Facts of contrails

Sadly, the chemtrail crowd ignores facts, for their faith. They would rather turn a blind eye to known, proven facts, to follow their religion, the religion of chemtrails.

Fact 1, a contrail that is visible is a man made cloud.

Fact 2, contrails can and do form in the sky right behind airplanes flying at around 25 to 35 thousand feet, when the conditions are right.

Fact 3, contrails are the same thing as clouds

Fact 4, contrails can and do persist as long as the conditions they are in allow them to. Just like clouds.


These are the facts and they are undisputed.

If you feel that any of these facts are incorrect, please use an official peer reviewed source to discredit them, and I will do my best to alert the scientific community.

Chemtrails may exist, or they may not. No scientific data exists to offer proof one way, or the other.

No evidence exists that chemtrails exist?

Are you taking the p*ss or just trolling for a fight?

reply to post by pbasonuk


I am speaking of facts. Patents, pictures of contrails, or scary stories about lines in the sky, do not constitute facts. But if you have verifiable facts that chemtrails exist, everyone here would be elated to see it. really.

Originally posted by pbasonuk
No evidence exists that chemtrails exist?

Are you taking the p*ss or just trolling for a fight?

Just echoing what he said ... if you do have any proof of chemtrails existing, by all means, enlighten us! Show us the evidence, we'd all love to see it!

reply to post by pbasonuk


By 'evidence', that would need to be something that is actually about chemtrails, as preached to the gullible and fearful by Will Thomas & co.

It would not be;

*False claims about the properties of contrails, ie they quickly disappear so that means anything that doesnt is a chemtrail - such things are known lies.

*Photos purporting to show chemtrail planes or interiors that actually show refuelling tankers and airliner prototypes undergoing ballast testing - these are not only known, but verifiable.

*Reports and documents about things that aren't chemtrailing that require you to make an assumption that 'if they did this then they must also be chemtrailing' - That is not evidence, it is speculation.

*Information about cloud seeding and chemical warfare experiments - These are about cloud seeding and chemical warfare experiments (quelle surprise!). While they do show that if there was an actual intent to engage in chemtrailing, the technological capability certainly exists, this was never in doubt. its deployment is an entirely different matter.

*Obfuscations about weather modification proposals - We are all familiar with those, they do exist, but that is putting the cart before the horse, before you can establish the reason for chemtrails, you have to show that there are chemtrails and this has not been done at all, the only thing that ties these proposals to chemtrails is the assumption that this is what such proposals would look like, where is the proof of that little detail?

So what haven't we got? There are no fuel samples, there is no established supply line or manufacturing centre, there are no whistleblowers, people with personal first hand experience left with deep resentment and anger that their friends and families have been subjected to this, not one in over 20 years! There isnt even any credible way in which such a quantity of material that would be needed could even be carried in an aircraft that would result in a sky full of haze, the sheer quantities that would be needed to cover the sky are in inconvenience that believer simply ignore altogether.

ALL we have ever had is that first some people started pointing to the trails in the sky and calling them chemtrails, to justify this they claimed that contrails cannot linger and spread.

Some other people who didn't know any better assumed the first lot knew what they were talking about and believed it, then they wanted to know why. Various factions then came up with their own stories such as hiding Nibiru, mind control, depopulation and even some that said they were for peoples benefit but we should have been asked and it all snowballed from there, all from the basic lie that contrails cannot persist.

double post

reply to post by network dude

Fact 3, contrails are the same thing as clouds

False, not fact at all.

Your argument is invalid.

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by network dude

 

Fact 3, contrails are the same thing as clouds

False, not fact at all.

Your argument is invalid.

Contrails are a concern in climate studies as increased jet traffic may result in an increase in cloud cover. Several scientific studies are 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 of the planet. It has been estimated that in certain heavy air-traffic corridors, cloud cover has increased by as much as 20%. Since contrails can spread out and essentially become cirrus clouds, it is felt that contrails may affect the planetary climate in similar ways. Other studies are underway to better understand the role that jet exhaust itself plays in modifying the chemistry of the upper levels of the atmosphere.

www.wrh.noaa.gov...

