monitor the amount they use better.

I've been looking at jet contrails for over fifty years. The contrails last a lot longer, they are in the sky for hours. They used to dissipate in ten minutes before. To deny this is happening is ignorant, anyone can see it even if their awareness is not so great.

reply to post by rickymouse

Your article is extremely misleading to the point that I would personally call it a complete fabrication...

Of course it comes from a “chemtrial” site.

For example:

Although the “trade secret” ingredients are well protected by the manufacturer, a recent study contracted by the EPA [10] and other sources strongly imply that these ingredients are salts of barium and/or calcium.

The linked document:
www.epa.gov...
Says no such thing whatsoever...
As a matter of fact, the terms “Stadis” or “Stadis 450” do not even exist in the document.
Of course they don't link their other supposed supporting documentation. I wonder why that is.

Additionally, Diisononylnaphthalene, Dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid, Dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid calcium salt, and Dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid barium salt are all different compounds and are clearly show as such.

CAS: 63512-64-1
Diisononylnaphthalene (a.k.a. dinonylnaphthalene)
CAS: 25322-17-2
Dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid
CAS: 25619-56-1
Dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid, barium salt
CAS: 57855-77-3
Dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid, calcium salt

The substance used in Stadis is clearly marked as being CAS: 25322-17-2 Dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid , which is not the ones containing Barium or Calcium.

DI NONYLNAPHTHYLSULFONIC ACID (DINNSA)
CAS: 25322-17-2
OSHA PELNOT PROVIDED
ACGIH TLV: NOT PROVIDED

reply to post by elrem48


Actually I think the contrail pictures are often quite beautiful.
Its nothing more then harmless ice after all. The only bad thing about them is that they do affect the planets weather.

reply to post by rickymouse

Read em and weep. An additive used in Jet fuel as an anti-static agent can cause extended contrails which could be classified as a chem-trail because of the Barium. chem-trails.... This particular anti-static agent is used in most jet fuel.

OK, Ricky, an anti-static additive is added (in some fuels not all) due to the high rate of "refueling". If you pump fuel in at a slow rate it really does not have time to accumulate a static charge in the fuel and fuel vessel / receptacle. The small amounts of static charge are normally dissipated through a ground lead attached to the aircraft. However, if for instance you needed to fuel at a faster rate (really pumping it in!!) or you had an aircraft on the ground full of passengers and needed refueling or the APU is running whilst re-fueling, an anti-static additive is added to reduce the build up of huge static charge. This can sometimes be seen / witnessed in fuel vessels by flashing static spider web like light inside the tank (if you are able to look in).

This can have a detrimental effect as usually the aircraft / tank / re-fueling equipment explodes, everyone dies and no one is happy.

So yes, in rare cases anti-static additive is added.

Here are the differences in Jet fuels:

Differences between Jet A and Jet A-1
The primary differences between Jet A and Jet A-1 are the higher freezing point of Jet A (−40 °C vs −47 °C for Jet A-1), and the mandatory requirement for the addition of an anti-static additive to Jet A-1.
Like Jet A-1, Jet A can be identified in trucks and storage facilities by the UN number 1863 Hazardous Material placards.[3] Jet A trucks, storage tanks, and pipes that carry Jet A are marked with a black sticker with a white "Jet A" written over it, next to another black stripe.
The annual U.S. usage of jet fuel was 20.2 billion US gallons (7.6×1010 L) in 2009.[4]

Typical physical properties for Jet A and Jet A-1
Jet A-1 Fuel must meet the specification for DEF STAN 91-91 (Jet A-1), ASTM specification D1655 (Jet A-1) and IATA Guidance Material (Kerosine Type), NATO Code F-35.
Jet A Fuel must reach ASTM specification D1655 (Jet A) [5]

And more importantly:
Jet B
Jet B is a fuel in the naphtha-kerosene region that is used for its enhanced cold-weather performance. However, Jet B's lighter composition makes it more dangerous to handle.[5] For this reason it is rarely used, except in very cold climates. A blend of approximately 30% kerosene and 70% gasoline, it is known as wide-cut fuel. It has a very low freezing point of -60 degrees Celsius and a low flash point as well. It is primarily used in US and some military aircraft.

reply to post by defcon5


I'm sure it is a partial fabrication and I think the chemtrails are harmless. The fact is that the chemistry of jet fuel can be modified to make longer lasting contrails by many means. This serves the purpose. You can add salt water to the exhaust and create clouds. They use water injection in airforce jets after the engine to increase thrust. I live near an old airbase, and I knew people who worked there before they closed. The pilot told me how it worked. All we need is clouds up there to reflect the sunlight, this is easily accomplished by many different means. They could probably put a certain wax or deicing compound on the wings and accomplish cloud making. They could also adjust the frequency of the sound or adjust the shape of the wings or engine to accomplish this. I see weather modification as easily done by many possible means.

reply to post by CaptainBeno


So explain to me why contrails last so much longer than they used to. There is no denying they don't, everyone sees they do including government scientists. What is the reason. You say that nothing has changed yet they last for hours, something has definitely changed. If nothing changed in the last thirty years everything should be the same. Explain what causes this new phenomenon.

reply to post by rickymouse

Q) How long do contrails last? A) Anywhere from less than a second, up to several hours. If depends on the atmospheric conditions at the altitude the plane is flying. It’s unrelated to the weather on the ground. This is an oft-asked question. The answer is reasonably straightforward, but misunderstanding is common. To understand why a contrail can last as little as a fraction of a second, or as long as several hours, you need to understand what a contrail is, and how it forms. Here’s another question, which has the same answer: Q) How long does a snowflake last? Why is this basically the same question? Because contrails are generally made of ice crystals. Jet exhaust contains a lot of water vapor (the chemical reaction actually produces more water than there was originally jet fuel), and when this gets shot out of the back of the engine at 2000MPH, it hits the frigid air (typically colder than -40 degrees), and the water vapor condenses and freezes, very quickly, into tiny ice crystals, just like snowflakes. So why do these ice crystals sometimes stay around for a long time, and sometimes vanish in seconds? The temperature is well below freezing, so they can’t melt, can they? This is puzzling, because it involves something that most people know nothing about: “sublimation“. Sublimation is when a substance (in this case, water), goes directly from being solid to being vapor (a gas), without actually melting into a liquid. It’s like evaporation, except instead of a liquid evaporating, it’s a solid (ice). If the air is dry (i.e. there is little water vapor in it), then the ice crystals will quickly sublimate into vapor, and the trail will vanish quickly. However, if the air already has a lot of water vapor in it, then the ice will sublimate slower, and the trail will last longer. If the air has so much water vapor in it already that it can’t hold any more (i.e. it’s “supersaturated”), then the ice crystals can’t sublimate, and so the contrail will stay around for a long time. The ice crystals might even attract water from the air, if there is enough, and the contrail will get thicker. Winds might make the contrail spread out to even cover the whole sky. The above is a simplification, as other factors like temperature, pressure, and sunlight have an effect. But it explains the basic reasons why some trails last only a few seconds, and some can last for hours, and spread out to cover the sky. Finally, there is one more way of asking the question: Q) How long do clouds last? This is the same question because contrails are clouds. Contrails are physically very similar to cirrus clouds (except they are long and thin), and so they act almost exactly the same. You see cirrus clouds that last for hours, so why not contrails?

contrailscience.com...

journal.borderlands.com...

The assertion that the government is spraying noxious chemicals on its own people from high flying military aircraft needs some real substantiation than just reports of seeing contrails in the sky and claiming they are making people sick. While there have been reports of similar activity in the past, merely seeing a jet contrail in the sky does not prove anything. Persistence of contrails is neither an indication that they contain some kind of chemical, nor that it is some kind of spray. As a matter of fact, sailors have known for years to look specifically at the patterns and persistence of jet contrails for weather forecasting. If a jet is flying through air at altitude with a low humidity, the moist air from the jet engine might produce a slight, short-lived contrail. These short-lived contrails are a sign that the weather will be fair. A thick, long-lasting contrail indicates humid air high in the atmosphere, and can be an early sign of a storm

Several scientific studies are also being conducted with respect to contrail formation and their climatic effects. "Cirrus clouds affect Earth’s climate by reflecting incoming sunlight and inhibiting heat loss from the surface. Ordinarily, cirrus clouds are only weakly influenced by most ground-based human activities, because of their high altitude. However, increasing levels of high-altitude jet air traffic may alter the regional climatic effects of cirrus because aircraft condensation trails (contrails) often produce new cirrus, which could differ in their radiative properties."

reply to post by rickymouse

You always had persistent contrails, there simply used to be fewer of them. Now, with the new Higher bypass engines, and the increase in air traffic, you just notice more of them. I remember seeing them all the time as a kid growing up near an airport in the 1970's.

reply to post by defcon5


When a military or commercial jet wanted to gain altitude they used water to get a boost. By the airport they were always evident and you could tell when the jet was rising. I see these way up in the sky now, that is not the same. Like I said, something has changed. I am not afraid of contrails/chemtrails at all. I am just saying something has changed and people are noticing it. I don't jump to conclusions or believe others that may be paranoid without seeing it first hand. I have never seen a UFO and won't say I believe in one till I do. Even then I will investigate every available means to try to explain it.