They have the same effect as cirrus clouds, and the same make up of cirrus clouds.

This video simply illustrates the difference between chemtrails and contrails based on known science.

In the video, the higher contrail can be seen forming and disappearing behind the plane. Contrail, no one disputes that.

However, at a much lower elevation, we have obvious chemtrails, persistent and lingering.

Why? Well, according to science, vapor will form when air warmer than the surrounding air cools, and as we all know warmer air holds more moisture than cooler air, and the water will condense into small, visible droplets that are quickly dispersed.

So if we have normal contrails forming at 30,000 feet or so, the only way for them to form much lower in elevation is if the air is as cold or colder, and there is actually no way to explain them persisting unless they contain particles apart from H2O.

As we have all seen in planes, the temperature can be anywhere from -30 degrees to -50 degrees (celsius) at about 30,000 feet, whereas when you drop down to 10,000 feet or so the temperature quickly warms, so you would expect any contrails that formed at a lower altitude to dissipate even more quickly than the ones at higher altitudes.

So let's stop this nonsense that chemtrails don't exist, anyone paying attention knows that they exist.

This debate is just a distraction.

I suggest to people who aren't paid debunkers working for the secret government to ignore threads that debate the existence of chemtrails, let's focus or start threads on the reasons for chemtrails.

The distractions are meant to divide and pull attention away from the reason for these chemtrails, let's bring the conversation back to the reason for chemtrails. Kind of like the 9/11 threads, they distract people from discovering the PURPOSE of 9/11.




Here is a great compedium of Geoengineering articles that you will not find through Google or Wikipedia:

All you ever wanted to know about Chemtrails and Geoegineering but were afraid to ask (or couldn't find in the MSM)

Peace and good luck.

Why? Well, according to science, vapor will form when air warmer than the surrounding air cools, and as we all know warmer air holds more moisture than cooler air, and the water will condense into small, visible droplets that are quickly dispersed.

So if we have normal contrails forming at 30,000 feet or so, the only way for them to form much lower in elevation is if the air is as cold or colder, and there is actually no way to explain them persisting unless they contain particles apart from H2O.

That would be true if it were not -40 degrees. Your breath forms a cloud of liquid water micro-droplets on a cold day and this quickly evaporates because it's liquid water.

Contrails are not liquid water. They are ice. Essentially a very fine dust of ice crystals. So they don't evaporate. That's why it's different to your breath on a cold day.

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by network dude

 

Fact 3, contrails are the same thing as clouds

False, not fact at all.

Your argument is invalid.

Here's what the encyclopedia has to say, 20 years ago:

"Contrail - streamer of cloud sometimes observed behind an airplane flying in clear cold humid air. It forms upon condensation of the water vapor produced by the combustion of fuel in the airplane engines. When the ambient relative humidity is high the resulting ice-crystal plume may last for several hours. The trail may be distorted by the winds and sometimes it spreads outwards to form a layer of cirrus cloud." - Encyclopædia Britannica 1993.

Note: "streamer of cloud" and "form a layer of cirrus cloud"

reply to post by Uncinus


Looking the same and being the same are entirely different.

It would be like saying the steam from your car exhaust pipe is the same as when you exhale.

reply to post by MagicWand67

This is of particular concern in well-traveled air corridors, where contrails by the hundreds can spread into man-made cirrus clouds that can both block sunlight from reaching the Earth and trap radiated heat from escaping to space.

www.pbs.org...

NASA scientists have found that cirrus clouds, formed by contrails from aircraft engine exhaust, are capable of increasing average surface temperatures enough to account for a warming trend in the United States that occurred between 1975 and 1994.