I see the contrails are lasting a lot longer, the only explanation is something has changed. I can only speculate on what causes it, I also know that it is possible that there is a reason for this phenomenon. How can I deny their existence if I have personally noticed the difference?

There has always been some persistant contrails, that is true. Not nearly as many as there is now though, almost every jet has them, I rarely see a jet without persistant contrails. I did see a huge white jet about a month ago without one, and it actually looked kind of weird nowadays, I have got so used to seeing the big contrails now that I got used to them being there.

reply to post by rickymouse

Originally posted by rickymouse
Read em and weep. An additive used in Jet fuel as an antistatic agent can cause extended contrails which could be classified as a chemtrail because of the Barium. chemtrails.cc... This particular antistatic agent is used in most jet fuel.

The link you provided seems to provide some good information, until you dig a little deeper...

Although the “trade secret” ingredients are well protected by the manufacturer, a recent study contracted by the EPA [10] and other sources strongly imply that these ingredients are salts of barium and/or calcium.

The article implies that barium salts are in the antistatic agent Stadis 450, and gives a source. The source makes no mention of the use of barium salts in Stadis 450, as it is merely talking about various forms of chemicals in the Dinonylnaphthalene family. The article provides the safety data sheet for Stadis 450, which shows that Dinonylnaphthalene sulfonic acid (CAS No: 25322-17-2) is an additive. This is not the same as the barium salt (CAS No: 25619-56-1). The process of making the barium salt requires introducing barium (funny that) in a reaction process, an example of which can be found here. Therefore, there is no evidence whatsoever that barium is in Stadis 450.

It's understandable that you have simply accepted this articles information as the truth, as it seems to be giving the relevant information. But the sad thing, is that it isn't. They've misled you, much like most chemtrail sites. This is why it pays to verify sources before touting them as fact.

Moving on to another part of the article.

If one phenomenon gives away the presence of metals in the aerosol, it would be the large number of high altitude rainbows produced by contrail aerosol. Virtually unheard of prior to 1990, bright rainbows, sometimes referred to as “circumhorizon arcs” or more commonly, “chembows,” can be observed regularly wherever jet aircraft fly.

The article uses one of it's own pages as a source for these so called "chembows", "What are chembows?". Unfortunately, they are misleading people again. They provide this photo as 'evidence' of a chembow.

What should be obvious to most people, is that the "chembow" in the picture is coming from a natural cirrus cloud, despite the caption claiming that it's from the "chemtrail". This is yet another example of the site being disingenuous. What the photo actually shows, is an example of Iridescent Clouds.

When parts of clouds are thin and have similar size droplets, diffraction can make them shine with colours like a corona. In fact, the colours are essentially corona fragments. The effect is called cloud iridescence or irisation, terms derived from Iris the Greek personification of the rainbow.

Iridescence is seen mostly when part of a cloud is forming because then all the droplets have a similar history and consequently have a similar size. Sometimes iridescence can be seen far from the sun but is most frequent near to it.

An important part to note is the 'cloud forming' part, as this is what is occurring when a contrail is produced. Fresh contrails will have create similar size water droplets which freeze, creating a good environment for the rainbow effect to be seen. This explains why it's the water causing the effect, not some made up concoction of chemicals. Here are some examples of iridescence, with the first one from natural cloud, and the rest from aerodynamic contrails (which aren't even caused by the exhaust).




I'm sorry to be so blunt, but you have been duped. That is what chemtrail sites do. It pays to keep an open mind and research claims fully before jumping to conclusions.

PS. I see I have been beaten to the punch by others, but I think I've provided some relevant inforamtion (gathering it took far too long )

reply to post by Curious and Concerned


I just grabbed an article for evidence, Maybe I should have investigated it more. I believe there is cloud manipulation going on and I would be disappointed if the government wasn't trying to test how to repair what we have screwed up. I see the difference in the exhaust contrails and there has to be a reason. Like I said to someone else, explain to me why such a higher percentage of jets have persistent contrails. I'm putting you into a position to tell me why something I see with my own eyes is not true. My IQ was tested at 165 so it better be be a reasonable explanation.

reply to post by rickymouse

The moral here is that folks are lying about this topic, normally to make money off it. For example, that site you linked us to is set up as an amazon sales affiliate and is linking you over to buy air filters and purifiers, which he obviously gets a sales commission for. Look around at the other “pro” Chemtrail sites, and you'll find a similar story every time. These sites use fear to sell snake oil.