"This result shows the increased cirrus coverage, attributable to air traffic, could account for nearly all of the warming observed over the United States for nearly 20 years starting in 1975, but it is important to acknowledge contrails would add to and not replace any greenhouse gas effect," said Patrick Minnis, senior research scientist at NASA's Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. The study was published April 15 in the Journal of Climate. "During the same period, warming occurred in many other areas where cirrus coverage decreased or remained steady," he added.

www.nasa.gov...

PDF paper on contrails into clouds

Even scientists don't differentiate between cirrus clouds and contrails, and state that they turn into cirrus clouds.

reply to post by MagicWand67


Please explain what a cloud is.

After that, please explain what a contrail is.

Thanks for playing.

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


how high were the persistent contrails in your video and how high was the plane flying?

What was the temperature of the air at both altitudes?

I won't even ask about the humidity.

That video showed contrails. Just contrails. Sorry.

DING!! DING!! Round One Over. Reality wins!

reply to post by Zaphod58


The term "cloud" is a generic term.

A cigarette makes a cloud of smoke.

That doesn't mean clouds from cigarettes are the same as contrails.

Man made clouds from airplanes are not the same as clouds made by mother nature.

I don't care how many scientists have been paid to say otherwise.

reply to post by MagicWand67


Cirrus cloud:

The most common form of high-level clouds are thin and often wispy cirrus clouds. Typically found at heights greater than 20,000 feet (6,000 meters), cirrus clouds are composed of ice crystals that originate from the freezing of supercooled water droplets. Cirrus generally occur in fair weather and point in the direction of air movement at their elevation.

Source

Contrail:

Since air temperatures at these high atmospheric levels are very cold (generally colder than -40 F), only a small amount of liquid is necessary for condensation to occur. Water is a normal byproduct of combustion in engines.

www.wrh.noaa.gov...

So you have a cirrus cloud, which forms naturally, that is found at high altitude, and forms around a water nucleus, when the nucleus turns to ice.

Then you have a contrail, which is formed when water vapor from an engine at high altitude turns to ice and leaves a visible trail. They're the same thing, except one is man made, one isn't. Just because you don't believe they're the same doesn't make it false.

Originally posted by MagicWand67
reply to post by Uncinus

 

Looking the same and being the same are entirely different.

It would be like saying the steam from your car exhaust pipe is the same as when you exhale.

There is a difference between jet exhaust and the contrail itself. The exhaust is still there whether you see a trail or not. The trail becomes visible only when the water vapor condenses and freezes....
...and much of that water was in the air to begin with, and did NOT come from the jet fuel.

So the visible white puffy part of the trail is not burnt jet fuel, but is instead water ice.

This is especially true for a spreading, persisting contrail. The visible trail grows due to the moisture already present in the air. The spreading/growing/persistent contrail is mostly made up of water that did NOT come from the plane. The spreading contrail is made up of water, just like a cloud, and forms exactly like a cirrus cloud forms.

Granted -- it is true that a contrail will include some jet exhaust -- AND it is true that jets contribute to air pollution. However, jet exhaust is a much smaller percentage of the air pollution up in the stratosphere than the percentage of automobile exhaust and industrial air pollution that exists up there.

reply to post by network dude


I agree with your assement.
We are talking modern day, and the here and now right?

Chemtrails may exist, or they may not. No scientific data exists to offer proof one way, or the other

Chemtrails have existed many many times in our past.
Agent Orange was used by the U.S. military from 1961 to 1971 in Vietnam. The herbicide was used to defoliate inland and coastal forests, cultivated land, and areas around military bases during the Vietnam conflict.

The long term health effects of our military veterans has been widely debated. Earlier studies had found no variation in the cancer rates of a soldier who had fought in Vietnam as compared to a man of the same age who had not spent any time in Vietnam. New studies do refute those prior arguments.

I could keep going that would verify proof of miltary using chemicals and droping these chemicals from planes, in effect making chem trails.

The real question is.. Are they doing it in the here and now, over the USA? I personally do not think they are. But I have shown that infact, there is proof, and solid evidence of Chemtrails used in the past.